(M781) The one letter written by Sin-iddinam(842) is addressed to the _rabiânu_ of Katalla, ordering him to send the plaintiff in a suit to him. Very interesting is a letter from Tabbi-Wadi and Mâr-Shamash to Aḫâti, the wife of Sin-iddinam,(843) asking her to intercede for them with Sin-iddinam. He had himself referred them to her, perhaps because their offence immediately concerned her. They say that they are ill acquainted with the ways of the court. From several unusual forms of expression it may be concluded that they were strangers who had settled in Babylonia. They do not state either their offence or the grounds on which they would be excused, but ask for an interview, that they may remove Aḫâti’s resentment against them. (M782) Some letters are addressed to “the man whom may Marduk make to flourish.”(844) Some have taken this as a proper name. But that seems very unlikely. Others regard it as a sort of polite address to a superior. Winckler(845) suggested that it was an address to the king. The Code has made it clear that the _amêlu_ was the “gentleman,” or “noble,” who lived in a “palace,” or “great house.” Hence, these letters may be addressed to any great official. But many turns of expression support the view that the king is really meant; he was thus the “First Gentleman” of Babylonia. It was not till Ḥammurabi that the title “king” was generally given. Perhaps the old nobles were slow to admit a king over them. (M783) As an example we may take:(846) To “the man whom may Marduk make to flourish” say, thus saith Ashtamar-Adadi: May Shamash and Marduk ever make thee flourish. The gardeners, inhabitants of Sippara, have spoken concerning their servants who fled and have been recaptured. Therefore I have sent a note thus to thee, I sent those men to thee. Accept their petition (?) and may they be acceptable to thee before Shamash. Grant their entreaty and set them free. If they come not to Babylon, do this in my name. It is probable that recaptured runaway slaves, who would not name their owners, were forfeit to the State. The king is the only one who would have power to release such slaves. It is clear that the recipient of the letter was at Babylon. IV. Private Letters Of The First Dynasty Of Babylon (M784) In these cases, as a rule, we know neither the sender nor receiver, beyond their names, and what we can gather from the letter itself. Hence a great deal must always remain uncertain. Here is a letter which comes from a prisoner, who says he is nearly starved and does not know why he was imprisoned:(847) (M785)