means ceiuuiu "'t'^" i^-"-.- ; — --- ■„„ ti,„f
worshippers of the moon ; and, even supposmg that such was the case, Haran may have been selected for other reasons than that the moon-god was wor- shipped there, shrines to that deity being not uncommon in the ancient East.
Notwithstanding the inherent probability of the identity of the ancient Babylonian Urn (Mugheir) with the biblical Ur of the Chaldees, the na.neu not so near as might be wished. The Heb form has a long vowel, represented by ik, at the begin- nin" and no vowel at all after the consonant (i). In the'Tiab. Uru, however, though there is no indica- tion that the end. vowel was long, there is but lit le doubt that it was originally so, as the non-Semitic (Akkadian) form Urbiui, or, better Unu-a, shows Frd. Delitzscli {Pamdies, p. 226) expresses the opinion that the old form of the name m Akkadian was Urum (Uruma) ; but that tins is not ouiM correct, is proved by the 4 -column syllaWry 82-8-16 !,• where the non-Scmitic pronunciation is given as Uri, the terminal -ma or -wa found in the archaic brick-inscriptions from the site, being as is usual in the Assyr.-'Bab. Byl abaries) omitted There would, then, seem to be but little doubt tha these last two syllables, -ima or -iioa are in p^t preserved in the form Urie [Oipljl, u«ed by E. .o le- Lus as quoted by Kusebius It is true that it im- dies that the i of iwa only was heard, but the lleb form, which is undou-btedly older, does not
'°Tto circumstance leads to the probability that the Ur-Kasdim of the OT may, ™ /«^'ty • .f ["^ for more than the name of a mere city -.and if tins he the case, it is not impossible that by tlH^se««^^J the whole land of Akkad was intended-the Uri or Ura of the non-Semitic (Akkadian) inscriptions The patriarch and his fami y in ^^'^^.'^ '"'^f'^°rA haveLd the whole extent of the province of Akkad
• Published by T. O. Pinche. n S. A. Smith'. HUcdlaneou, Attyrian TexU, 1887 (pL 2aX
[TR OF THE CHALDEES
URIAH
837
(northern Babylonia) in which to roam and find pasturage for their flocks and herds, instead of being confined to the neighbourhood of the city of Uru(.Mugheir). Ur-Kasdim, 'Urof theChalda'ans' (the ' land of the Chaldoeans' of the LXX), is prob- ably so called in order to distinguish it from some other Ur where the Chaldseans were not ; and, in this case, either the province of Ura (Akkad) or the city of Uriwa would suit best, to the exclusion of UrVa and the castle of Ur between Uatra and Nisibis.
From exceedingly early times the kings of Baby- lonia called themselves kings of Kengi-Ura, i.e. Sunier and Akkad, and from this equivalence it is clear that Uri or Ura is the same as the district (not the city) called Akkad, and so named appar- ently from one of the chief cities, known as Agad6, Semiticized into Akad or Akkad. On this account the Semitic population called the whole tract Akkadu, ' the Akkadian (land),' to the exclusion of Uru, which name was already used, to all appearance, as the Semitic form of Uriwa. That they did not call this Akkadian district Uru may be regarded as an argument against its possible identilication with Ur of the Chaldees, though it would seem, on the other hand, to be to a certain extent justified by the translation of the LXX, whose rendering, ' country of the Chaldaeans,' not- withstanding that it does not seem to represent any Semitic or non - Semitic Babylonian expres- sion,* may nevertheless be due to some tradition which they possessed. In connexion with this it is worthy of note that Ur, In the Heb. text, is not called the ' city,' but the ' land ' of the nativity of IJaran, who died there ' in the presence of his father Terah.'
The tradition that Urof the Chaldees is repre- sented by the ruins known as Warka mav be dis- mis.sed, as this is now known to be the ferech of Gn 10'", called by the Babylonians Untk.i Its identification with the castle of Ur (Ammianus Marcellinus, XXV. viii. 7) in the Mesopotamian desert between Hatra and Nisibis, is also worth- less, this place having been founded by the Persians.
Concerning the name itself, it is needful to state that Knldu is to all appearance a late word, not provable in the cuneiform inscriptions before the 9th cent. B.C., when Adad-nirari III. uses it, and seems to mean, by the expression mAt Knldi, the whole of Babylonia. The Heb. Kasdim preserves the original s', changed, in the native form, into I before the dental.;
LiTERATOM.— liOttua, Trajxlt, 1857 ; Dclitzsch, Paradie; p. 22«; Dillmann, (irrutu, 109 ft. ; O. Rawlinson, Monarchies, vol. I. ; Schnuler, CUT i. p. 114 ef. ; Petere, A'ippur, vol. ii. ; Vaux In Smith's Diet, of Gr. and Ram, Geofjrap/iif ; also the articles AcCAD, Babki., Cualdju, and Sui.mar, in this Dictionary.
T. G. Pinches.
• Uru, the non-Semltlo (dialectic) word tor ' city,' the original form ot which was ffuru, also kur, 'country,* and fjur, 'moun- tain,' furnish tnntenol tor comparison, hut the combination ot thcAe with KuMliin, 'Chalda-'OiiB,' a Semilio word, is in the hi;,'hest dt'urt-e imlilvcly.
t Sir Ilcnry KnwIinHon {JRAS xii. 141, note) refers to a tradi- tion that Aijraham was bom not at l^r, but at Ercch. This would \mnK the <liatrict of Ur somewhat far south, but Erech may have been included within its boundaries. The statement prolKibly has, however, little or no \ulue.