(M587) Another interior apartment is called a kimahhu. This has usually been taken to be a "tomb." We know that the old Babylonian kings were buried in the palace of Sargon. But this was when the palace was no longer the abode of the living. Ashurbanipal's charter to his faithful general and tutor-in-arms, Nabu-shar-usur,(623) seems to contemplate that general's being buried in the palace, though this is not certain. However, the explorations of Nippur demonstrate the existence of vaults for burial, built over with brickwork. It may be that such vaults did exist within the house, and were sold with it.

A "portico," bit mutirreti, is named once.(624) Beside the "great house," bitu dannu, or bitannu, a "second house," bit sanu, is mentioned. The exit from the house, musu, a way to the street, was often named, being very important where the house was bounded on four sides by others.

(M588) Most of the houses, of which we have deeds of sale, were situated in Nineveh itself. Occasionally, the house is shut in by more than three others, most often only by three. Then the fourth side is said or implied to be on the street. Hence, we may be sure that in parts of Nineveh, there were continuous blocks of houses, on each side of a street. Sometimes, however, we have a garden, or orchard, as one boundary.

(M589) Contrary to the practice in Babylonia, the size of the house is rarely given. We have the size of the bitu akulli given, in one case,(625) as forty-three cubits long and twenty cubits broad. What seem to be the dimensions of an ordinary house were twenty-two by fourteen cubits.(626)

(M590) Houses in Assyria sold for from half a mina up to twelve minas; but as long as we are so ignorant of the form, nature, and dimensions of the house and its adjuncts, the information is of very little interest.

(M591) A number of other buildings or parcels of land were sold with houses or separately. Thus, we read of a papahu, or chamber, which was beneath an adjoining beer-shop.(627) The beer-shop is often mentioned, and was a state-regulated institution.

(M592) A term which was long somewhat of a puzzle, the ki-gallu, usually written E-KI-GAL, or E-KI-DAN, is shown definitely by the Code(628) to be a plot of uncultivated land. This might be rented for cultivation and was not necessarily poor land, for it was expected to yield ten GUR per GAN. But it might also lie in a city bounded on four sides by houses,(629) or, as often, by three houses and the street. It was then, of course, a building site. Its price was usually about two shekels per SAR, but might be as high as eight shekels per SAR.(630)

(M593) Another common object of sale was a building called E KISLAH, shown by the Code(631) to be really a "granary," or barn, read maskanu. These are usually in the city, and the prices paid for them varied from one-third of a shekel(632) to fifteen shekels(633) per SAR. They might be surrounded by houses on all four sides, or by a canal, road, and street.(634)

(M594) These examples serve to show that bitu as often denoted a "plot" of land as a "house."(635) In Assyrian times we find the same usage. A fairly common object of sale is what I take to be a "fuller's field," or a "bleaching ground," bitu kakkiri puse. It was usually in the city, of small size, given in cubits each way, or a trifle over a homer in area. It was near a stream. It sold for a very high price. Once we find half of it used as a garden. It seemed to have been fenced in. Unfortunately, no one example is perfectly preserved; and the deeds are of no special interest beyond the peculiar nature of the plot.(636)

(M595) The gardens in the time of the First Dynasty of Babylon are generally said to be planted with dates, and sold for "full" price. Once two shekels are given for a garden of fifteen SAR.

(M596) There are not many examples of these sales in Assyrian times, but they give some welcome information. There is nothing peculiar about the sale formula. The only interest is in the specifications. The garden is usually said to be planted with the isu tillit, almost certainly "the vine." Hence, we may regard them as "vineyards." The number of plants in them is often given, being as high as two thousand four hundred.(637) Of other plants grown in a Babylonian garden we can recognize with more or less certainty in The Garden Tablet,(638) garlic, onion, leek, kinds of lettuce, dill, cardamom, saffron, coriander, hyssop, mangold, turnip, radish, cabbage, lucerne, assafoetida, colocynth.

Other gardens are said to be kiru urkitu, "vegetable gardens." In later times the date-plantations are continually in evidence. Beyond the specification, "planted with dates," and certain obscure references to the condition of the crop at the time of sale, there is nothing to be noted.

(M597) The sales of fields are very numerous. They were usually situated outside the city walls, in the ugaru, or townland. They were not, however, reckoned outside the "town." For the town extended beyond its walls, like a parish in England; and was bounded, as a rule, by adjoining towns. In the case of Sippara, many of these ugare are named; but as a rule, the names do not explain themselves. Thus, Azarim, Higanim, and Shikat Malkat may be named after persons or temples. Other names, like Shutpalu, Nagu, Ible, Tapirtum, may well be significant. Certainly, Ebirtim appears to mean "across" the Euphrates. Once the field is said to be in Sippara,(639) once in Halhalla,(640) but we cannot press these statements to mean "within the walls" of those cities. Usually, the boundaries of a field are four other fields, with now and then a road, or canal. The price per SAR varied from one-thirtieth of a shekel(641) to more than a mina. Very frequently, indeed, the price is simply said to be "full."

(M598) The fields in Assyrian times are often mentioned. Nearly always when a field, eklu, is sold, it is somewhere else referred to as bitu, or plot, usually of so many homers in size. There is nothing distinctive about the sale formula. The specifications give most interesting and valuable data as to the topography of the land around Nineveh.(642) The accessories of a field may be named. Sometimes it was corn-land, se zer, part was tabru, "open land," part adru, enclosed by a wall or fence. Pits or wells, canals or ditches, courts or folds, occur frequently as adjuncts of a field.

(M599) Larger estates are built up of the simple elements which we have noted. Sometimes the estate was so large as to be styled a "city," alu se. These "cities" are generally called after the name of some one, probably a former owner. But the number of people sold in them does not justify the use of any larger designation than "hamlet." A large estate, with a few people on it, obviously its bailiffs and the serfs of its landlord, constituted the alu. Hence, this term, like bitu, must have a wider signification than that usually given it. Such hamlets were, doubtless, the germs of future cities, but the term evidently denotes simply a settled abode of a group of people.

(M600) From very early times the Babylonians drew plans of estates, which are in many ways very instructive. The seated statue of Gudea, found by De Sarzec at Telloh, has a plan of his city upon a tablet on his lap, accompanied by a scale of dimensions or a standard of length.(643)

Professor Oppert, Dr. Eisenlohr, M. Thureau-Dangin, and others have discussed at length the plan of a field,(644) which has the sides of several plots given in linear measure and the areas in square measure. From this was obtained a great variety of results regarding the relations between the measures.(645)



XXIII. Loans And Deposits

(M601) In the first epoch there are many examples of loans. The characteristic word SU-BA-TI, or SU-BA-AN-TI, which means "he has borrowed," has been used as a title and they are often called SUBATI tablets. They are the receipts given for the loans by the borrowers. Here is an example:

"Sixty GUR of corn, royal quality, from L have been received by B." Date. Seal of borrower.

In place of corn we may have money, dates, wool, or almost anything. Sometimes a date for repayment is given. In the examples there are usually no references to the interest to be paid for the loan. They may be regarded as advances made to temple tenants, or serfs, to be repaid at harvest from crops.

(M602) The greatest value of these tablets lies in their dates. The dates are usually events. Many of these have already been collected and registered, especially by Dr. H. Radau.(646) But there is even more to be done, when further examples are published. Many tablets contain two dates referring to loans contracted at different times. By this means the sequence can gradually be determined. The seals are also of great interest and often of value, as may be seen from Dr. Radau's work.

(M603) Advances of all sorts were freely made both with and without interest. For convenience we may separate money from corn loans and advances of all kinds of commodities; but we must not forget that corn, at any rate, was legal tender; and silver loans might be repaid in corn. This, however, was early recognized as an inconvenience and it is quite common to find a direct stipulation that what was lent shall be repaid in kind. It soon became usual to state that if the loan was repaid otherwise, it must be according to a fixed ratio between silver and corn.

(M604) A very large number of loans take the form of Abstract schuldscheine, loans without statement of any cause for the debt. They are merely promises to pay, that is, acknowledgments of indebtedness. Thus we read: "Five shekels of silver which A has given to B. On such a date B shall pay five shekels of silver to A." A penalty may be added for not paying on the fixed date. Usually this takes the form of interest. The rate is one shekel per mina each month, or twelve shekels per mina yearly, that is, twenty per cent. There is no clear case of money lent as an investment to bear interest. That was done in quite another way. The lender entered into relationship with an agent, to whom he furnished capital and who traded with the money and repaid it with interest.

