iii. IMPORTANCE OF THE INSCRIPTION. — At Susa, where the monument was actually found, the French explorers have of late years been con- ducting a very scientific examination of the re- mains of the oldest strata. They have given to the world, along with many records of the native Elamite monarchs, a number of splendid monu- ments of Babylonian kings. These had_ been transported from Babylonia as trophies of con- quest, as is shown by the fact that sundry speci- mens have had parts of their inscriptions erased, and replaced by the name and titles of some Elamite ruler. We can hardly doubt that this was to have been done in the space left vacant by the erased five columns of this stele, but the in- scription was never cut in. Hence we do not know for certain when this monument was carried to Susa. That it was meant to be set up in Sippara is clear from the words E-barra suati, é this E-barra,’ the name of the temple of Shamash at Sippara (line 76, rev. col. XXviii.).
The value of the inscription is enormously en- hanced by its being the original autograph. Copies existed. There was found with it at Susa a large fragment of a duplicate. The scribes of Assur- banipal, king of Assyria (B.C. 668-626), made copies of it, or one of its duplicates, dividing the text into possibly fifteen books. They called the series, in their edition, dindni (sa) Hammurabi, either ‘the judgments of Hammurabi,’ or perhaps ‘the image of Hammurabi.’ A number of frag- ments of this Assyrian edition, preserved in the British Museum, were copied and edited, with attempted translation and notes, by B. Meissner, under the title ‘Altbabylonische Gesetze’ (Bei- triige zur Assyriologie, iil. pp. 493-523). A frag- ment or two had been already published, noticed under the title ‘Code d’Asourbanipal.’ But Meissner, who had edited a large number of con- tracts of the time of Hammurabi in his ‘ Das alt-
babylonische Privatrecht’ (Assyriolog.' Bibliothek, xi.), recognized forms of expression, measures of capacity and area, which showed that the Assyrian scribes had copied from some ancient document of that period. Frdr. Delitzsch, in his article ‘ Zur juristischen Litteratur Babyloniens’ (Beitrdge zur Assyriologie, iv. pp. 78-87), again went over Meissner’s texts, and, giving an improved transla- tion, definitely named them the ‘Code Hammu- rabi.’ This deduction was amply verified in a few months by the discovery at Susa. The Assyrian copies are wonderfully faithful, and the few variants which occur in them may be due to their having been copied, not from this stele but from a contemporary duplicate. The credit of recog- nizing these copies in Meissner’s edition is due to Professor Scheil, who also pointed out that they actually restore parts of the erased five columns. T. G. Pinches, in a paper entitled ‘Hammurabi’s Code of Laws’ (Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archeology, 1902, p. 301ff.), showed the exist- ence of a further fragment, published in Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets, etc., in the British Museum (xiii. pls. 46, 47). H. Winckler, in a review of Scheil’s edition (in the Orientalische Litteraturzeitung, January 1903), gives a long examination of these Assyrian copies. It is to be hoped that further fragments may now be recog- nized and published.
Not only did the Assyrian lawyers study this great,Code, but the later Babylonians did the same. F, E. Peiser, in his Jwrisprudentie Babylonice que supersunt (Céthen, 1890), published the text of a number of fragments of late Babylonian copies preserved in the Berlin Museum (V.A.Th. 991, 1036). From these we learn that the scribes had edited the Code in a series of books, or tablets, under the title Ninw ilu strwm, which are the first words of the Susa stele. As the seventh book ended with Scheil’s § 154, we may fairly assume that this edition was in twelve books. It was the habit of the Assyrian and Babylonian scribes to write commentaries on the works they studied. Now that the text of the Code is known, we may expect that commentaries, like those published by L. W. King in his edition of the Creation Tablets, will be found and published.
The monument not only contains the Code, but Hammurabi devoted some seven hundred lines to a prologue and epilogue, which narrated his glory and that of the gods whom he worshipped, and blessed those who should respect his inscription, while they cursed the future vandals who should injure or deface it. This part of the inscription is either conventionally phrased or very difficult, and many editors have done wisely in ignoring it altogether. There are, however, several note- worthy points about these portions of the inscrip- tion which help to fix our views as to its date. We may first sketch briefly what is known as to the king’s life and reign. Much fresh information has come to light since the article BABYLONIA (in vol. i.) was written.
iv. YAMMURABI’S LIFE AND REIGN.—1. The fresh sources for Hammurabi’s reign are chiefly the Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi, published by L. W. King in three magnificent volumes (Luzac, London, 1898-1900). They consist of fifty- live letters written by Hammurabi to his vassal Sin-idinnam of Larsa ; ten of his great inscriptions, besides a multitude of other letters and inscriptions relating to the other kings of his Dynasty. Most important of all is the Chronicle of the Kings of the First Dynasty of Babylon (pp. 212-252). In the Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets, etc., in the British Museum (vols. ii. iv. vi. viii.) were also published a large number of contracts, lists, and letters from the same period. They