The Egibi Family. more

4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 232 CHAPTER SIXTEEN T H E E G I B I FA M I LY Cornelia Wunsch T he records of the Egibi family constitute the largest and most important private archive from the Neo-Babylonian and early Achaemenid periods (sixth and early fifth centuries BC). Local people hoping to find antiquities to sell discovered the tablets in the 1870s and 1880s among the ruins of private houses in the Babylon area. They were found in sealed earthen jars, a sure sign that they had been consciously set aside by their owners. The archive is said to have originally comprised some three to four thousand tablets, but the rough handling during excavation, shipment, and trade inevitably reduced their number. George Smith acquired the bulk of this archive for the British Museum in 1876, the rest was dispersed among many collections in Europe and America. Today about 1,700 texts can be confidently attributed to this archive, discounting duplicates and joined fragments. The records cover five generations of members of one family (a sequence of firstborn sons) over more than 100 years, from the time of Nebuchadrezzar II until the beginning of Xerxes’ reign. Late nineteenth-century scholars described the family as ‘bankers of Jewish origin’, this reflects contemporary ideas about Jews and their role in banking rather than actual fact. These labels are still in use today even though the notions both of ‘bankers’ and the allegedly Jewish ethnicity of the Egibis were shown to be inappropriate many decades ago. The family name Egibi is of straightforward Sumero-Babylonian origin,1 and the business activities of the branch that left the famous archive fit the description of entrepreneurship rather than deposit banking.2 There is no sign that the first generation of our family branch owned or inherited any real estate or prebendary offices. The latter were the insignia of the traditional wealthy urban class and guaranteed participation in the stream of income from local temples. M. Jursa (2005: 66) described the Egibi as ‘members of a socially mobile class of entrepreneurially oriented urbanites without well-established roots in the traditional establishment whose focal point was formed by the old sanctuaries’. ˇ The documents of the first generation were drawn up for Sulaja, the son of (Nabû)zera-ukın. Most of them concern wholesale trade in commodities (barley and dates) ¯ ¯ ˇ in the rural districts around Babylon. For this end, Sulaja engaged in long-term business ventures with several partners, sharing profits and risks, and built up capital as well as connections, later to be developed by his son Nabû-ahhe-iddin. ¯ ˘˘ 232 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 233 — Chapter title — 1111 2 3 4222 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5111 6 7222 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5111 6 7 8 9 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 71111 It is in the second generation that the acquired wealth was translated into assets, prestige and office. Nabû-ahhe-iddin underwent a scribal education and legal training ¯ that allowed him to act as ˘a˘ court scribe. From the few records that survive of this period we get a glimpse on his early career: during the late years of Nebuchadnezzar he spent some time at Opis, a royal administrative centre. There he issued, for instance, documents to royal officials on their private matters, probably as a by-product of his main occupation, serving the administration. Among his clients was the administrator of the crown prince’s palace. Nabû-ahhe-iddin also is known to have arranged legal ¯ ˘ and financial issues for the purchase ˘of a valuable house by Neriglissar (some time before the latter usurped the throne), acting as his ‘lawyer’ so to speak. He disentangled a complex web of creditor rights in a bancruptcy case. After Neriglissar’s death he managed to advance his career under the next king, Nabonidus, when he held an influential position as royal judge in Babylon. Many of his business tasks were then delegated to his eldest son or to some skilled and well-trusted slaves. After Nabû-ahhe-iddin’s death early in the thirteenth year of Nabonidus, Itti¯ Marduk-balatu managed the affairs of the Egibi house in the third generation, until ¯. ˘ ˘ the end of Cambyses’ reign. The Persian conquest of Babylonia occurred at this period. The political transition seems to have been smooth, though Itti-Marduk-balatu must ¯. have made some special efforts to keep the business going since a huge part of his commodity trade depended on cooperation with the royal administration. He untertook several long trips to Persia, obviously as part of a group of Babylonian business people in pursuit of the royal court and its influential personalities. As later records show, he succeeded in maintaining and expanding his position in the tax collection in the Babylon area and in providing army