(M605) Most of the loans were evidently contracted to meet temporary embarrassment. Usually it was in connection with the need of cash to pay the expenses at harvest-time. The loan was then repaid at harvest. It might be repaid in corn.(647) The time was usually short—fifteen days is named.(648) The lender had his reward in obtaining his money's worth in corn, when its price was cheapest. But he was evidently not expected to charge interest. A similar kind of loan is half a mina of silver to pay the price of a piece of land. Here the money was lent until the land was bought, and was to be repaid with interest of three GUR of corn.(649) So half a mina for certain land to be paid, when the land was cultivated.(650)

(M606) Another reason for borrowing was the need of money to pay taxes, ana ilkim suddanim.(651) In one of these cases the stipulation is added that the borrower shall bring the receipt of the tax-collector and then may take back his bonds.(652) Here the "sealed tablet" is in one case the receipt for the tax, in the other the receipt which the borrower gave for his loan. But there is no mention of his repayment. Perhaps the lender owed the tax, half a mina, and as it was a considerable sum, sent it by a third party, but made him give a receipt for it. But such a receipt would differ in no respect from the sort of bond mentioned above, and would render the messenger liable to repay the money; so he was to have his receipt back, on handing over the tax-collector's receipt showing that he had paid the tax.

(M607) In several cases the god is represented as lending the money. It is obvious that such advances were made from the temple treasury.(653) It is usual from such instances to expatiate on the temple, or the priests, as the great moneylenders. This is a view easily misunderstood. It is quite true that the temples were great landowners, and had steady incomes, and possessed treasuries; but there is no evidence that they lent on usury. It seems rather that these loans without interest (except as a fine for undue retention of the loan) were a kindly accommodation. We know that under certain circumstances a man might appeal to the temple treasury to ransom him from the enemy. He might also borrow in case of necessity without interest. Moneylending proper existed, but was kept in narrow bounds by the temple itself.

(M608) In view of the many questions that arise as to the nature of the money at this period, it should be noted that the silver is often said to be kanku; literally "sealed." Whether this means that the silver bars, or ingots, were sealed while the metal was soft enough to receive a mark which would authenticate its weight and purity, or whether it means that the money was enclosed in sealed sacks, is hard to say. Against the latter may be urged that such a small sum as one and two-thirds shekels would not be sealed up.(654) But it may be that kanku means "sealed for," that is, acknowledged by the receipt.

(M609) Even more common than money loans are the corn loans. Here the loans were generally for a short time just before harvest, when the repayment was expected. The period is usually short, five days,(655) or a month.(656) Interest is sometimes demanded, at the rate of one hundred KA per GUR, or one-third, that is, thirty-three and a third per cent. This was probably the rate per mensem, four hundred per cent. per annum. But in one case the interest is one hundred KA per GUR per annum,(657) once it is expressly said to be nothing,(658) usually it is not referred to at all. Sometimes a loan was partly in money, partly in corn.(659)

(M610) Other things were lent, as sesame, skins, bricks, and the like, but these loans exhibit no peculiarity. They are merely letting the borrower have goods on credit, to be paid for, or returned, after a time.

We may take, as an example of this kind of transaction, a rather more complicated case:(660)

(M611)

Two and seven-thirtieths of a GUR of corn, Shamash standard measure, which Ilu-kasha, son of Sharru-Shamash, gave to Belshunu, Ilushu-abushu, and Ikash-Ninsah. Ilu-kasha brought the corn and returned one GUR and one-tenth and took for himself two hundred and twenty KA. Later he paid one-tenth of a GUR to Ilushu-bani, Ikash-Ninsah, and Shumma-Shamash, and they remitted in all three GUR, the former and later debt.

In the second case only one of the former debtors is left. The loan was partly repaid, a fresh loan contracted, and then partly repaid. It is not clear whether the arrears were remitted or extracted by distraint. Nor is it clear whether Ilukasha was debtor or creditor. As a rule such points are clear. It is only the conciseness of the formula which here causes the obscurity.

(M612) Another fairly common type of document contains a number of sections, each containing the record of one sum. But it is not clear that these were loans. They may be allowances for food or salary. Thus in B1 247 we have so much corn for the women weavers, so much more for the votaries, so much for other officials, from the first of one month to the thirtieth, so much for the Suti who was watching the field, so much for a boatman, and so on. These are perhaps a temple steward's accounts. Their interest lies only in the incidental notices. We also note that here a month had thirty days. It is interesting to find that the celebrated Suti nomads who later gave so much trouble, were already in the country and were employed to watch the fields. Was this watching done on the principle of "setting a thief to catch a thief"? Perhaps it was necessary to employ a Suti as custodian, of course at a salary, if one was to preserve the crop from the depredations of his fellow-tribesmen.

Some of these tablets expressly state the amount of corn loaned, giving the date for repayment.(661) Hence we see what a narrow margin divides the proper bond from the mere receipt, or even the memorandum of the loan.

(M613) A number of tablets deal with advances of wool or woollen yarn made by temple officials to weavers and dyers to work up. As a rule they contain a number of words connected doubtless with the weaver's craft which are not yet made out. The following is a fairly simple example:(662)

One talent of wool belonging to the palace, price ten shekels of silver, property of Utul-Ishtar the abi sabe, which Ishme-Sin, son of Sin-bel-aplim, Marduk-mushallim, son of Sin-idinnam, Ilushu-ibni and Belshunu, sons of Sin-eribam have borrowed. The day that the tax-collector of the palace demands it they shall pay the money of the palace.

Elsewhere the time of loan may be stated, two months for example.(663) The price is always reckoned at six minas of wool for a shekel. It seems that the borrowers were not obliged to repay until a certain date, or until a demand was made for certain taxes. They then must pay in silver.

(M614) In the Assyrian examples of money-loans the same general features constantly recur. The most common are loans ana puhi, which may be taken to mean "for consideration," as the word puhu means an "exchange." But there is never any statement of what the consideration was. Some have thought, that as the bond was invariably given to the creditor to be broken up on the repayment of the loan, the exchange referred to was a restoration of the bond in return for the money. But the consideration, which is a legal presumption, may have lain in the fact that the borrowers were tenants on the metayer system and had a right to borrow of their landlord, free of interest, at seed-time and harvest. On such loans interest is only demanded when the debtor fails to repay at the fixed date.

(M615) The rate of interest charged as a penalty for non-payment or late payment was twenty-five per cent. per mensem, three hundred per cent. per annum. This interest was intended to secure prompt payment, but was not unfair in view of the increase of value obtained by investing it in corn and then sowing that. Other rates were one-third and one-eighth, but there is no fixed rate of interest for the loan of money, except when it was ana puhi.

(M616) The interest on corn was thirty KA per homer. Some think the homer had sixty KA, which would make the interest fifty per cent. But no case has yet been found which gives the number of KA in a homer.

(M617) The money lent is often said to belong to a god. Ashur, Ishtar of Arbela, or Ishtar of Nineveh, are the most common. Sometimes it is said to be in "Ishtar heads," which has been taken to mean ingots stamped with a head of Ishtar. The frequent reference to the mina of Carchemish alongside the king's mina is eloquent as to the commercial eminence of the old Hittite capital.

An example is the following:(664)

Sixteen shekels of silver, from A to B, ana puhi, he has taken. On the first day of Tammuz he shall pay the money. If not, it shall increase by a quarter. Dated the eleventh of Nisan, in the Eponymy of Bel-ludari. Three witnesses.

(M618) Loans or advances were also made of various kinds of property. Thus we have an advance of ten minas of silver, Carchemish standard, seventy-five sheep, one cow, made by Ashurbanipal's chief steward to four men, ana puhi. The sheep and cow they are to return in Adar. If they do not return the sheep, they must breed them. The interest on the money is to be one-third. Dated the twenty-fifth of Tebet, B.C. 664. Thirteen witnesses. Such a loan seems to be on the metayer system.(665)

(M619) Here again we have an exceptional case:(666)

L lends two dromedaries, "which they called double-humped," to three men, who shall return them on the first of the month, or pay six minas of silver. If they do not pay the money, interest shall accrue at the rate of five shekels per mina. Dated the fourteenth of Tishri, B.C. 674.

These animals were rare and evidently highly valued. What could the three borrowers want with a pair of such animals? Were they for exhibition in a menagerie? Perhaps they were for breeding. We may have here a case of goods taken on approval, for a fortnight or so, perhaps for sale to another party.

The same lender lent to the same three men, two hundred sheep, one hundred and fifty goats, two hundred and thirty yearling lambs, in all five hundred and eighty small cattle. They were to return the animals by a fixed date, or pay. Dated the seventh of Iyyar, B.C. 673. The same lender had lent seventy-two sheep to two other men, in Sivan, B.C. 680. They had to return the sheep in Ab, or pay for them at the market-rate in Nineveh. Bel-eresh acted as agent for the borrowers.(667)

(M620) Other goods, such as wine, or oil, were advanced. Here we probably have to do with the transactions of the royal chief steward and the king's agents. For example:(668)

L intrusts five homers of wine, according to the royal measure, to D. On the first of Nisan he shall return the wine, otherwise he shall pay for the wine according to the market-rate in Nineveh. Dated fifth of Adar, B.C. 674. Five witnesses.

Again:(669)

(M621)

L advances six homers of pure oil, price ten KA of bronze per homer, to D, the major-domo at Carchemish. He shall repay the oil in Sebat; if not, it shall be doubled. Dated twenty-first of Ab, B.C. 681. Six witnesses.

