The regions surrounding Mesopotamia, from Elam to Mari, were often in competition over the conquest of the ‘dimorphic’ region of Upper Mesopotamia, through constant military expeditions and sudden political changes. Meanwhile, Lower Mesopotamia experienced a different type of political unification, which was marked by a gradual consolidation of power in smaller areas, brought about internally rather than through conquest from outside. Eventually, these areas were united under a single rule. However, at the beginning of the phase considered in this chapter (around 1820 bc), Lower Mesopotamia was still divided into the kingdoms of Babylon, Isin, Larsa and Uruk. There also were some minor centres, such as Der, Kazallu, Malgum, and so on. The two most powerful states were Larsa in the south and Babylon in the north. This situation brought the rulers of Babylon to establish diplomatic ties with Uruk. Despite being a relatively isolated city, Uruk was still an important ally against Larsa. We know of an inter-dynastic marriage between the first king of Uruk, Sin-kashid, with a sister of Sumu-la-El of Babylon. We also know of several military alliances during the reign of Sin-muballit of Babylon and Anam and Irdanene of Uruk.
An initial unification of Lower Mesopotamia came with the reign of Rim-Sin of Larsa, a ruler gifted with exceptional political talent. His father, Kudur-mabuk, was a military and tribal leader who, despite his Elamite name, ruled over an Amorite group. His career, however, remains unknown to us. Kudur-mabuk began his rise controlling the land of the Yamut-bal tribe, until he conquered the throne of Larsa. There, he placed his son Warad-Sin as ruler. The presence of Kudur-mabuk’s name alongside his son’s in their royal inscriptions indicates, however, that he ruled Larsa with his son. Their military endeavours (including the conquest of Kazallu) and the restoration of the walls and temples of Ur indicate that their reign was largely focused on consolidation. Only with Rim-Sin did Larsa begin its expansion, which we can track down through the many dating formulas of his very long reign. In his fourteenth regnal year, Rim-Sin defeated Uruk and its ally Isin, both supported by Babylon. He also destroyed and conquered Der (in the twentieth year of his reign), Uruk (in the twenty-first year of his reign) and Isin (in his thirtieth regnal year). The conquest of Isin was considered such a prestigious achievement that all the following dating formulas refer to this event.
At this stage, Rim-Sin controlled the whole of Sumer. Despite this, he continued to be surrounded by belligerent neighbours (Elam, Eshnunna and Babylon), which were effectively cutting Larsa out from the diplomatic interactions and manoeuvres of the Mari Age. Just like his father, Rim-Sin also tried to consolidate his kingdom. Following the Sumerian tradition, he ordered the construction and restoration of walls, temples and canals and the dedication of expensive cultic furniture. In terms of political organisation, he introduced something new, ordering tax exemptions, debt releases and the release of debt slavery to ‘re-establish justice in the land’. These were all common practices in the north (at Isin, Babylon and Eshnunna), but not in the south. Administrative and legal texts from Rim-Sin’s reign also attest to the particular care he took to re-organise the management of public land and the revival of trade in the Persian Gulf.
In the year after the conquest of Isin, Hammurabi was enthroned in the city of Babylon. He was to become a much fiercer rival of Rim-Sin than his father Sin-muballit. Rim-Sin, who must have been relatively old at this point, found the second half of his reign marked by the rise of Babylon, although Hammurabi himself was threatened on multiple fronts. This was because Babylon was clenched between the kingdoms of Larsa in the south and Assyria in the north. Both powers, however, were ruled by successful, yet elderly, kings. Eshnunna also constituted a threat to Babylon, especially in the reign of Ibal-pi-El. In the first years of his rule, Hammurabi was particularly engaged in the south. In his seventh regnal year, he took Isin and Uruk away from Rim-Sin, who saw his kingdom being significantly reduced on a territorial level and subordinated to Babylon on a political one. Having secured the south and gained the support of Rim-Sin, now forced to be a subordinate ally, Hammurabi had the opportunity to play an active role in the events of the Mari Age. Consequently, he took advantage of Shamshi-Adad’s death to rise as the main player in the entire region.
For around twenty years (1785—1765 bc), the situation remained relatively flexible, though the balance of power always lay between Hammurabi in Babylon and the strong presence of Ibal-pi-El in Eshnunna. In this regard, the Mari archives reveal the string of wars fought along the Euphrates and the Tigris. The tensest front was the border between Babylon and Eshnunna. The two cities were in fact dangerously close to each other. Their respective positions were so consolidated, however, that the majority of conflicts between them took place in Upper Mesopotamia. For the time being, neither contender managed to gather enough force to directly attack the other. In the past decade, the expansionist policy of Eshnunna had commanded a sense of fear throughout Mesopotamia. This fear allowed Hammurabi to gain the support not only of Larsa, but also of Mari and Yamhad, although for a large portion of his reign, Hammurabi was stuck in a political deadlock.
Only towards the end of his reign did Hammurabi see the effects of his gradual rise (Figure 14.1). Within five years, he conquered Larsa (in the thirty-first year of his rule), Eshnunna (in the thirty-second year), and defeated Mari (in his thirty-third year on the throne), which was destroyed after a rebellion in the city (in the thirty-fifth year of Hammurabi’s reign). As can be seen, when Hammurabi decided to break out of this deadlock, he did not make a distinction between opponents and former allies: having pitted the one against the other, he condemned them all to the same fate. Towards the end of his reign, he fought wars against Assyria (in the thirty-seventh and thirty-eighth years of his reign), which was now an autonomous yet isolated state. In a way, Assyria was just like Elam. In their former expansionist phases, they had interfered in the Mesopotamian affairs for decades. Now, however, they were in a marginal position.
Hammurabi’s unification of Mesopotamia was limited both in terms of time and space. First, the unification was short-lived. Hammurabi’s success came towards the end of his reign and his successors did not manage to prevent the breakdown of his kingdom. Moreover, Hammurabi did not hold solid control over all of his conquered territories. A large portion of them had been part of the expansionistic and military tendencies of the Mari Age. For instance, Babylon did not manage to effectively impose its presence in the Middle Euphrates, especially beyond the semi-inhabited territory that separated the northernmost Babylonian centres from the kingdom of Hana, which was heir to the legacy of the kingdom of Mari. The kingdoms of the ‘Upper Land’ remained even more inaccessible, and would eventually experience the political pre-eminence of the Hurrian element in the area. As mentioned above, Assyria and Elam also remained independent, although considerably reduced in size.
Figure 14.1 Map of the kingdom of Hammurabi of Babylon.
The main Babylonian conquests were therefore centred in the lands of Sumer and Akkad. They coincided in a significant way with the core of the Ur III territory, namely, between the wall built against the Martu and the southern coast of Mesopotamia. Due to this reference to the former Ur III state, the Babylonian unification was effective in eliminating the expansionistic ambitions of individual city-states. Consequently, there were no more expansionistic opportunities for Eshnunna or Uruk, two contemporary and important states of the time, or for smaller independent states, such as Der, Kazallu, or Malgum. Cities now became provincial centres, de-centralised administrative cities of a politically unified land. Therefore, a political fragmentation of the area could not take place on a city-state level anymore, but only through the rise of sizeable territorial states. In other words, with Hammurabi the concept of a land of ‘Babylonia’, named after its main city, was born. Babylonia thus became the heir of the ancient region of ‘Sumer and Akkad’. Eventually, Babylonia would become the southern counterpart of the land of ‘Assyria’ in the north.
World History