supplies. He seems to have died suddenly at the beginning of Darius’ reign, with his eldest son Marduk-nasir-apli being neither married nor introduced to his father’s business ¯. affairs. Both matters were only accomplished according to Itti-Marduk-balat u’s ¯. intentions by the latter’s father-in-law, with whom he had a close business relationship; apparently he did not consider his own brothers trustworthy in such matters. Marduk-nasir-apli stayed in charge of the family business for 14 years. At this ¯. point his two younger brothers demanded to receive their shares. The record of the inheritance division shows the wealth of the family: 16 urban properties in Babylon and Borsippa and more than 100 slaves are distributed among the brothers; gains and losses of pending business were to be shared accordingly. The fields and gardens, as well as houses in Hursagkalamma (where some business operations were based), are only mentioned in˘ passing as they were not yet subject to division. This inheritance division was problematic as it reduced the working capital. Marduknasir-apli can be seen pledging valuable properties for debts owed to the temple ¯. Esagila in Babylon, presumably in connection with his rent or tax farming activities. One record attests to the foreclosure on assets worth 50 minas (about 25 kg) of silver. However, despite this trouble there is no indication of a general or drastic decline in the family’s fortunes. Marduk-nasir-apli’s son Nidinti-Bel took over the business after the death of his ¯. ¯ father in the thirty-sixth year of Darius. Only few records remain from this time, as the archives as we know them came to an end at the beginning of Xerxes’ reign during a period of political unrest. Nidinti-Bel seems to have sifted through his ¯ tablets, keeping those of immediate interest for his business affairs while putting 233 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 234 — Contributor — aside everything obsolete and outdated. It is this discarded corpus, carefully buried in jars, that has survived the millennia. THE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS Transactions involving commodities (essential goods such as barley, dates, onions and wool), from their purchase in the rural area around Babylon to their transport, storage and sale, formed the mainstay of the Egibi enterprise, with little change in the forms of organization throughout the decades. Numerous smaller private archives, as well as information about other entrepreneurs in the Egibi documents demonstrate that a great number of urban, upper-middle-class people were engaged in similar activities, playing a mediating role between producers and consumers. Although they had various professional contacts to royal officials or temple personnel they did not operate in a capacity of representing an institution, but as private entrepreneurs. Business with commodities must have been lucrative, not least because of Babylon’s growing population, who, attracted by the large-scale building projects under Nebuchadrezzar and Nabonidus, were not engaged in agriculture and did not have their own plots to cultivate. ˇ Sulaja and his son began by working with other partners in so-called harranu¯ ˘ companies (harra nu means ‘street, caravan’), the equivalent of the long-lasting ¯ Kommanda ˘enterprises known from Italy and the Hanseatic. Usually, one of the partners provided the start-up capital while the other did the work in the countryside. The farmers were given seed corn and draught animals on credit which they had to pay back in kind at harvest time. Just before the harvest buyers would move around the fields to secure part of the harvest in advance. Barley, dates and onions had to be gathered up, the farmers then moved them to depots along the canal from whence they were loaded onto boats and taken to Babylon or other depots lining the canal. This entailed negotiations with the palace administration about canal charges, the hiring of boats and storage space, the brewing of beer from barley – all these different procedures are well documented, only the sale transactions to the final consumer are not. The provider of the capital and his active partner shared the profit (Akkadian utru ‘surplus’) equally, and the former also shared the risk. The acting partner was not allowed to work for others on the side or to enter into business deals with others, he had to work full-time. This made the crucial difference to business transactions on the basis of normal loans where the interest was 20 per cent per year and secured by a deposit. Harranu-companies were, therefore, suitable for ambitious business men, ¯ without their˘ own capital as well as for the wealthy, prepared to take a risk for above average profit margins. There is no doubt that the economic situation at the time of the Neo-Babylonian empire was favourable for such enterprise and some families became seriously rich quite quickly. However, there is also documentation