We may deduce the interesting fact that Esarhaddon was at Carchemish in Ab, B.C. 681. The advance was made for the use of the royal household there.

(M622) Advances of corn were made exactly as in the earlier times. Thus:(670)

L advances thirty homers of corn to D, the messenger from the city of Maganisi, by the hands of E, a colonel in the army. He shall pay the corn in Marchesvan, in the city of Maganisi, or pay the full value of it in Nineveh. Dated the seventeenth of Sebat, B.C. 665. Eight witnesses.

(M623) One peculiarity of the corn loans is that they are chiefly recorded upon what have been called heart-shaped tablets. These were lumps of clay through which a string passed and came out at the upper shoulders. The string was probably tied around the neck of a sack containing the corn. They thus served both as labels, seals, and as bonds. Many of them have Aramaic dockets, which have been collected and edited by Dr. J. H. Stevenson, in his Assyrian and Babylonian Contracts, with Aramaic reference-notes.

(M624) Thus the above example bears the words in Aramaic, "barley, assignment, which is from Nabu-duri." These Aramaic legends, in the case of such labels, may have served as addresses. But the general purpose is obscure. All the corn advances seem to have been made by officials of the royal household to inferior officers, in charge of farms or otherwise dependent for supplies.

(M625) (M626) They show by their dates that the corn was usually advanced just before harvest, when corn was dearest. Some of them name the reapers; others give the number of them. We conclude that these advances were made as food for the harvesters, or as wages for their labor. Occasionally, however, the loan was made at seed-time. Most of the loans are ana puhi,(671) which supports the view that the meaning of this phrase is really "for management expenses" and presupposes the metayer system.

(M627) Closely connected with money or other loans are receipts for payment. These are somewhat rare. The more usual practice was to break the tablet, or promise to pay, which was returned to the debtor. But we have two good examples, thus:(672)

The four minas of silver, interest, belonging to C, which were due from D, D has paid and given to C. One with the other, neither shall litigate. Dated seventh of Sivan, B.C. 683. Three witnesses.

Here we are not aware of the circumstances which lead to the loan. But, in one case, we have records both of the loan and its repayment, thus:(673)

(M628)

Bahianu advanced two homers of corn, for food, to Nabu-nur-nammir; and one homer each to Latubashani-ilu and Sabutanu, ana puhi. Dated the twenty-ninth of Elul, B.C. 686.

And we find also:(674)

Sabutanu and Latubashani-ilu repay each one homer. Nabu-nur-nammir does not repay. Dated Iyyar, B.C. 685.

Whether or not the defaulter paid later is not known; but we probably owe our knowledge of the repayment to the fact that all three did not pay together. We note that each paid exactly what he borrowed. No interest was charged.

(M629) In one case we have a receipt for a fine, or damages, imposed by a law-court. Thus:(675)

Forty minas of bronze, without rebate, which the sukallu imposed as a fine. Paid to the sakintu. Dated the tenth of Adar, B.C. 693. Four witnesses.

There is no statement who owed, or paid, the fine. But the lady governor who received the money gave this receipt for it.

(M630) The Code makes very clear the legal aspect of this transaction. A minor or a slave could only deposit under power of attorney.(676) A deposit was not recoverable unless made by a deed, or delivered in presence of witnesses and duly acknowledged by a receipt.(677) The receiver was liable for all loss occurring to the goods in his possession on deposit, even when the loss was such as involved the loss of his own goods as well.(678) For corn, the Code fixed a yearly fee for warehousing of one-sixtieth the amount deposited.(679)

(M631) As we learn from the few actual cases which occur, the receipt given for the goods was returned to the recipient on the return of the goods and the tablet broken as cancelling the responsibility. One form which it might take is illustrated by the following:(680)

Ten shekels of silver, which according to a sealed receipt was deposited for the share of Sili-Shamash, he has taken from Sili-Ishtar and Amel-ili, his brothers. His heart is contented; he will not dispute. Oath by Hammurabi, the king. Seven witnesses. Fourth year of Hammurabi.

Here apparently three brothers share, but one being absent the two hold their brother's share for him, giving a sealed receipt for it. This the judge delivered to him and he claimed and received his share.

(M632) Actual examples of deposit are rare; probably because our collections refer to temple transactions, rather than to private family deeds. We have a deposit of lead,(681) from which we learn that silver was worth twice as much as lead. It was to be sent from Ashnunna, on demand. Here is another:(682)

(M633)

"Concerning the silver which Zikrum and Sabitum gave to Sili-Ishtar on deposit. They have received it; their hearts are content. They gave up their bond and it was broken."

Instead of a receipt by the recipient there is often found a list concluding with the word apkida, "I have intrusted." Then comes the date and the names of witnesses. It is not clear, however, that these things were meant to be returned. They may only be memoranda of allowances given out. They chiefly occur in Scheil's Saison de fouilles a Sippar.(683)

(M634) In Assyrian documents no examples of this kind of transaction are found. Nor are any very clear examples producible from later Babylonian times. But it must not be overlooked that some cases, where a receipt is given for a sum or quantity of goods, without mention of interest to be paid, may very well be acknowledgments of a deposit; they have usually been taken to be loans.



XXIV. Pledges And Guarantees

(M635) Very little is known about pledges in early times, though Meissner had argued for their existence from certain passages of the series ana ittisu, such as "on account of the interest of his money he shall cause house, field, garden, man-servant, or maid-servant, to stand on deposit"; followed later by, "if he bring back the money he can re-enter his house; if he bring back the money, he can plant his garden again; if he bring back the money, he can stand in his field; if he bring back the money, he can take away his maid; if he bring back the money, one shall return his slave."(684) Consequently the creditor held the pledge in his possession until the loan was returned, when he had to give it back. The pledges here mentioned are antichretic, that is, such that they produce an income or return to the holder, which is a set-off against the interest of his money.

(M636) The Code recognizes the taking of property in satisfaction of a debt.(685) But this is rather a process of distraint upon the goods of the debtor, in case of non-payment, than a case of pledge. Since it was usually expected that the property so taken would be returned on payment of the debt, we can hardly distinguish it from pledge. Indeed, where a debtor gave up his wife, child, or slave to work off a debt, we have a case of antichretic pledge for the debt and interest.

(M637) In times subsequent to the First Babylonian Dynasty, the pledge is common. As a rule, it is antichretic, such that income or profit derived from the pledge is a fair equivalent for the interest of the loan. The lender acquires the right of enjoying the pledge. As a rule this is assigned him absolutely, so that no account is needed to be kept of interest on one side and profit on the other. If the profit exceeds the interest due, the excess may be returned, or it may be credited towards the discharge of the debt. If the interest exceeds the profit on the pledge, then the amount by which the loan exceeds the capitalized profit must pay interest.

(M638) In Assyrian times loans on security are fairly common. Here also we have antichretic loans, where the profit on the pledge was a set-off against the interest of the money. The pledge is expressly stated to be "in lieu of interest." But it seems that the property was often expected also to extinguish the debt. Or it was merely pledged, as a security, which the creditor would keep in case he could not get his money back. We may illustrate these by examples:(686)

(M639)

The lady Addati, the sakintu, lends two minas of silver, Carchemish standard, exact sum, to D, the deputy of the chief of the city. In lieu of the two minas of silver, a plot of twelve homers of land in the outskirts of Nineveh, Kurdi-Adadi, his wife and three sons, Kandilanu and his wife, in all seven people, and twelve homers of land, are pledged. On the day that one returns the money, the other shall release the land and people. Dated the first of Marchesvan, B.C. 694. Ten witnesses.

The point about the phrase, "exact sum," seems to be that the advance was made without any rebate. Here the security is worth little more than the loan. Its profits would, however, be a good security for the interest of the loan. No time is given for repayment, but the creditor undertakes to accept repayment and release the pledge at any time.

Again:(687)

(M640)

The lady Indibi lends sixteen minas of silver, royal standard, to D. In the month of Tishri, he shall pay the money in full; if not, interest shall be two shekels per mina monthly. A vineyard in the village of Bel-ahe, next to that of Habasu, next to that of Si'banik, next to that of the chief scribe; also these slaves, Dari-Bel, his wife, three sons, and two daughters, along with his household, four fat cows (?); Hudi-sharrutu and his daughter; all are pledged as security. If they die or run away, the loss shall be D's. The day that D shall refund the money, with the interest, his slaves and vineyard shall be released. Dated the ninth of Ab, B.C. 688. Six witnesses.

Or again:(688)

(M641)

Five homers of land belong to D, in the city Kar-Au. The lender L gives D two-thirds of a mina of silver. This two-thirds of a mina of silver L shall acquire from the field and when D thus has given L his money back, he shall release the field. Dated the sixteenth of Iyyar, B.C. 680.

In the following case a maid is assigned outright for a loan. It is doubtful whether this is a sale, or a pledge:(689)

(M642)

In lieu of money, Belit-ittia, the maid of the sakintu, is assigned to the lady Sinki-Ishtar. As long as she lives, she shall serve her. Dated the fourteenth of Iyyar, B.C. 652.

