The Seven Great Monarchies Of The Ancient Eastern World, Vol 1: Chaldaea: The History, Geography, And Antiquities Of Chaldaea, Assyria, Babylon, Media, Persia, Parthia, And Sassanian or New Persian Empire; With Maps and Illustrations.Rawlinson, George
History
The Seven Great Monarchies Of The Ancient Eastern World, Vol 1: Chaldaea: The History, Geography, And Antiquities Of Chaldaea, Assyria, Babylon, Media, Persia, Parthia, And Sassanian or New Persian Empire; With Maps and Illustrations.
The other three kings who may be assigned to the Elamitic dynasty are a
father, son, and grandson, whose names appear upon the native monuments
of Chaldaea in a position which is thought to imply that they were
posterior to the kings Urukh and Ilgi, but of greater antiquity than any
other monarchs who have left memorials in the country. Their names are
read as Sinti-shil-khak, Kudur-Mabuk, and Arid-Sin. Of Sinti-shil khak
nothing is known beyond the name. Kudur-Mabuk is said in the
inscriptions of his son to have “enlarged the dominions of the city of
Ur;” and on his own bricks he bears the title of Apda Martu, which
probably means “Conqueror of the West.” We may presume therefore that
he was a warlike prince, like Kudur-Nakhunta and Kudur-Lagamer; and
that, like the latter of these two kings, he made war in the direction
of Syria, though he may not have carried his arms so far as his great
predecessor. He and his son both held their court at Ur, and, though of
foreign origin, maintained the Chaldaean religion unchanged, making
additions to the ancient temples, and worshipping the Chaldaean gods
under the old titles.
The circumstances which brought the Elamitic dynasty to a close, and
restored the Chaldaean throne to a line of native princes, and
unrecorded by any historian; nor have the monuments hitherto thrown any
light upon them. If we may trust the numbers of the Armenian Eusebius,
the dynasty which succeeded, ab. B.C. 2052, to the Susianian (or
Median), though it counted eleven kings, bore rule for the short space
of forty-eight years only. This would seem to imply either a state of
great internal disturbance, or a time during which viceroys, removable
at pleasure and often removed, governed the country under some foreign
suzerain. In either case, the third dynasty of Berosus may be said to
mark a transition period between the time of foreign subjection and that
of the recovery by the native Chaldaeans of complete independence.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account