Who are the descendants of the Elamites

Online library


[601] 432. Elam's development is similar, and it has always intervened anew in Sinear's fate. The dynasty of Ebarti and his son Silhaha (§ 416) now rules here, from which the name of Sirukduch [601] is mentioned among the descendants; he may belong to the latter half of the Ur dynasty. We have no inscriptions either from him or from his next successors, but only again from Temtiagun, who calls himself "son (i.e. descendant) of Sirukduch's sister" and bears the title "Minister (sukkal) of Susa". He built a brick temple "for the life of Kutirnachundi (and several other people, perhaps brothers or officials of the latter) and for his own life" in Susa. According to this, Kutirnachundi (who has a genuinely Elamite, later repeated name that is formed with that of the god Nachundi) seems to have been his overlord. Now the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal tells, during the conquest of Susa around 645 BC. He said he had given back her statue to the goddess Nanaia of Uruk, which Elamit Kudurnanchundi had dragged away 1635 years ago, "when he plundered the temples of the country of Akkad" - Akkad refers to the whole of Sinear, according to later usage. If the date is reliable, Kutirnachundi's procession falls around 2280 BC. BC, just at the time when the kingdom of Isin is falling apart and the kingdom of Larsa is next to it (§ 417). Perhaps the temple of Nippur was devastated by the Elamites at that time. Kutirnachundi presumably ruled a larger empire, the main focus of which was in the mountains; perhaps it was the land that was subsequently called Jamutbal (§ 440); the rulers of Susa were then his vassals. In general, as in later times and down to the present, the Elamite war campaigns will have originated much more from the warlike mountain tribes than from the industrious and semi-Semitic inhabitants of Susa and the lowlands. Perhaps the names Anšan and Hatamti (§ 363), which never appear in the Susian inscriptions of this time, belong to these same tribes, which later, in the second millennium, also occupied Susa herself and brought the national language back to dominance here.

[602] Inscriptions of the Temtiagun: Délég. VI 23 (= TH.-D. 184). 25; SCHEIL rightly placed him in front of the rulers named in § 432 a because of the connection to Širukduch. - Assurbanipal indication: Rassamcylinder (V R 1ff.) Col. 6, 107 and the parallels [once prescribed 1535 years], especially III R 38, 1; Wedge inscription Bibl. II 208 [the text III R 38.2 on the other hand refers to Kudurnanchundi II., Around 1160]. In the past, the invasion of Kutirnachundi was directly associated with Kudurmabuk and Kedorla'omer (§ 440f.); but there is no reason to do so.

432 a. This relationship may have continued under the following rulers of the dynasty. The next of whom we have news, Kukkirmaš, calls himself "great minister, minister of Elam (Nimma), Simaš and Susa" and at the same time, like all his successors, "son (ie descendant) of the sister of Silhaha" - like this one The emphasis on the descent from the ancestor's sister, which we also found at Temtiagun, is to be explained, is quite obscure; It cannot be a matter of maternal succession, as I previously assumed, since the rulers who equally bear this title span several generations24. The overlord, whose "minister" is Kukkirmaš, may have been a descendant of Kutirnachundi. The dedication of a dynast from Dêr Kunde, the great border town mentioned in Sargon's war against Elam (§ 398), which temporarily gained a very independent position during the fall of the empires of Sumer and Akkad, also gives evidence of the expansion of his power. Their ruler Anumutabil "the mighty hero, commander (šakkanakku) of Dêr" prides himself on having "smashed the head of the troops of Anšan, Elam and Simaš and defeated Barachsu (a border country, cf. § 399)"; that would be a victory not only over the prince of Susa, but also over the other rulers of Elam (Anšan). It may be related to this that we do not find the ministerial title of the next known ruler, Addapakšu, but instead calls himself "Shepherd of the hosts of Susa" or "Shepherd [603] Šušinaks". But he was not independent; rather, a clay tablet from Susa, which his servant Adadrabi son of Rimadad sealed - the names show how strong the Semitic element was here - dates from "the year when Sumuabi ..." Šumuabi is the founder of the kingdom of Babel ; but the date can only belong to the empire of Isin (or that of Larsa?) and must refer to battles against the Babylonian dynasty. So Addapakšu ruled around 2220 and recognized the suzerainty of Sinear. In the following rulers, Temtichalki and Kuknašur, we find the titles "great minister, minister of Elam, lord of Simaš and Susa, son (i.e. descendant) of the sister of Silhaha". Kuknašur already belongs to the time of Ammiṣaduqa of Babel (1977 BC), of which he was a vassal (§ 448). In between, however, there is another significant intervention by Elamite rulers in the relations of Sinear (§ 440f.).

The inscriptions by Susa TH.-D. P. 182f., By Dêr p. 176 Date of Addapakšu: Délég. X (él.-sém. IV) p. 18, the interpretation of which by SCHEIL von UNGNAD, subs. to the documents from Dilbat, contribution to Assyriol. VI, p. 2ff., Is wrongly disputed; We must not operate with chronological reservations in view of the gaps in our material. The date cited in § 416 A. also shows dependence on the Sinears kings (Larsa?). - Temtichalki is also mentioned in the inscription of a king much later (Délég. II, él.-sém. I p. 120) who restored its building, similar to Šilchakšušinak (§ 416 A.). - Date of Kuknašur: UNGNAD l.c.S. 3. - The relationship between the Susa dynasties and the other rulers in Elam is of course difficult to discern from our sources; it is very possible that they sought support and protection from the rulers of Sinear against the wild mountain tribes. - On the sources of the list of rulers see § 416 A. (continuation of the list § 462).