(M643) A very similar case occurs in the loan of corn and a cow by the bel pahati of the Crown Prince, to a certain Nargi of the city of Bamatu. Nargi was to serve the lender for the corn and cow. When his service had become equivalent to the value of the advance, he could go free.(690)

Antichretic pledge was very common in later Babylonian times. The most typical examples are houses. The lender (M644) has a house in pledge. To him it is rent-free until the loan is repaid. Hence the common phrase "rent is nought, interest is nought." There was then no reckoning made one against the other.(691) The creditor might not, however, care to take the pledge in perpetuity against interest of a loan, never repaid. Usually a date was fixed for repayment, at which time the debtor was bound to take back his pledge. Thus a house might be pledged definitely for three years.(692)

(M645) A reckoning might also be made, to check off profit against interest. Thus D pledges a field to L, but on condition that, if in any year the crop is less than will meet the interest due, he shall pay the difference; but if, on the other hand, it be worth more, he shall take the balance.(693)

(M646) The value of the pledge might, however, be such that it would outweigh both loan and interest. At any rate, it should be as valuable as the loan. Hence it could not be used as a further pledge to another. There is often a guarantee that the pledge given has not been already pledged, that no other creditor has a lien upon it.

(M647) In these cases the creditor enters into possession of the pledge and enjoyment of it. He has some responsibilities towards it. He cannot destroy it, or waste it. As a rule, he assumed full liability for all cases for wear and tear. He also fed and clothed a slave pledged to him. Now and then we find the debtor responsible for clothing the slave pledged by him.(694) It is not essential, however, to the idea of pledge that it should come into the possession of the creditor, only it is hypothecated to him. This practice was very common in later Babylonian times.(695)

(M648) Such pledges give an eventual possession. Something like a reversion occurs in the pledge of a share not yet divided.(696) Thus a sum was borrowed on the understanding that if not returned by the proper time, a slave shall be handed over as an antichretic pledge.(697) The man who gives a pledge may not be in actual possession of it, but pledges it on the understanding that he will hand it over as soon as it becomes his. Thus B bought a slave and her two young children for sixty-five shekels, but before they were handed over, he pledged them for fifty-five shekels. Nine months later he sold them for sixty shekels.(698)

(M649) A common case is where the debtor pledges all he has to the creditor, a pledge usually greatly in excess of the value of the loan and its interest for a reasonable term, but remains in possession himself. Hence the creditor has only a right over the pledge, a lien upon it, but no usufruct. For this he had the bond. This also gives only an eventual possession.

(M650) We often meet with after-pledge. The creditor, being in possession of the pledge, might traffic in its profits. If he held a house as pledge, he was not bound to live in it, but could sublet it. Hence he might pledge the rent of it. Or he could repay himself his loan by repledging the house to another. He could also pledge the loan which was due to him. This makes a rather complicated case.

(M651) Thus L makes an advance a to D and receives a pledge p. He may then pledge both a and p. If these are given to two separate persons, a to A and p to P, then P has a cause for uneasiness. If D comes in and pays up a, he has a right to the pledge p which is in P's possession. But the money he advanced is not thereby paid to him. Further, A has a right to the money a just paid in by D, which is all that is in evidence. Hence L will have succeeded in getting two sums, and unless he can succeed in realizing his investments of them, is called on to pay both A and P with one amount. Either A or P may suffer. But if L pledges both a and p to one man C, then C is quite independent of the relations of L to D. Now D simply has to pay C and gets his pledge back. C is sure of his money.

(M652) Such a transfer of the responsibility of D from L to C was effected by handing over to C, with the pledge, also D's bond to L. C now holds this bond, which, with his pledge, D wishes to get back. The following is a complicated case illustrating these points:(699) D had a house and pledged it to L, who lived in it. Two others were guarantees that D would repay the loan. The pledge was antichretic, "rent nothing, interest nothing." Now L wanted money; so he pledged the house to C. But he did not wish to vacate. So he hired it of C, at such a rate that he would repay C's loan in about five years. It is clear that this house was not good security for C, since D might turn out L at any time by repaying him. L would then owe money to C for which C had no security at all. But L in addition pledged all his own property, his slave, and all his goods in town and country. Further, he not only pledged the house, but handed over D's bond to him. C thus held the house in after-pledge, and the advance with its security in pledge. He was therefore amply secured, since D must pay him.

Now L died and was succeeded by his son M. L had already paid nearly a third of his debt. M thus owed less interest on the loan still due and was accepted by C as tenant at a lower rent. By this means M really made a small profit to himself. In three years M had paid off the whole sum borrowed by his father, and due from him as heir and executor, so he gave back his father's bond to C, also D's bond to L. Now D paid back his loan to M. His bond to L was destroyed. The claim of C on D was annulled, the guarantees of D were free. A final deed of settlement was drawn up, in which C acknowledged that he had no claims on D or M, nor on D's sureties. He had to say this, because he was not only creditor to M, but as long as he held transferred to him the pledge of D, and the credit of L, he was a creditor with claims on D also. Further, M declares that he has no credit on D.(700)

(M653) A guarantee arises from certain persons undertaking to fulfil a responsibility which is legally incumbent on another, in case he fails to do so himself; or to secure that he shall fulfil it himself. Thus, guarantees are very frequent at all times, especially in the later Babylonian period, and are of many different kinds.

(M654) A guarantee for debt was an additional security to the creditor. Of course, the original debtor is the security that the guarantor shall not lose. A good example showing all sides is the following bond for three minas due from D to L. G and W come in and guarantee that D will pay; if not, they will. To protect themselves, they take as a pledge of D some of his people. But D paid and received back his people, so that the bond was returned to D.(701) Why D did not give his people as pledge to L direct is not clear. G and W were probably persons of greater credit and perhaps related to D. The guarantor was sometimes called on to pay. Thus G guarantees for D, is called on to pay and D repays him.(702) The guarantor was legally protected against the defaulting debtor.(703)

(M655) A guarantee for appearance may have been only to come and pay, as when G guarantees the creditor, a temple, that D will come on a fixed date, and pay his debt; or if not, G will himself pay.(704) It may be a guarantee that a man will not go away; by which may be meant escape payment, or fail to appear for judgment. This is called a guarantee "for the foot of" the person thus indorsed. The "foot" is said to be in the "hand" of him who demands the guarantee. It often refers to debt. G guarantees for the foot of D, out of the hand of L. If he goes away, G will pay thirty-five GUR of dates. Here G is the mother of D.(705) So, probably on account of debt, G guarantees for the foot of D, his son-in-law, from the hand of L;(706) again, G guarantees for D to L that D will come on a certain day. G takes the responsibility for all D owes to L, and will pay if D does not come.(707) Or, G guarantees for D and E that they will not leave for another place. If they do, he will pay six minas.(708)

(M656) But the appearance may be needed for a different purpose. G guarantees to bring a witness to Opis, and give witness against L that one who was guarantee for the foot of someone to L shall return at the right time. If the guarantee shall prove that L was paid, he is free; if not, he is bound to pay.(709)

D owed L a debt. L ceded this debt to M, but had to guarantee that D will come and pay.(710)

(M657) Solidarity is in some cases a form of guarantee. Thus two men D and E owe a debt to L. Each is taken as guarantee for the other that they will pay.(711) This is one of the commonest forms of guarantee. The debt could then be recovered in its entirety from either.

(M658) An example of a guarantee against theft is also found.(712)

(M659) A warrant against defects in a slave is very common. The seller warrants that if the slave prove to have certain undisclosed defects, vices, or liabilities, which would detract from his value to the buyer, the seller will indemnify the buyer. This indemnification seems to be effected by a return of the purchase-money and accepting the slave back. But, in some cases, the seller returned part of the purchase-money according to a fixed scale of allowances. In the sale of an estate, the seller guarantees that he will indemnify the buyer in case of any defect of title to sell, or any lien upon the estate.

(M660) Very common at all times was a personal guarantee not to dispute the compact entered into. In fact, this may always be said to be assumed. The oaths by which parties swore to observe the terms of the compact are a form of this guarantee. The penalties, so prominent in Assyrian times, are voluntary undertakings to forfeit stated sums, if found attempting to go behind the contract.

(M661) As the pledge did not always leave the debtor's possession, the creditor only had a lien upon it. Hence the giver of the pledge had to guarantee that no creditor had a previous lien upon it. This is also extremely common. A slave pledged for debt might run away. His labor as the offset against the interest was thus annulled. The borrower then becomes liable for the interest lost to the creditor.(713)



XXV. Wages Of Hired Laborers

(M662) Despite the existence of slaves, who were for the most part domestic servants, there was considerable demand for free labor in ancient Babylonia. This is clear from the large number of contracts relating to hire which have come down to us. The variability of the terms agreed upon is witness for the existence of competition. As a rule, the man was hired for the harvest and was free directly after. But there are many examples in which the term of service was different—one month, half a year, or a whole year.

