a) ea
(c) So far as inalienability of holding was con- | Greek influence may later have corrupted their
cerned, the ndé biti, or ‘ payer of tribute,’ was in the same position as the rid sdbé and the b@iru. It seems, therefore, that land was held of the crown, as in other Oriental countries — notably Morocco now—on two forms of tenure. One carried an obligation to personal service, the other only a rent or tribute. Both were thus inalienable, but might be hereditary. Land could also be held by others, who might alienate: votaries, merchants, and foreign residents are named (§ 40); but the duty, whatever it was, went with the land, and must be discharged by the buyer. Some land was freehold (zai) ; and it is expressly laid down as a special privilege that the estates of a Marduk votary were thus exempt from the ‘duty.’ There is no express mention of tithe, but that probably grew out of the ‘duty.’
2. The votary was also the subject of special legislation., She might be devoted to the service of a god (Sama% and Marduk are named in the Code; Sin, Anunit, and others elsewhere) by her parents; or she might herself elect to become a votary. She thus became a ‘bride’ of the god, and might be dowered by her father as for marriage ($178). Her father could give her complete power over her property, or not. In any case, she had the life interest in it (§ 179). If not absolutely at her own disposal,—on her father’s death, her brethren, who had the reversion of it, might assume possession and maintain her. If they did not do this to her satisfaction, she had the power to appoint a steward, who would administer it as she wished. In any such case it reverted at her death, unless her father had granted her the dis- posal of it by a special deed of gift. If he gave her no allowance of this sort, she did not forfeit her rights as a daughter in his estate, but came in for one-third of a son’s share at his death (§ 180). To all appearances, the votary was vowed to perpetual virginity ; but she might marry, and give her hus- band a maid to bear him children (§ 146). If she broke her vow and had children, they were not recognized as in her power ; they could be adopted by any one without her having power to claim them back (§ 193). From contemporary documents we find that votaries often adopted children, mostly other votaries, doubtless to care for their old age. Normally, the votaries lived in a convent (§ 110), or common home, called ‘ the pride chamber.’ It was a very large establishment, and is often named as a neighbour in sales of lands. If they did not live there, they were expected to be staid in their be- haviour. They might not open a beer-shop, nor enter one, on pain of being burned (§ 110). They were highly respected. No one might slander them, on pain of being branded on the forehead (§ 127). _ We read of Iltani, daughter of king Ammizaduga, as a votary (V.A.Th. 630). They had a common scribe (B? 2175 A) and a ‘lady superior’ (B? 61). The votary of Marduk had special treatment, as was natural for a king who had made Babylon the capital of his empire, and Marduk supreme, even over Jamas in Sippara. She was, even if not dowered by her father, able to claim one-third of a son’s share in his property at his death, and had full testamentary powers over it. She had no ‘duty’ to discharge (§ 182). We continually meet with votaries in contemporary documents, chiefly devoted to Samas. They were clearly a wealthy body, and carry on business freely. They agree with brothers about their estates, put in stewards, leave property, and carry on ordinary contracts. Many marry. Nowhere in the Code or elsewhere is there any trace of the evil reputation which Greek writers assign to these ladies, and the translations which make them prostitutes, or unchaste, are not to be accepted.
morals.
3. Men were also vowed to the service of a god, but the Code does not refer to them. The rather obscure manzdz pani, who ‘ stood in the presence ’ of the king, were naturally celibates. Their wives could not be tolerated in the palace. Their chil- dren, if they had any, were treated as homeless (§ 192), and could be adopted by any one without the father’s consent. There is no ground for assum- ing any vicious habits on their part, as the term included some of the highest officials of the State.
4, Special professions were also legislated for. The beer-shop was usually kept by women. Even as late as the Second Babylonian Empire we find a master setting up a female slave in a wine-shop. The price of beer was not to be dearer than corn, measure for measure (§ 108). Corn was legal tender, and silver was not to be demanded by the great weight. The beer-seller had to give information of all treasonable conspiracy she overheard in her shop (§ 109). She was severely dealt with : if she broke these rules, death was the penalty. There is no hint that her house was a brothel, though later custom suggests it.