Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T19:28:10.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Social Effects of Old Assyrian Trade

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

K. R. Veenhof
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Around the middle of the nineteenth century B.C., according to a calculated guess, as much as 2,000 inhabitants of the City of Assur were in some way involved in OA Trade. Roughly one-third of this number lived in or regularly travelled to and in Anatolia. This involvement of so many people must have had a serious impact on Assyrian society. In this paper an attempt is made to point out some of its social effects. “Social” is taken in a broad sense, including some more economic aspects; social and economic facts of ancient Assyria cannot and should not be treated separately.

The treatment of this subject is hampered by some serious limitations. Diachronic comparisons, correlating social changes with the development of the trade, are almost impossible, because we know hardly anything about OA society before the period under review. We are also largely ignorant about the effects of the disruption of the trade at the end of Kültepe II. Changes and differences revealing themselves in the period Kültepe Ib are not necessarily “natural” developments, but may be due to the influence of the new king Šamši-Adad I, and to inner Anatolian developments.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , Spring 1977 , pp. 109 - 118
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbreviations used: AC—P. Garelli, Les Assyriens en Cappadoce (1963); AOATT — K. R. Veenhof, Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and its Terminology (1972); OA— Old Assyrian; OACP—M. T. Larsen, Old Assyrian Caravan Procedures (1967); OACC—M. T. Larsen, The Old Assyrian City-State and its Colonies (1976).

1 The figures apply to the later years of Kültepe II, covered by the līmū-datings dealt with in OACC, 375 ff., with chart on 381. The figure is based on personal names attested (minus those of Anatolians and those only attested in patronymics) increased by 10% to account for unpublished data. The resulting figure of c. 1500 has been increased by 500 to account for the many people involved in the trade, but rarely mentioned in the sources: personnel of the bīt līmim; people engaged in the import of tin and textiles in Assur; those working in the wool and textile production, including many women employed as weavers; those responsible for raising, training and harnessing donkeys; craftsmen working with metals (silver, bronze); personnel of the temples, taking part in commercial activities.

2 Cf. for some changes due to that king OACC, 118, 154 f., 210 and 218ffGoogle Scholar.

3 Caravans arriving from Kaniš never brought copper to Assur; cf. for the problem OACC, 91 f.

4 The word has been compared to “barbarian” as used in classical times. Cf. for its original meaning and semantic evolution Gelb, I. J., OIP 27, 46 ad 37, y + 2Google Scholar, and Landsberger, B.ArOr 18/1 (1950), 345 fGoogle Scholar. with note 76. The expression nuwā'uttam epāšum, used once, means in the context: “to act in the interest of the (native) Anatolians”. The man to whom this applies (TC 2, 27, 14Google Scholar) “is related to the (local) palace”.

5 Cf. AC, 384 f. for a list of bonds in which they occur. Anatolians are never the subject of employment-contracts as mentioned in note 31 below.

6 Cf. for the marriage of such amtum-wives (amtum indicating their inferior legal position towards the Assyrian aššutum or main wife), Lewy, J., HUCA 27 (1956), 3 ffGoogle Scholar. and in general for social contacts AC, 161 ff. Cases of debt-servitude of Anatolians in default of payment should be distinguished from the purchase of slaves. The former were of a special nature, and as a rule of limited duration; cf. EL, 188 for a case of debt-servitude and redemption.

7 Cf. OACC, 357 f. for such cases.

8 Cf. the examples in Hecker, GKT § 57a and c. Loanwords like marnū'atum (von Schuler, E., AOAT 1 (1969), 317 ff.Google Scholar), mainly appellatives, are not surprising in view of the particular situation. See, for possible phonetic influences of Anatolian languages on OA, Hecker's cautious remarks in GKT § 6b. I am not convinced by the few cases (§ 8d and 17a) he is willing to consider.

9 Cf. the texts I 490 (HUCA 27 (1956), 6Google Scholar); ICK 1, 3Google Scholar; and CCT 5, 16Google Scholar. From a later period TIM 4, 45Google Scholar (late OA or early MA).

10 Cf. OACC, 78 f., and for the text mentioning the arrival of Akkadians AOATT, 98 ff.

11 Cf. OACC, 160 ff. and 247 ff.

12 Cf. OACC, 192 ff.; ibidem, 198 ff. on the monopoly of the bīt līmim in the trade of certain luxury items.

13 Cf. AOATT 126 ff. and OACC 172 ff.

14 Puzur-Aššur, in BIN 6, 104, 15 ffGoogle Scholar. (in a letter urging an Assyrian girl to come to Anatolia in order to marry him; cf. Lewy, J., ArOr 18/1 (1950), 374, note 48Google Scholar).

15 The marriage contract I 490 authorizes the husband to take his Assyrian amtum-wife along on his journeys in Anatolia (lines 6 f.); she really became a dam.kaskal.lá, a Sumerian compound equated with secondary wife, concubine.