(M663) One might hire labor from the master of a slave, or from the parents of a young man, not yet independent, and then the wages were small, a shekel or two. These wages were paid to the master or parents, not to the laborer himself.

Reapers for the harvest had half a shekel,(714) or two shekels,(715) each. The first may be the daily wages, the latter the price for a specific job. It is probable that the GUR of corn for ten days also represents the wages for the whole period.(716)

(M664) Average wages have been estimated by Meissner(717) to be six shekels per year, according to the Code, and some actual examples of contracts. But it was evidently a matter of agreement, for we have rates as low as four shekels and as high as eight. Usually the employer paid down a sum, for example, a shekel, as earnest-money; the rest was paid by a monthly or daily rate, or in a lump sum at the end of the term of service. Occasionally the wages might be paid down at the start, but this was rare and the amount less.

(M665) Very frequently, of course, the wages were paid in corn instead of money. Many difficulties lie in the way of finding an equivalent of the shekel in corn. Harvest labor was probably far dearer than any other, because of its importance, the skill and exertion demanded, and the fact that so many were seeking for it at once. Further, after harvest, when the wages were paid, corn was at its lowest price. Meissner's actual examples show that two hundred and fifty KA might be accepted as yearly wages. We have such a variety of rates that it is difficult to draw any clear conclusion, but two young slaves at harvest could earn three hundred KA, and for a whole year the wages might be over six hundred KA, or even as much as three GUR, or nine hundred KA.(718) The Code names ten KA as daily wages. The average value of a GUR of corn was a shekel, hence this gives a yearly rate of twelve shekels. In this case we may suppose that the laborer supported himself.

(M666) The laborer had to be bound to perform his task. A penalty was attached to his failure to appear at the proper time, and guarantees were sometimes taken for his appearance. In other cases it is stipulated that the penalty for non-appearance shall be fixed by the king's decision.(719)

(M667) It was usual to name expressly the time of his commencing and leaving off his work. These clauses are incidentally of importance as fixing the names and sequence of the months at this period. Thus, from the example below we see that the month Tirinu preceded Elul.

(M668) Of course, the employer took all responsibility for the slave whom he hired. He fed and clothed him during his term of service. If he suffered any injury, the employer had to compensate the master. Occasionally the slave clothed himself,(720) and then his wages were higher.

As an example we may take the following:(721)

Namir-nurshu from Rutum, Rish-Shamash, son of Marduk-nasir, for wages, for one year, has hired. His wages for one year, twenty-four KA of oil, he shall pay, and he shall clothe him. In Elul he shall enter, in Tirinu he shall leave. Two witnesses. Dated in the reign of Hammurabi.

(M669) In the Assyrian times we have certain examples of advances of corn, or money, at harvest-time for the payment of reapers, which have already been noticed under loans.(722) An advance of money and food to workmen may perhaps be put here. But it is also a contract to do work. It reads thus:

Shamash-bani-aplu, Latubashani, Ukin-abia, Ahu ... in all four workmen. Two talents of bronze, three homers one SE of cooked corn. On the tenth of the month they shall do the work. All the repairs and the beams they shall make fast. They shall fix the balks, and set up the roof. If the bricks are not sufficient ... the month they do not give, they shall work and finish. Then follow seven witnesses. Dated on the sixth of some month, B.C. 734.

Unfortunately, parts of the tablet are injured and so the sense is not at all clear; but the workmen seem to have had four days in which to do the work. The price offered was considerable.

In later Babylonian times we do not obtain much further information. Here is a good example:(723)

From the twentieth of Nisan to the tenth of Ab, Zamama-iddin, son of Shamash-uballit, son of the smith, shall be at the disposal of Nabu-usallim, son of Limnia, and he shall pay him as his wages ten shekels of silver. He shall pay half the wages in Nisan and the rest in Tammuz. Whoever breaks the contract shall pay five shekels of silver.

The hire is nearly thirty shekels a year, as in the next example:(724)

Bulta, son of Habasiru, son of the oxherd, has put himself in the hands of Marduk-nasir-apli, son of Itti-Marduk-balatu, son of Egibi, for wages of half a mina of silver for one year. From the first of Sebat shall Bulta be at the disposal of Marduk-nasir-apli. Bulta has received one-third of a mina of silver from Marduk-nasir-apli.



XXVI. Lease Of Property

(M670) In case of lease, the specifications of the house are usually the same as in a sale. But this is often not so full, since the identity of the house is less in evidence. A very interesting text referring to the sale or lease of a house next to the palace, in the district of Tirka, a house belonging to gods Shamash, Dagan, and Idur-mer is published by M. Thureau-Dangin in Revue d'Assyriologie.(725) It belonged to the King of Hana, whose seal it bears. His name was Isar-lim, son of Idin-Kakka. The receiver was Kaki-Dagan's son. The oath was by Shamash, Dagan, Idur-mer and Isar-lim the king. The names are very interesting—Igid-lim, an official of the god Amurru; Idin-abu, king's son; Ili-esuh, a judge; Idin-Nani, son of Idin-Marduk; Sin-ukur, son of Amur-sha-Dagan; Iazi-Dagan; Turi-Dagan; Silli-Shamash. These prove that the land of Hana, already known by a votive offering of one of its kings, Tukulti-mer, was largely Semitic. The names are either of the Babylonian or Aramaic type. It is, of course, not easy to date, as the style of writing in Hana may have been different from that in Babylonia at the same epoch.

(M671) Meissner estimates the average rent of a house to be one shekel per annum. But there are noteworthy variations which, with our available data, cannot be explained. Perhaps the best way is to take account of the size of the house, usually given in the Babylonian fashion by the area of its ground-plan. Rents were often paid in corn, but are so variable that a value for corn in money cannot safely be deduced.

(M672) A small part of the rent was usually paid as earnest-money to close the bargain. In the case of short leases the rest was paid on quitting the house, in longer leases half-yearly. Usually the term of tenancy was carefully stated. It was most commonly one year. The cost of repairs fell on the tenant, according to the Code,(726) but he was forbidden to make any alterations until he had paid over the earnest-money. The Code perhaps only means to forbid his closing the door and fastening it, until the deposit was made. The landlord, in fact, preserved the right of free entry until then.

(M673) The usual term of lease for fields was three years. It is not possible as yet to explain why three years was stipulated, but it was probably due to something more than an accident of custom. Possibly a rotation of crops or an alternation of crop and fallow may have been in vogue.

(M674) According to the Code the tenant was bound to keep the land in good condition. His duties included the ploughing or trenching, sowing the seed, snaring or driving off the birds and stray beasts, weeding, watering, and harvesting. Gardens he had to fence. The watering-machines were of great importance and had to be kept in order. They were worked by oxen—often as many as eight oxen were required to work them. A certain amount of stock was frequently leased with the land. It is not clear that oxen were used for the plough; they may have been kept for the watering-machines.

(M675) The landlord was in a very real sense a partner with his tenant, though he may be described as a "silent partner".

In the case of the great temple landowners it seems to have been the custom to supply a very large amount of the tenant's necessities. Seed-corn was frequently furnished, also corn for food for farmer and men, until the crop was gathered. The stock and farm implements were also provided by the landlord. This metayer system of leasing land probably accounts for loans without interest. It is not clear that such a system was already in vogue in early times.

(M676) In hiring a field it might be stipulated that the lessee should place a dwelling upon it,(727) manahtu ana eklim isakkanu. Here the field was at a distance from the city, "beyond the upper stream." If the crop was to be properly looked after, protected from birds, stray beasts, and robbers the farmer must live there some part of the year. There was no dwelling. The lessee was therefore called on to erect a dwelling. Probably a simple edifice sufficed. At the end of the tenancy the tenant was called on to resign this building.

(M677) There were two sorts of land. That called AB-SIN or seru', seems always to have paid six to eight GUR of corn per GAN. The other sort, KI-DAN, probably read kigallu, and certainly meaning land, not cultivated but to be brought into cultivation, was exceedingly variable in quality. It is set down for a rent of from three up to eighteen GUR per GAN, but some land is rented at seventy-two GUR per GAN.(728)

(M678) On account of the hire, some deposit was usually made, which seems to bear no direct relation to amount of rent. But while this was in many cases money—one to three shekels—a number of cases exhibit a list of quantities of food and drink. What these were it is difficult to say, as the terms are written ideographically. But joints of meat, pieces of flesh, drinks, bread and oil, seem to be intended. The custom is obscure. Possibly these are set down as weekly or monthly rations secured on the whole rent and to be set off against it later. That the quantities are in some sense distributive is certain, "so much each," but whether "each person," "each day," "each month," or "each year" is not stated. One plausible suggestion is that the landlord, like the votary in the Code whose brothers do not content her, let the farm to a man who covenanted to support or maintain him. The contention is strengthened by the fact that the cases known to us are all female landlords, and may actually be examples of what the Code contemplates. Having only a life interest in the property and being without capital, they could not afford to wait until harvest to receive the rent, but needed a frequent allowance for maintenance.