of families who were forced to sell substantial property (houses, gardens, slaves) in one go in order to pay their creditors – not all entrepreneurs were as successful as the Egibi. ˇ While Sulaja began by acting as managing associate with his partners’ capital, Nabû-ahhe-iddin soon had enough funds of his own to let others work for him. He ¯ ˘ married˘his eldest son to the daughter of another very successful businessman, IddinMarduk, of the Nur-Sîn family. This resulted not only in a dowry of 24 minas which ¯ 234 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 235 — Chapter title — 1111 2 3 4222 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5111 6 7222 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5111 6 7 8 9 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 71111 were invested into the family fortune, but also in access to the other family’s commodity business (especially onions), which was concentrated on the Borsippa canal. IddinMarduk had established there a network of connections to local producers and officials. He, too, had begun to do business with harranu-companies, on a small scale at first, ¯ ˘ then through subordinates and finally even some slaves. The latter now also worked for Itti-Marduk-balatu, the son-in-law, and later became part of Egibi property. ¯. The profits seem to have been invested productively. Business accounts mention especially slaves, houses and real estate which had been purchased with company funds and then allocated to shareholding parties, sometimes by drawing lots. Lease contracts for fields and gardens, rent receipts for houses in Babylon and Borsippa, as well as payments from slave dues, all record respective incomes. Work or delivery contracts with craftsmen also show that the Egibi (and their wives) were interested in gold, silver, precious stones, sumptuous textiles and beautiful beasts – prestige objects appropriate to members of a wealthy family. REAL ESTATE ˇ There is no evidence that Sulaja, the representative of the first generation, had inherited or purchased fields and orchards. There is one document, however, that shows him as leaseholder of palace land somewhere near Babylon. This contract was for an unlimited period of time and obliged him to cultivate the land with date palms. ˇ Sulaja as leaseholder was to receive part (probably half) of the yield. Since the text is badly preserved and other relevant documentation is missing, we cannot be clear about details of sub-leasing and production. It was a large area, 400 metres long at the front side of the canal. Normally strips of cultivation reached one to two kilometres ˇ inland. It is likely that this royal reclamation project helped to get Sulaja’s commodity business off the ground. It was only under Nabû-ahhe-iddin’s direction that the first town houses were ¯ ˘ purchased, and then, in quick ˘succession during the reign of Nabonidus, agricultural plots, mainly smaller parcels of less than one hectare, but also some larger ones. Most were situated in the immediate vicinity of Babylon. In the sale contracts they are defined at first generally according to fields, adjacent canals and paths, the nearest city gate and the administrative district, then follow the names of neighbours on all sides. This form of localization makes it hard for us to situate these properties with any certainty; field plans were rarely transmitted and are difficult to relate to the description of extant sales contracts. Therefore it is unlikely that we will ever be able to make a map of ‘Babylon environs’. The Egibi preferred property outside the city wall in the east and south-east of Babylon, but not exclusively. In fact, their largest contiguous possession was in the north-west, outside the Enlil Gate. It can be seen from exchange contracts that they tried to swap small isolated parcels outside the main holding for those bordering their land. A comparison of property prices in the area of Babylon does not show an increase for the years 575 to 510, the period for which we have enough material for comparison. Date palm orchards with productive palm trees within the city walls fetched the highest price, followed by extramural ones. One shequel of silver (the monthly income 235 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 236 — Contributor — of a hired man) corresponded to 22 to 75 square metres of orchard land (with a normal density of one to two trees). Orchards with a few or young trees were relatively cheaper, agricultural land up to ten times more, depending on soil quality. It is often possible to deduce from the sales and other documents why a property was sold. Frequently it was to pay off debts, sometimes debts had accumulated for two generations, with the property being pawned, until there was no alternative to selling. Sometimes fields or orchards formed part of a communal inheritance or business partnership, and the owners wanted to sell all or part of it, because there