16 See the references and discussions in AC, 252 ff.; Hirsch, , UAR, 59 ffGoogle Scholar. (with “Nachträge” in the second edition, 24 f.); CAD 1/J 64 fGoogle Scholar. (note the remarks on p. 66, discussion); OACP, 78. I am in substantial agreement with the interpretation by Garelli (cf. also Lewy, J., OrNs 26 (1957), 192)Google Scholar.

17 Cf. texts like Hecker, KUG no. 28 and Garelli, , RA 60 (1966), 112 no. 43Google Scholar (using the term qīptum, “trust”). The text L 29–563 (HUCA 39 (1968), 19 f.Google Scholar) is important for the relation between votive gifts and ikribū as temple funds entrusted to a merchant.

18 See AOATT, 103 ff. and the new evidence in CCT 6, 11aGoogle Scholar. Lamassi's total output, as recorded in the texts known, was c. 100 fine textiles, worth at least half a talent of silver.

19 Slaves and slave-girls occur in inheritance texts and inventories, both in Assur and Kaniš cf. for Assur, CCT 5, 9a, 12Google Scholar; RA 59 (1965), 153 (Sch. 23), 18, 60Google Scholar; RA 60 (1966), 134, 12, 20, 41 (subrutn)Google Scholar; VAT 9270 (HUCA 38 (1967), 7 f.Google Scholar), 10 f.; EL 287, 19, 29Google Scholar; BIN 6, 222, 5Google Scholar (line 5 end: šerrum !). The eponym takes slave-girls as security in BIN 4, 67, 17 ff.Google Scholar; TC 2, 46, 7 ffGoogle Scholar. Other people do the same in CCT 3, 24, 42 f.Google Scholar; KTS 29b, 5 f.Google Scholar; TC 1, 25, 13 ff.Google Scholar; 3, 60, 22.

20 Cf. Kraus, F. R., Staatliche Viehaltung im altbabylonischen Lande Larsa (1966)Google Scholar; Waetzoldt, H., Untersuchungen zur neusumerischen Textilindustrie (1972)Google Scholar. Cf. for Mari, e.g. ARMT XIII, no. 1Google Scholar.

21 Cf. texts like BIN 6, 102Google Scholar; TC 1, 30Google Scholar; 3, 35; VAT 9224 and 13478. Taram-Kubi writes to her husband in CCT 3, 25, 12 ff.Google Scholar: “Now it is the right season; send silver so that grain can be stored for you before you arrive”; cf. also CCT 3, 24, 15 ff. and 33 ffGoogle Scholar.

22 Cf. AOATT, 116, 2Google Scholar.

23 Oates, D., Studies in the Ancient History of Northern Iraq (1968), 19, 31 ffGoogle Scholar. He points out the possibilities of wool production.

24 The origin of the city is unknown. Cf. for a review of the facts OACC, 27 ff. and 36, where arguments for a nomadic origin are refuted.

25 Cf. CCT 5, 21aGoogle Scholar and EL 96 for examples concerning Pušu-ken.

26 Cf. for goblets (kasātum) in enumerations, alongside silver and gold, CCT 1, 31bGoogle Scholar (commercial context), TC 3, 271, 7 (inventory)Google Scholar; in CCT 5, 41b, 14 ffGoogle Scholar. they are sent to Assur together with amounts of silver; in TC 2, 22, 16Google Scholarhusārum and a goblet of husārum are sold.

27 TC 2, 11, 3 ffGoogle Scholar. with TTC 6; TC 2, 14, 29Google Scholar with VAT 9251, 13; TC 2, 2, 3 ff.Google Scholar; 3, 29, 26.

28 RA 59 (1965), 160, 30 ffGoogle Scholar.

29 Cf. Hirsch, , UAR 59 ff.Google Scholar, with “Nachträge” 24 f. CCT 4, 2a, 3 and L 29–563Google Scholar (HUCA 39 (1968), 19 f.Google Scholar), 13 ff. both mention a sun-disc of 1 mina of gold.

30 Functioning as a week-eponym (hamuštum) is not necessarily an indication of high status, as Larsen, has shown in OACC, 358 fGoogle Scholar.

31 Cf. for be'ūlatum-contracts (characterized by the formula: A išti kaspim uktāl) EL 97 f.; ICK 1, 126Google Scholar; 2, 105 + 108, 107, 109; TC 3, 246Google Scholar; OIP 27, 50Google Scholar, and for be'ūlatum in general the discussions in AC, 249 and OACP, 41 and 149 f. Sometimes people even hired out their slaves as transporters in order to acquire such a loan: ICK 1, 10Google Scholar and TC 3, 43Google Scholar.

32 Cf. AOATT, 407 ff.

33 Cf. OACC, 288 ff. for “big” and “small” members of the kārum.

34 Cf. for the naruqqum-contract OACC, 157 with note 147, and for the so-called “dātum-payers” AOATT, 278 and OACC, 264 ff. and 281 f.

35 Cf. for this text AOATT, 398.