(M679) (M680) The lease of an estate for a term exceeding a few years was always rare. One is found on a tablet which is one of the most interesting of all those supposed to be of the First Dynasty of Babylon. The script and the language recall Assyrian types most vividly and it is full of non-Babylonian names, which suggest Hittite, or even Armenian, origin. Unfortunately, it is not dated. It might well have been found at Kalah, or Asshur, and belong to somewhat early Assyrian times, perhaps before Assyrian independence of Babylonia. Not one person named in it occurs in the other tablets of the Bu. 91-5-9 Collection—a thing which cannot be said of another of them. If this was really found with them, we can only suppose that centralization was carried to such a pitch that important legal documents, even when executed as far away as Assyria, or Mesopotamia proper, had to be sent in duplicate to the capital of Babylonia. Or was it possible that the principal party came to the capital with this document in his possession, deposited it in the temple archives there, and died, leaving no one to reclaim it.

Dr. T. G. Pinches gave a transcription and translation of the text in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1897, pp. 589 ff., with many interesting and valuable comments:

Six homers of corn [land] belonging to Ishtar-KI-TIL-LA, son of Tehip-TIL-LA, Kibia, son of Palia, Urhia, son of Ithip-sharru, and Irishenni, son of Iddin-PU-SI, have taken for three homers of land, to harvest and transport. As long as Ishtar-KI-TIL-LA lives, Kibia, Urhia, and Irishenni shall transport the crop of three homers of land and shall deliver the same in caldrons. If Kibia, Urhia, and Irishenni do not harvest and transport and deliver the same in caldrons, and the corn perish, they shall pay in full one mina of silver and one mina of gold to Ishtar-KI-TIL-LA. Each is surety for the other. Before Ahli-Teshup, son of Taishenni; before Ukuia, son of Geshhai; before Shellu, son of Wantia; before Kushshu, son of Hulukku; before Durar-Teshup, son of Gil-Teshup; before Ahli-Babu, the hazanu, son of Nubananu; before Zinu, son of Kiannibu, the scribe.

(M681) The names of the witnesses are here given in full because of their exceptional interest. Until we are sure of his nationality it is scarcely safe to suppose the principal's name was really pronounced Ishtar-kitilla—the latter part of the name may well be an ideogram. The name of his father ending also in TIL-LA suggests that that group of signs is separable. If so, the signs read Ishtar-KI may perhaps be ideographic also. It is evident that Tehip is from the same root as Ithip, and the form looks Semitic.

Kibia, Palia, Urhia are Semitic, but Irishenni and Taishenni remind one of the Erisinni, of the son of U'alli, King of the Mannai in Ashurbanipal's time. Still, neither can be said to be non-Semitic with certainty, when we recall the many names ending in enni or inni formed from verbs and compare the names formed from eresu, eresu. Names containing the name of the god Teshup were known long ago, as Hu-Teshup, Kali-Teshup, Kili-Teshup, where the other element of the name does not seem to be Semitic. Egyptian records give us other compounds of the name of this god, who was the sky-god among the pre-Semitic peoples of Mesopotamia

Here we have Ahli-Teshup, Gil-Teshup, and Durar-Teshup. With the former, Professor Hommel compares Ahlib-shar. With the next compare the Mitanni name Gilia, also Gilua. Ahli-Babu is a closer parallel.

Of the other names, Shellu, Kushshu, Hulukku, and Zinu seem to be Semitic; at any rate they occur frequently, or in cognate forms, well known among the Assyrians and Babylonians. The others are all very unfamiliar. We are as yet so imperfectly acquainted with the onomastics of the nations surrounding the Semites that it is hazardous to attempt to locate these people. Supposing them to be all of one race, they may belong to a colony settled near Sippara, but the whole style of the language is so unlike the Sippara documents that we can hardly suppose that to be the case.



XXVII. The Laws Of Trade

(M682) The oldest form of business in Asiatic life is commenda: the commendatist gives a fixed sum of money to the agent with which he does his business. The former takes a fixed share of the profit, say half, in addition to the original sum invested. The agent usually secures guarantees for the capital. This method of carrying on business is customary in the early times. The Code regulates the relations between principal and agent. The former is called tamkaru, usually rendered "merchant," and the latter is samallu, often rendered "apprentice." The merchant is, however, a trader in many ways, and in the Code he is usually named, where we expect lender or creditor. Hence there is little doubt that his name is derived from magaru, or makaru, with a meaning "to traffic" (?). He seems to have been a monied man, who was ready to make to cultivators advances on their crops—a practice always liable to great abuses, which the Code aims to check.

(M683) The merchant principal also furnished goods, among which are mentioned corn, sesame, oil, wool, wine, and manufactured articles. The agent did the trading, and regularly rendered his accounts to his principal. He travelled from place to place to find a market for his goods, or to make purchases, which could be profitably sold at home. The principal paid no salary, but received again his capital, or the value of his goods, and an interest or share of the profit. It is clear that the merchant also moved from place to place, and there is evidence that many of them were foreigners. The travelling agents with their goods formed the caravan.

(M684) This kind of trading was regulated by the Code.(729) Unfortunately, the opening sections of the part dealing with the relations of principal and agent are lost; but from what is left we see that it insisted on exact accounts being taken, on both sides, of the amounts of money or value of goods thus invested. If the merchant intrusted money to his agent, he was to take a receipt for it. If the agent received goods, he was to enter their money value and obtain his principal's acknowledgment of the amount of his debt. If he suffered loss of goods from his caravan by bandits, or in an enemy's land, he could swear to his loss, and be exempt from repayment to his principal. But if he did not prosper in his business, or sold at a loss, he had to make good the capital, at least, to his principal. The Code leaves nothing to chance. If the agent is foolish enough not to obtain a sealed memorandum of the amounts received, or a receipt for what he pays to his principal, it is enacted that money not sealed for cannot be put in the accounts. Much was clearly left to the good faith of the agent. The principal was tolerably secure of receiving back his money and had hope of profit. Against that he had to set possible loss by robbery of the caravan. But he was not bound again to employ the same agent. An agent detected defrauding his principal had to pay threefold. But it speaks well for the Code as protector of the weak that it made the capitalist who defrauded the agent repay sixfold.

(M685) From the contemporary documents we learn that the name for the business was girru. That this was also the name for an "expedition," warlike as well as peaceable, points to its connection with the caravan trade. The sign for girru, also used for harranu, a "journey," came in later times to be used for all kinds of business transactions. That the relations noted in the Code actually were carried out in practice, many tablets show. Thus we read:

One shekel of silver, price of one hundred and eighty SE, and three shekels of silver which Zuzana lent Apla son of Edishu, for five years, to enter on his girru. He shall pay one hundred and eighty SE and three shekels of silver to take back his sealed receipt.(730)

Here the capital intrusted was a quantity of corn worth a shekel, and three shekels in money. This was in order to enter on a business journey. The agent Apla had to return the capital in full, as the Code enacts, to take back his bond. There is no agreement as to profits, which might be wanting; that was left to be understood. As a rule, the time was shorter, generally "one year." The agent appears to have often borne the name of muttalliku, "one who wanders about," "a hawker." The same may be denoted by AH-ME-ZU-AB, a group of signs whose reading is not yet clear, but may be a variant of the ideogram for samallu.

(M686) Business was also done, as the Code shows, as speculation in futures. Thus(731) we read:

Sibbat-ase-iddina hired as "business" the produce of a field from three men. The produce of the business was to be three and seven-fifteenths GUR of corn, according to the standard measure of Shamash paid in Kar-Sippar, and one shekel was to be profit.

This was what he had to pay, and evidently, if the crop yielded more, that was his profit; if less, he had to stand the loss. Similarly, other crops were let on the terms that at harvest, or at the end of the "business," a specified amount should be paid.

(M687) We learn from many hints, that caravan trade was always active. The name of Harran in Mesopotamia is supposed to be derived from the numerous caravan routes that crossed there. The Tell el Amarna tablets tell us of the complaints made by the kings of Babylonia of the robbery of caravans in districts nominally under the control of Egypt.

(M688) In the more private documents of the later Babylonian times, there is again plentiful evidence that this form of trade was common. The money was loaned out "to buy and sell." It was given ana harranu, "for hawking trade." Then whatever profit was made upon the money, the agent "will give" to the principal. The agent binds himself to undertake no other agency. He gives a guarantee for the money. The principal had no further responsibility for the business, and would not meet any further call. It is obvious that in a sense the principal and agent were partners, and many transactions in later times are difficult to distinguish from cases of partnership in the ordinary sense.