had been a quarrel, or because the parcels had become too small through partition, or the cultivation too complicated, or when they needed the money for something else. The cultivation of a property was effected by the leaseholders, which included slaves belonging to the Egibi. Lease contracts with special clauses document that date cultivation in the Babylon area was heavily intensified and that numerous new plantations were made along the canals. This procedure was very labour intensive and the leaseholder was compensated accordingly by high proportions of the yield over several years. Since this meant that advantages and profits only accrued after several years it proves the far-sighted and long-term investment strategies of the Egibi. It was Nabû-ahhe-iddin who made the first purchase of tillable property outside ¯ ˘˘ the gates of Babylon, just a few months after Neriglissar had usurped the throne. As we have seen, he had already established business contacts with Neriglissar during the reign of Nebuchadrezzar and now benefited from this connection. Since the ‘fate’ of this field is well documented across three generations we can use it as a case study for how the Egibi acquired and cultivated property, how it was subject to partition in each generation and how the heirs tried to consolidate their share through exchanges and re-purchase. Nabû-ahhe-iddin bought an area of 24 Kur (ca. 2,300 m × 140 m = 32.4 hectare), ¯ ˘ situated on ˘both sides of the New Canal, north-west of the city. The document was signed by high-ranking witnesses: the governor of Babylon and seven royal judges who, together with the four scribes, rolled their seal along the edges of the tablet. The vendors were four brothers, facing Nabû-ahhe-iddin as the sole purchaser. The buying price, 221⁄3 minas (about 11,166 kg) of silver, however, was not handed over to the four vendors but to the temple of Marduk, Esagila, who had a claim against the brother ‘on account of oxen’ as it says. The background hints at other documents since the brothers handed the existing sale contract to the buyer, as was the custom at the time, in order to show that they had purchased the property legitimately and they were entitled to sell it on. According to this sales contract the father of the four brothers had bought the property in the thirtieth regnal year of Nebuchadrezzar through a middle man, when he himself was acting governor of Babylon. A later, unfortunately fragmentary, text cites a directive by Neriglissar concerning our field, which he issued after his accession to the throne. Is it too fanciful to think of this as a case of corruption or enrichment in office penalized by the new ruler? After all, the governor of Babylon had considerable debts, at least to the temple of Marduk. And is it coincidence that Neriglissar’s protégé, Nabû-ahhe-iddin got a good deal with his purchase? Although he paid a somewhat ¯ ˘˘ higher price than the governor had paid 15 years previously (about17 per cent), the value of the property had also risen in the meantime because of the new date palm 236 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 237 — Chapter title — 1111 2 3 4222 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5111 6 7222 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5111 6 7 8 9 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 71111 plantations. While at the beginning only a thirtieth of the surface, a narrow strip along the shore, had been planted with date palms, the proportion at sale was nearly a sixth, of which one half had productive and one half young trees. Land planted with date palms was worth five to ten times more than arable land. Despite the favourable conditions Nabû-ahhe-iddin had not been able to raise the purchase price ¯ ˘˘ all by himself at this time in his career. Immediately after the purchase he, therefore, made half the property over to his business partner, with whom he shared the lease income for the following years. Date cultivation alone could yield up to 30,000 litres of dates in a good year, as can be seen from the relevant obligation bills laid on the lease holder. When one takes the ideal conversion rate of dates to silver into account, which was applied, among others, for the conversion of debts in kind into silver or as equivalent in lease contracts, then this represents the considerable sum of 23⁄4 minas. After Nabû-ahhe-iddin’s death the property was divided in half, equally between ¯ ˘˘ his heirs and those of his business partner and henceforth cultivated separately. Nabûahhe-iddin has specified in a written document that the yield of his share should go ¯ ˘˘ to his wife during her lifetime. Only after her death could his three sons take possession of the property. She survived her husband by nearly 20 years and during this time she did, indeed, issue lease contracts for plots at the New Canal and received an income. Just after her death, her three sons made a contract as to how