(M689) It has long been recognized that the canals controlled the prosperity of the country, but it is only lately that their importance as waterways has been fully realized. In the early period we read of flour sent by ship to Nippur for certain officials.(732)

(M690) The Code has much to say about ships. Temples owned them, as well as private persons. It was a crime, punishable with death, to steal a ship.(733) We read of fees for building or navigating various ships.(734) The responsibilities and damages in collisions and wrecks are apportioned.(735) A shipowner might hire a captain to navigate a ship for him, or might hire the captain and ship together. The usual freight included corn, wool, oil, and dates, but many other things were also carried. The wages of a captain was six GUR of corn yearly. There are frequent references to ships in the contemporary letters.(736) They were named according to their carrying capacity, which was five or more GUR. A ship of seventy-five GUR is named. They carried wood, for King Hammurabi ordered seven thousand two hundred pieces of abba wood to be brought to Babylon, three hundred pieces in a ship. A number of boat captains or perhaps shipping agents were ordered to proceed from Larsa to Babylon and arrive with their ships in Adar. He gave orders for the furnishing of the crews. We further have a correspondence concerning the invasion of certain fishing rights by boats from another district. In the contemporary contracts we meet with several long lists of ships divided into little groups, of five, six, or seven, each with its captain named, each group under a head captain, all set down as at anchor at the port of Shamash, or the like.(737) There is a case of the hire of a boat of six GUR freight by two persons for two months.(738)

(M691) In Assyria, canals served chiefly for water-supply. Except when the Assyrian kings went outside their own lands to Babylonia or Mesopotamia, we hardly read of ships. Sennacherib's ships were built abroad and served abroad. There is no hint of their ever coming up to the walls of Nineveh. The contracts only once mention a ship(739) in which booty was brought from somewhere.

(M692) In the later Babylonian times there are many references to the hire of boats and their crews. They appear to be a regular conveyance of goods:(740)

One shekel and a quarter of silver for the hire of a ship which brought three oxen and twenty-four sheep from the king's son [Belshazzar], for Shamash and the gods of Sippara. Further, fifty KA of dates for the rations of the two boatmen.

Thus the receiver paid carriage and expenses. The daily hire of a boat is now one shekel, and the wages of the crew amount to half as much.(741) A boat might be bought for twenty shekels or half a mina.(742) The wages of the boatmen included corn, dates, salt, and onions. The freight was exceedingly varied as before. One boat appears to have carried fresh meat.(743)

(M693) There are less obvious references to roads in the literature; but that they were in excellent condition has been conjectured from the many evidences of postal service and ready carriage even in early times. Convoys travelled from Agade to Lagash as early as the time of Sargon I.(744) Innumerable labels are found on lumps of clay with the name and address of the consignee. These were attached to consignments of money and goods.

(M694) The Code contemplates consignments being sent from a great distance, even from abroad.(745) It regulates the charges for a wagon, with oxen and driver,(746) or a wagon alone.(747) There are several cases in the contracts of the hire of wagons, for varied prices per year, one-third of a shekel(748) to twelve shekels;(749) but it is not certain that these were for conveyance from place to place. They may have been for agricultural purposes only. The usual means of conveyance seems to have been by asses.

(M695) In Assyrian times we find it part of the duty of a founder of a city to open up the roads leading to it.(750) The land was intersected with roads in all directions, so that a field often had two roads as its boundaries. The whole plain outside Nineveh was cut up by roads, which here take the place of the canals of Babylonia. In this period we find horses and camels in use as beasts of burden as well as the asses.



XXVIII. Partnership And Power Of Attorney

(M696) Association, or partnership, makes its appearance very early and in a highly developed state. Some forms are very simple, as when two or more men buy or hire a piece of land together. There may, or may not, be any family relationship between the partners. In some cases we learn nothing about the terms of partnership. But where we are able to discern them, they follow the natural course that profits were divided, pro rata, according to the capital contributed. More obscure is the question how far the personal exertions of each partner were pledged to the benefit of the firm. There is a suggestion that some partners were content with furnishing capital, and obtaining a fair return upon it, while the others were actively engaged in the business of the firm. Prolonged study and comparison are, however, needed before all these points can be definitely decided.

(M697) The name for a "partner" is tappu, and the sign TAP serves as ideogram. This sign consists of the two horizontal strokes used to denote "two," and may have been used to denote "union," or partnership, and so from its name tap have given rise to the name for "partner." In the new Babylonian times the ideogram is the sign usually read harranu, also formed of the two horizontal strokes crossed by two connecting strokes or bonds. There is little doubt that in early times this was read girru, when denoting "business," undertaken in association. Later the dualism of the partnership was marked by the addition of the dual sign to harranu. That both harranu and girru are used as words for "way," "journey," "expedition," may well point to the prominence of the idea of trade journeys with caravans. But partnerships were made with less ambitious aims and confined to holding and sharing in common varied sources of income.

(M698) To make a partnership, tapputam epesu,(751) it seems that each partner contributed a certain amount of capital, ummanu.(752) Yearly accounts were rendered and the profit then shared. This took place by a formal dissolution of partnership, when each partner took his share. This in no way prevented a renewal of partnership. For the satisfaction of the partners sworn declarations as to the property held in common and the profit made were deposed before judicial authorities. These often take the form of a suit by one partner against the other, but it seems that they might be only formal suits to clear up the points at issue and secure a legal settlement.

(M699) A considerable number of tablets are drawn up to embody a settlement on dissolution of partnership. Some do not make any reference to a law officer as arbitrator; but all contain a careful setting-forth of each partner's share and an oath to make no further claim. It is practically certain that these were drawn up with the cognizance of the local law-court.

(M700) The Code has nothing to say as to partnership, unless its regulations on the point were embodied in the lost five columns.

A good example of partnership documents is the following:(753)

Erib-Sin and Nur-Shamash entered into partnership and came into the temple of Shamash and made their plan. Silver, merchandise, man-servant, and maid-servant, abroad or at home, altogether they shared. Their purpose they realized. Money for money, man-servant and maid-servant, merchandise abroad or at home, from mouth to interest, brother with brother will not dispute. By Shamash and Malkat, by Marduk and Hammurabi, they swore. Then follow seventeen witnesses. The document is not dated.

(M701) The word for plan, temu, means the basis of partnership, that is, its terms. Here it was "share and share alike." The phrase babtum, "merchandise," includes all the material in which they traded, excluding the living agents. The phrase sa harranim, literally "on the road," may well have denoted the merchandise not in warehouse, but in circulation. Whether harranu actually referred to a caravan may be doubtful. We often read of goods sa suki, "on the street," in the same sense, "out on the market." If the partners dealt in corn, and had a quantity lent out on interest, that was sa suki. Whether a distinction between sa harranim and sa suki was kept up is not clear. But if they invested their capital in merchandise which they sent to a distant market for sale, the former phrase would be more appropriate, while if they bought wool to manufacture into cloth or garments and to sell in the bazaars of their own town, sa suki would be more suitable. The gate of the city was a market, and money or goods sa babi, "at the gate," was as we should say "on the market." In contrast to these phrases, ina libbi alim, "in the midst of the town," answers to our "in stock." While the term mitharis literally means "altogether," "without reservation," it implies exact equality of share. The amatu was the "word," literally, but, applied to business, means the agreement as to their mutual transactions. The completion of that was reached when they took the profits and divided them. It might include the mutual reckoning of profit and loss. The phrase "from mouth to interest" is very idiomatic. The "mouth," or verbal relationships, included all they said, the terms they agreed upon. The word "interest" here replaces the more usual "gold;" both mean the "profit," or the balance due to each. Usually we have the words "is complete," the idea being that no verbal stipulation has been overlooked, no money or profit left out of reckoning.

(M702) As will be remarked, such pregnant forms of expression evidently presuppose a long course of commercial activity. They can only have arisen as abbreviations of much longer sentences. Clear enough to the users of them, they do not admit of literal rendering, if they are to be intelligible to us. But they are eloquent witnesses of an advanced state of commerce.

(M703) Traces of partnership are difficult to find in the Assyrian tablets which have reached us. We must not confuse with partnership the holding in common of property or lands, which may be due to heritage. Two or more brothers may sell their common property, for greater ease of division, but they are not exactly partners.

(M704) In the later Babylonian times, as is natural to expect with the larger number of private documents, there is much evidence regarding the many forms of association for business. We have such simple forms as the following:(754)

One mina which A and B have put together for common business. All that it makes is common property.

Or thus:

Two minas each, A and B, have as harranu. All that it makes, in town and country, is in common. Rent of the house to be paid from capital.(755)

(M705) They had a house, as shop and warehouse, the rent of which was a charge upon the business. Slaves might be partners with free men, even with their masters. A partner might merely furnish the capital or both might do so, and commit it to the hands of a slave or a free man with which to do business. The slave took his living out of such capital, and the free man received either provisions or a fixed payment. Thus we read:(756)

Five minas and six hundred and thirty pots of aromatics belong to A and B as partners. This stock is given to C, a slave, and D, another slave, with which to do business. Whatever it makes is A and B's in common. C and D take food and clothing from the profits where they go.

It is not unlikely that each slave was to look after his own master's interests. For we read:(757)

Six minas belong to A and B and are given to C the slave of B as capital. A and B share what it makes. A will give another slave D to help C.

Even women entered into business as agents. We read:(758)

Two-thirds of a mina belonging to A and B are given to a free woman with which to trade.