much each could claim as his share. Itti-Marduk-balatu as the eldest received half as his customary ¯. preferential share, Iddin-Nabû and Nergal-etir, the two younger siblings, one quarter ¯. each. This specification was necessary because Iddin-Nabû, the second eldest, was in financial difficulties. He had, among other things, already tried to sell a female slave belonging to his brother under his own name in a foreign city, and finally even his creditors were obligated not to lend him any more money without the consent of his brothers. In order to pay off at least part of his debts, he sold his share to his younger brother. The property was at that time not divided physically and parcelled up, it was agreed that it should be administered communally and the income shared. But only two years after the mother’s death her eldest son Itti-Marduk-balatu died, who had ¯. heirs of his own. Now the moment had come to sort out the matter properly and to initiate a formal partition of the land because otherwise it would have been too complicated to establish ownership. The heirs of Itti-Marduk-balatu received the one ¯. half, their uncle Nergal-etir the other. At this occasion the land was surveyed before ¯. witnesses and a schematic plan made (Figure 16.1) which details the lateral lengths and surface portions according to their agricultural usage, mentions the neighbours and even records the number of date palm trees along the river bank. These data were entered into the partition document which was issued on the same day by the same scribe, and before the same witnesses. Both texts are damaged but complement each other. The obverse of the field plan shows a rectangle, divided lengthwise into two halves. These are subdivided horizontally into four parts each, the border between the first two is the New Canal. The lateral lengths of all plots are given, as well as their surface area, the former measured in yards, the latter in Babylonian kur to 54,000 square yards. The complicated system of calculation (1 Kur = 5 Pan = 30 Sut = 360 ¯ ¯ 237 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 238 — Contributor — Figure 16.1 Tablet from the Egibi archive showing a field plan (copy: C. Wunsch). 238 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 239 — Chapter title — 1111 2 3 4222 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5111 6 7222 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5111 6 7 8 9 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 71111 Figure 16.2 Schematic interpretation of the field plan. 239 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 240 — Contributor — Qa = 3600 Nindan) explains why sales contracts were only drafted by a small circle of specially qualified and privileged scribes who ratified the tablets with their seals and who must have fulfilled a position like a notary. This plan is an abstraction since the property is 30 times longer than wide. The names of the neighbours are listed at the side. On the reverse is the description of the portions: the left is ascribed to Nergal-etir, the right to his nephews. The lengthwise ¯. partition results in rather narrow strips, but since the date plantations are alongside the canal, both parties thereby receive an equal share of garden and arable land and have unhindered access to the water course and hence to irrigation devices. Since yields depended on artificial irrigation this was a very important aspect. The plan also records details rarely found in other texts: on the southern bank of the canal (below) is an area with ca. 500 date palms on 2.5 hectares, which means that the density of the trees is one tree per 50 square metres or 200 trees per hectare. On the other canal bank, land in the form of a strip parallel to the bank has two thirds of its surface cultivated with palms, while beyond is an area for barley. South of the canal the arable field begins after 500 metres and extends for 1.37 kilometres where it ends in a sharp triangle in a drainage basin. Date cultivation at this time covered about a quarter of the whole surface. From the first mentioning of the property, 56 years before, the cultivation had expanded enormously and probably reached the limits of irrigation potential. This is made clear by a lease contract which allows a gardener to cultivate an additional plot of land which had to be irrigated with buckets, and therefore must have been beyond reach of the canal. This shows just how intensively fields in Babylon were cultivated at this time. Seven years after the partition described above the property features again in another document. Nergal-etir had died without male heirs and his widow found herself in ¯. financial difficulties. She exchanged Nergal-etir’s share with Marduk-nasir-apli, her ¯. ¯. nephew, against another, smaller field and a sum of compensation which was paid to her husband’s creditors. This meant that those 12 Kur which used to belong to Nabûahhe-iddin, were once more in one hand, that of his grandson, Marduk-nasir-apli, ¯ ¯. ˘˘ who continued to direct business as the family head for another four years, until his brothers insisted that he surrender their inheritance which initiated the next round of partition. MARRIAGES AND DOWRIES In well-to-do Babylonian families marriage was a matter of prestige, income prospects and business connections, arranged by the father or both parents, for daughters, sometimes when they were children. Grown sons could not marry without their father’s consent and often did so only after his death. Neither daughters nor wives could inherit since the dowry, which was handed over to the future husband or his father, fulfilled the obligations of their own families. It was, however, up to the husband or father to make donations or last wills in favour of wives or daughters. There was no general norm as to the value of a dowry in relation to the expected inheritance share of brothers. This meant that non-material aspects such as the family’s status and the social connections played a decisive role in the initial negotiations and the settlement of the dowry. The Egibi archive contains dowry contracts for women of three generations (the third to the fifth). They show a noteworthy pattern; women 240 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 241 — Chapter title — 1111 2 3 4222 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5111 6 7222 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5111 6 7 8 9 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 71111 who married into the family brought rich property values whereas the daughters of the Egibi had comparatively modest settlements. Obviously, it must have been lucrative as well as prestigious to marry into this part of the family, at least since the third generation. Nuptaja, the wife of Itti-Marduk-balatu, not only brought, as mentioned already, ¯. 24 minas of silver but also the infrastructure of her father’s business; she was also assured by contract of a third of the paternal income – an unusual directive, probably explicable by the fact that only one son and one daughter had to be considered. Nuptaja’s eldest daughter, according to her dowry contract, was also meant to marry one of her father’s business friends but only received ten minas of silver and five slaves as her dowry. Ten years later, however, another document asserts that nothing of this had yet been handed over. The woman had died in the meantime, either before the marriage was consummated, or before she had any children. Her fiancé (or husband) was now offered the second sister but she was to get only a property of one kur (= 1.35 hectare) and three slaves. This dowry corresponds to the amount specified for her in her father’s will 12 years earlier, when her elder sister was still alive and she herself was not yet betrothed. On the same day the youngest daughter, who could not have been older than nine years, was promised, for the same conditions, to a man who, among other things, wrote her father’s business documents. The dowry of her sister-in-law, who was married to Marduk-nasir-apli, is on a ¯. quite different scale. She brought 30 minas of silver, a property of two kur, five slaves, jewellery and abundant household equipment into her marriage to the future head of the Egibi firm. The dowry silver could be invested into business by the husband (unless it was contractully reserved for the quppu box of the wife) but not without transferring other property of equal value (real estate, slaves) for the wife’s security. Also dowry slaves or plots had to be compensated for if the husband wanted to sell them, because while he had the right of use and income, he could not dispose of them at will. Furthermore, as long as no children had been born, the dowry belonged in principle to the wife’s family and had to be given back intact if she should die without issue. This is why the handing over of the dowry or of particular items was often delayed until the birth of children. They shared the dowry after the mother’s death. Dowries unite the interests of two families and three generations which explains why relatively many documents about dowry provisions, receipts and compensations have been preserved in private archives. Nabû-ahhe-iddin, the head of the Egibi family in the second generation, officiated, ¯ ˘˘ as has been mentioned, for 12 years, until his death, as a judge under Nabonidus. Committees of royal judges consisted of three to eight judges, presided over by the governor in charge (sakin-t¯ mi) or a supreme judge (sartennu, sukkallu) and assisted ˇ¯ .e by usually several legal clerks. They were recruited from a very limited circle of persons, and never were two members of the same family represented in a single committee. Their family names are also well documented in business records of this period which proves what was to be expected at any rate: the well-established and influential circles also had access to the most important offices. 241 ¯ N AB Û -AH H E - I D D I N A S R O Y A L J U D G E ˘ ˘ 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 242 — Contributor — The committees were hierarchically organized and suprisingly stable. Only in a single case did judges change their positions. Newcomers started at the most junior position and acceded to higher positions when someone of superior rank died or left. The career path proceeded from scribal training and administrative experience. Besides the ‘judges of the king’ who had a traditional Babylonian education and mastered the cuneiform writing system, there were also officials who wrote on parchments or wax, in alphabetic Aramaic, and were responsible for the legal business and transactions of the non-Babylonian population. We have to assume the ‘judges of the king’ were appointed by the king in some form or other, presumably from a circle of qualified candidates. The question as to how much freedom of choice the kings had in their selection or whether a recall or suspension of judges for political reasons took place, cannot, so far, be answered. The texts preserved so far show a remarkable continuity of personnel, even across politically turbulent times and changes of dynasties. It should be underlined that almost all transmitted court documents from the NeoBabylonian period, apart from those of the temple judiciary, originate from purchases that can be linked to the Egibi archive.3 Apart from an involvement of the family in the respective legal cases or their direct interest in their subjects (purchase of orchards, fields, slaves), the fact that Nabû-ahhe-iddin could have kept copies of such ¯ ˘ documents in his capacity as judge among his˘ archive, could explain why it contains so many court documents, especially from his period in office. The majority of cases concern property, such as the mode of partition on inheritance or the payment of inherited debts. Also, questions of legal status arise, as when a slave maintains that he is thus wrongly described, or when a freed female slave asserts that her child was born after her manumission and could, as such, not be sold as a slave. The royal judges were also responsible for punishing criminals, as in cases of grievous bodily harm. Only a single case documents the presence and the judgment of the king as supreme judge. Tellingly, it is a case of high treason. CONCLUSION The example of this family shows just how many interesting details concerning the lives of wealthy Babylonians can be gleaned from the private archives. The economic success and social rise of some families, linking them to the highest circles, contrasts with the financial ruin and human tragedy of others. Terse notes in formalized documents have to be put together like stones in a mosaic to create a vivid image of their protagonists. Even though two and half thousand years separate us from the daily life of the Babylonians, we meet forms of behaviour and traits of character that seem only too familiar. NOTES 1 Egibi is an abbreviation of Sumerian e.gi-ba-ti.la, a full form used occasionally in the archival records. In a learned text on ancestral names Babylonian scribes equated it to Babylonian Sîntaqı. a-liblut, which can be translated as ‘O Sin [the moon god], you have given [the child], ¯s . may he now live and thrive’ (see W.G. Lambert, JCS 11 (1957):1–14; 112, comment on col. iii line 53). This follows a well-attested Babylonian name pattern. F.E. Peiser already in 1897 pointed out that it had ‘nothing to do’ with Jacob (MVAeG 2: 307, quoted in Peiser 1890–98: 242 4868P BABYLONIANS-A_all 29/4/07 3:18 pm Page 243 — Chapter title — 1111 2 3 4222 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3111 4 5111 6 7222 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5111 6 7 8 9 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 71111 2 3 IV 221). It occurs in Babylonian records since the eighth century BC, long before the time of the Babylonian Captivity. By the sixth century several different family branches are attested in Babylon and Uruk alone, and more than 200 individuals are known who claim to be descendents of Egibi (see Tallqvist 1905: s.v.). R. Bogaert’s exhaustive 1966 study on early ‘banking’ shows that the essential characteristic of taking money as a deposit and lending it out at a higher rate cannot be found. See in detail Wunsch 1997–98 and 1999. BIBLIOGRAPHY van Driel, G. 1985–86 ‘The Rise of the House of Egibi. Nabû-ahhe∂-iddina’, Jaarbericht van het ~Vooraziatasch-Egytisch Gennootschap ‘Ex Oriente Lux’ 29: 50–67. Roth, M.T. 1991 ‘The Women of the Itti-Marduk-balatu Family’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 11: 19–37. Wunsch, C. 1993 Die Urkunden des babylonischen Geschäftsmannes Iddin-Marduk. Zum Handel mit Naturalien im 6. Jahrhundert v.Chr. (= Cuneiform Monographs 3a und b), Groningen. –––– 1995–6 ‘Die Frauen der Familie Egibi’, Archiv für Orienforschung 2/43: 33–63. 243