(M706) As in earlier times, the dissolution of partnership usually involved a reference to the law-courts. Thus we have(759) a reckoning before judges of two brothers and a third who were in a partnership from the eighth year of Nabopolassar to the eighteenth of Nebuchadrezzar. "The business is dissolved" (girru patrat). All the former contracts were broken and shares are assigned to each. The first two brothers were in possession of fifty shekels which were to be divided.

(M707) Provisional reckonings were constantly made at frequent intervals, but did not involve dissolution of partnership, nor need to be referred to a law-court.(760) Some cases are interesting for additional items of information. Thus we note:(761)

(M708)

Two partners put in each fifty GUR of dates. Whatever it makes is to be in common. They take a house in Borsippa for one year at rent of half a mina. The rent is to be paid out of profits. B holds the house and apparently carries on the business. At the end of the year he returns it and all the utensils to A.

It seems likely that he carried on some kind of manufacture. A held the south house, next door. B also paid the tithes. A similar case where some manufacture from dates is supposed, is thus stated:(762)

A lends one hundred GUR of dates, fifty GUR of corn, sixty large pots, to B and C two of his slaves, on a partnership. They are to take in common whatever it makes, in town and country. The venture is to last three years. But, in this case, they are to pay interest two minas per annum. At the end of the three years, the two slaves returned all.

They were given a house for which they paid no rent.

(M709) Closely allied with agency is the power of attorney. In the Code(763) a son in his father's house could not contract, buy or sell, or give on deposit, except by power of attorney empowering him to act for his father. The same was true of the slave. The contemporary documents contain many references to business done by agents on the order of their principals.(764) The Assyrians also make frequent mention of persons acting as bel katati, having the power of another's hands, being in fact allowed to act as their attorney or agent. The king was represented in the law-courts by his agent.(765) Sometimes the agent was called bel pahati of the king's son.(766) It even seems to be the case that katatu acquired the sense of agency, or business, and bit katati came to mean a "shop," or bazaar. In many cases "agency" was expressed by sa kata, "by the hands of." Aliens had to act through such an agent.(767) When three men borrow a quantity of straw, one alone sealed the receipt and bond to repay, and was said to be bel katati sa tibni, "agent for the straw."(768) A female slave was sued for property said to be due from her master, in his absence. A free man, perhaps the judge, was bel katati for the woman that her master would take up the case on his return, and undertook to satisfy the suitor, if she could not do so.(769)

(M710) In later Babylonian times the phrase survived. The commissary acted "with the hand" of his principal. We may take this to be the hand-sign, or seal, representing written authority. It involved a reckoning with his master, and naturally gave rise to a number of delicate questions. If a man bought a house for another, having been commissioned so to do, his principal must of course pay the price. But was he bound to accept his agent's selection? Could he not demur regarding the price? One of these points at least was dealt with by the later Code. Law A deals with the man who has concluded a purchase for another, without having a power of attorney from him in a sealed deed. If he has had the deed made out in his own name, he is the possessor. Of course, he can sell again to his principal, but he could not do so at a profit. Nor is the principal under any obligation to accept the purchase at the price the agent gave for it. Actual examples are far from rare: A buys a field, crop, date-palms and all, for C and D. This purchase was made on condition that all copies of the transaction be destroyed. The condition was not observed, as we still possess one of them. Later A received from C, one of his principals, about half the price he had paid. But it does not appear that D ever paid his share, and this is why the condition was not carried out. Presumably A and C remained owners of the field.(770)

(M711) There is no limit to the varieties of agency or representative action. At all periods we meet with a brother, usually the eldest, acting for his other brothers. A brother acting with the hand of his brother also occurs in the time of Evil Merodach.(771)

(M712) The power of attorney was also given to receive money and give a receipt, under seal.(772) Again: A bought some slaves of B and paid in full. B gave receipt for the money, but did not undertake to deliver the slaves at A's house. A can send a messenger or agent to take the slaves, and B agrees to deliver them to such. Whatever is born or dies from among the slaves is credited to A.(773)



XXIX. Accounts And Business Documents

(M713) There are lists which are not formal contracts, but may have been used as legal evidence. The stewards of the great temples, of the palaces, and even of wealthy men in business, kept most careful accounts. These lists have some features peculiar to themselves and are not without considerable interest.

(M714) The tablets which have reached our museums from Telloh, Nippur, and elsewhere, belonging to the ages before the First Dynasty of Babylon, are for the most part temple accounts. They often concern the offerings made by various persons, often officials of high standing, and some may well have been the notes sent with the offerings. But many were drawn up as records of the receipts for a certain day, month, or year. Interesting as they are for the class of offerings, for the names of offerers, or of priests, and for the cult of particular gods, or the localities near Telloh and Nippur, and often containing valuable hints for the history and chronology of those times, they do not give us the same insight into the daily life of the people that the longer legal documents do, in later periods.

(M715) An important class consists of receipts for loans. Those drawn up at full length and witnessed, have already been considered. But the majority may only contain a list of articles delivered, with the name of the receiver, the lender being the holder as a temple official, while the receiver is a subordinate. These may have been as effective as the fuller bonds, but they furnish little information, except regarding the current prices of articles.

(M716) Some tablets are concerned with hire. The amounts paid by the temple for repairs, fresh robes for gods and officials, even maintenance of the workmen, are all set down with their totals for a week, or a month.

(M717) An important class consists of the records of the measurements, length, breadth, and area of fields, together with the amounts of corn which they were expected to produce. Were these available for a widely extended area, we might be able to map out the district round the temple from whose archives they come.

(M718) The temples and large landowners had great flocks and herds. Consequently, there is much evidence concerning the pastoral occupations of the people of Babylonia. The Code regulates the relations of the shepherds and herdsmen to the flock-masters.(774) Thus an owner might hire a shepherd, nakidu, for his sheep or cattle, at the wages of eight GUR of corn per annum. The shepherd or herdsman took out the flock or herd to the pasture and was responsible to the owner for them. They were intrusted to him, and if sheep or ox were lost through his fault, he had to restore ox for ox and sheep for sheep. If he was hired and had received satisfactory wages, he had no power to diminish, or abstract from, the flock or herd for his keep or private use. He entered into a contract with the owner, and that stipulated for the restoration of the entire flock or herd, together with a proper increase due to the breeding of the flock or herd. He had to make any deficiency good, by statute.(775) This applied also to the stipulated profit in wool or other produce. It seems clear that his own profit was any excess above the stipulated return. Otherwise it is difficult to see what source he had from which to make good the loss to his master. He was forbidden to alter the agreement into which he had entered in any particular, or to sell any of the flock, under penalty of a tenfold restitution. He was, however, protected from liability for loss by wild beasts or accident. But, if the loss was due to his fault, by neglecting to keep the fold secure, he had to make up the loss.

(M719) It is obvious that he gave a receipt for what was intrusted to him and made his account on return from the pastures. These accounts are plentiful among the temple accounts in the earliest periods, but being written for the most part in Sumerian, have still many obscurities for us. As a rule, each deals with the liabilities of one man, whose "account," nikasu, it is said to be. At the beginning are recounted the details of his trust, so many oxen, cows, sheep or goats, of varied ages and qualities. Here it is very difficult to translate. Anyone who knows the variety of names which are given to an animal by agriculturists according to its age, sex, and use, need not be surprised to find that the Babylonians had many names for what we can only render by "sheep." As a rule, we know when the ram, ewe, or lamb is intended. But this by no means exhausts the variety. Anyone who glances through an Arabic lexicon must notice how many different names the Arabs have for the camel in its different aspects. But in our case we often have no clew to what was meant by the signs beyond some variety of sheep, ox, or goat. At any rate, the first section enumerates the cattle or sheep delivered to the herdsman. Then follows a section devoted to those "withdrawn," taken back by the owner, or exacted as some due from the flock. Others are noted as taken for sacrifice, used for the wages or support of the herdsman, or else dead or otherwise missing. These the herdsman was allowed to subtract and then had to return the balance. There are similar lists of asses or goats. The tablets hardly lend themselves to connected translation because of the absence of verbs. The following is an example:

Forty-three ewes, forty-three rams, seven ewe-lambs, seven he-lambs, three she-goats, one sucking kid, to start with. Expended in ewes and rams, none; six ewes, seventeen rams, snatched away; no lambs lost: no ewes, one ram, no lambs. Total: one hundred and four to start with. Total expended: none. Total: twenty-three snatched away. Total: one lost. Namhani, shepherd. Overseer: Duggazidda. At Girsu. The year after the king devastated Kimash.

The meaning of the words is somewhat conjectural. "Expended" may mean used for the shepherd's own maintenance. "Snatched away" means probably deducted for revenue purposes, about one in five. The scribe did not write "none." He merely left a blank.(776)

(M720) The similar lists for the second epoch are not yet available for study. Only one(777) appears to have been published,(778) but there are many still unpublished. It is not easy to translate them, because, though many Semitic names occur, there is still a tendency to use the old Sumerian, or ideographic writings. Such a list as: