Essay Question:

Discuss the mechanisms of Old Assyrian trade with the Anatolian principalities.

Essay written by David Rohl (3rd Year Ancient History/Egyptology).

Submitted to Amelie Kuhrt on the 2nd October 1989.

Throughout the Early Bronze Age, the ancient Near East had witnessed the rise and successful establishment of the city state system, with the cities of southern Mesopotamia, in particular, each in turn dominating the region before losing their hegemony to the capital city of a neighbouring dynast. The kings of these city states and their palace bureaucracies appear to have held a monopoly over the trading system which then prevailed and were thus masters of their regional economies. As a result, most of our knowledge of the period before 1900 BC centres around royalty and its achievements, both militarily and economically.

With the rise, at the beginning of the 19th century, of a new form of society, whose political structure was very different to that which had gone before, the ancient world was to witness a new phenomena – a state economy based on private enterprise with the establishment of a trading network independent of the palace.

Following the Ur III period in southern Mesopotamia, the historical focus shifted north and westward to the upper Tigris and the emerging state of Assyria. Between c. 1900 and c. 1780 the city of Ashur prospered under a trading regime established between the merchants of the Assyrian capital and the local princes/rulers of eastern and central Anatolia (Hellenistic Cappadocia), across the Taurus and Anti-Taurus mountain ranges. The principal trading goods of the time were tin (for the bronze smelting process) and wool textiles, both of which were taken by donkey train to Anatolia and there exchanged, principally for silver but also some gold.

The city of Ashur in the Old Assyrian Period

In the Old Assyrian Period, the kingship of Ashur was modelled on a 'first amongst equals' principle rather than despotic rule. It is interesting to note that sharum, the Babylonian term for 'king', was not used to describe the rulers of Ashur until the arrival of Shamshi-Adad I – the Amorite conqueror of Ashur who brought an end to the Old Assyrian Dynasty. Indeed, the government of the city of Ashur was by an assembly or city council of merchants (the alum). As this assembly was the preeminent governing body of the population, so the Akkadian word for 'city' was used for the 'assembly' itself – they were effectively one and the same; also, because Ashur was the city par excellence, it was often simply referred to as the alum in correspondence of the period.

The assembly was headed by an annual eponym or limmum, who was elected by lot from amongst the leading male citizens of the city; and these leading citizens were drawn inevitably from the families of the rich merchants and their financier/banker associates. Thus the wealth of the city, and the control of the trade which created that wealth, was in the hands of private individuals rather than the king. This simple development marks a clear change from the situation which prevailed during the dominant dynasty of the preceding century, based at Ur, where the royal house effectively controlled the economy of the state and private incentive, on the 19th century Assyrian scale, did not exist.

Although Assyria's first significant appearance on the stage of history can be attributed to this new initiative, probably introduced by Erishum I, there is some evidence that Mesopotamian traders may have colonised Anatolia several centuries before 1900. The epic of the 'King of Battle' relates how Sargon of Akkad (c. 2350) was asked to intercede in a dispute between the prince of Purushanda and the city's resident foreign merchants from Mesopotamia. This tradition may have some historical basis, as it is known that Sargon had at least some influence far to the north and west of his homeland, with inscriptions and royal residences of this king having been discovered at Tell Brak, Chagar Bazar and Diyarbekr. Hattusili I, the first 'historical' Hittite king, also refers back to Sargon's influence over Anatolia. Purushanda may thus have had a Mesopotamian colony which predated the colonies of the Old Assyrian period by around 400 years. However, there is no evidence to establish for certain whether the economy of that period was in the hands of private enterprise or the usual monopoly of the royal household.

The Old Assyrian trading network

By 1900, the initial destination of the trading caravans was the city of Kanesh, where Assyrian merchants had established a major trading colony or karum to the north-east of the city mound. The word karum at first described a riverside 'quay', but this soon, for obvious reasons, gained the general understanding of 'market' to the virtual exclusion of the original meaning; in terms of the Anatolian karu, very few are located on the banks of rivers. It was from Kanesh that the trade routes then fanned out into the rest of Anatolia; as a result, this city was the major focus of the network. It must be noted that the population of the karum at Kanesh was mainly Anatolian with a minority of Assyrian traders; the buildings uncovered by excavation are typical of the local region with two-storey timber-frame houses clustered together. A karum was actually an assembly of traders rather than the colony itself, but it is convenient to refer to the settlement by this term as most writers on the period tend to do.

The karum at Kanesh (modern Kultepe) was approximately 1000 kilometres by road from Ashur, up on the Anatolian plateau, south of the Halys river. The site was first excavated in 1925 by the Czechoslovakians who were able to recover some 10,000 tablets. Unfortunately, only a quarter have been published to date and so discussions on Assyrian trade are obviously limited to the current reservoir of published data. Similar, but smaller, archives have been found at Boghazkoy (Hattusa) and Alishar Huyuk (ancient Ankuwa?) and Alaca Huyuk (perhaps ancient Zalpa). However, the attention historians have paid to Karum Kanesh is understandable given the vast quantity of documentary source material which has come from that site. Inspite of this, it must still be remembered that there are a number of other karu in eastern and central Anatolia attested in the texts which all played a part in the Assyrian trading network. This system of trading outlets or karu included Purushaddum (= Purushanda – perhaps modern Acem Huyuk, south of the Tuz Gol), Urshu, Hattusa, Washushana and Zalpa; in all, eleven karu have so far been identified, the settlements of which correspond archaeologically to the Level 2 occupation at Karum Kanesh.

Of the four main levels of the Kanesh karum, there are two that have produced text:

Level 2

This occupation of the karum, the earlier of the two 'Assyrian' levels, can be dated from c. 1900 to 1830 – roughly three to four generations. Some 73 limmus are known from the site as a whole and the names of three kings of Ashur are indirectly attested: Erishum I (in a school text which refers to the building of the law courts at Ashur, therefore not necessarily contemporary with the settlement), Ikunum, and Sargon I (via the eponym of Elali – this name occurs on seal of Sargon I from Ashur [Larsen, p. 81]). Larsen believes that the Level 2 Kultepe colony probably did start in the reign of Erishum I and that it lasted for a maximum of four generations [Larsen, p. 83]. He notes that 40 eponyms can be positively attributed to this period, leaving 33 to the later level; this figure for Level 2 may be a little conservative given the short duration estimated for the succeeding occupation of the site; perhaps then some of the 33 limmus should be reattributed to the Level 2 period.

It is quite reasonable to hypothesise that the colony was founded in the reign of Erishum as we possess a text of this king, from Ashur, claiming that he had 'established the freedom of movement of silver, gold, copper, annakum, wheat, wool' [Lewy, p. 707]. The appearance of an Assyrian trading network in Anatolia is thus consistent with his pronouncement that he had removed the royal monopolies and allowed free enterprise to flourish, with the royal house receiving a levy from the traders' profits.

Erishum I was succeeded by Ikunum, and a letter from the latter has been found which instructs the merchants of Kanesh to make a contribution of 10 minas of silver towards the rebuilding of the city wall at Ashur. Thus the political system required that the traders maintain the fabric of their home capital through levies, and, indeed, a complex taxation scheme based on the distances to the karu and the depots en-route was instigated (see below). Ikunum was followed by Sargon I (Sharrum-ken) who is the last Assyrian ruler recorded in Kanesh Level 2; however it is probable that Puzur-Ashur II (successor of Sargon) must be included, at least in part, as one of the Assyrian rulers of this period of the colony.

The Level 2 colony came to an abrupt end with its destruction by fire, to all intents and purposes bringing to an end the Assyrian tin trade. For a period of 10 years Ashur was dominated by Naram-Sin (1840-1819), king of Esnunna, and during this decade the colony at Kanesh may have lain abandoned or at least only sparsely occupied. This archaeological phase has been designated 1c and is in effect only represented by burials.

On the main tell at Kultepe the excavations appear to have revealed the end of a line of native rulers with the demise of Warshama. Some have argued that the destruction of Level 2 must be attributed to the takeover of the city by the neighbouring state of Kushara under either king Pithana or his son Anittas; a spearhead bearing Anittas' name was found in a large burnt structure on the city mound, a building which had been concurrent with the Assyrian colony. It has also been suggested that Kanesh was one and the same as the city of the founding kings of the Hittite state, known in later texts as Nesha and remembered in the name for the Hittite language – Neshite. Legal texts (known as the Statutes of Kanesh) found at Kultepe mention judgements which were referred to Pithana and mention Anittas as the commander of the fortress. This discovery would make it difficult to see the destruction of the colony and the city as contemporary events given that both Kusharan princes are attested in Level 2, prior to its destruction.

Level 1b

With Level 1b we arrive at the reign of Shamshi-Adad I (1814-1781), the Amorite ruler whose family dominated upper Mesopotamia for the next half century following the death of Erishum II, last in the line of his famous like-named ancestor. A text bearing the eponym of Awilia, a contemporary of Shamshi-Adad, is the indirect evidence for the dating of this short-lived resurrection of the colony, following the destruction of Level 2. It is believed that Level 1b lasted not much longer than a single generation – about 20-25 years. Only 90 texts have so far been published from 1b, but even from this small selection it is clear that the type of trade goods had changed and that Ashur had somehow losts its monopoly over the tin market; annakum (tin) does not occur in any of these texts, but this may yet prove simply to be because of the dirth of published material from this level.

The last mention of a caravan to Kanesh is found in a letter to Zimrilim of Mari who overthrew Yasmah-Adad, the ineffectual son of Shamshi-Adad, following the death of the latter. Level 1b must have come to its end soon after the demise of Yasmah-Adad'a father around 1780. Labarsha (Labarnas of the Hittite legends?) is also recorded at Kanesh as having taken over the princely functions and so he may have ruled at the city during the 1b phase, thus perhaps tieing in the legendary founder of the Hittite Old Kingdom to the end of the Assyrian colony at Kultepe.

The Annakum Trade

All the information we have about the mechanisms of the trading system come from letters received at Kanesh, sent by the members of merchant families remaining in Ashur. The texts are in an Old Assyrian dialect of Akkadian which is not easy to understand but, even so, considerable information has been extracted. Seals from the Ur III period have also been found in the later levels of the karum, perhaps used to add extra authority to documents through their venerable antiquity.

From the various karu the tin and textiles could be sent on to the much smaller wabartu – trading posts which formed the last link in the chain to the local Anatolian population. Thus the goods would follow a route starting at Ashur, then to Kanesh, on to another karum further west, and finally to the local wabartum.

A road tax known as the datum was levied by the city of Ashur which appears to have been based on the distances the donkey loads had travelled from Ashur [Veenhof, p. 240-43]. The greater the toll charged, the further from Ashur the trade goods were to go. From this data it has been possible, with considerable guesswork, to determine the principal route which the donkey trains took into Eastern Anatolia. The major stopping places on the way appear to have been something on the following lines:

From Ashur (probably through a pass in the Jebel Sinjar) the route went to Razama (a distance of c. 150 kms), then to Abum (location unknown), on to Puhitar (location also unknown, but possibly in the region of Harran). The route then continued to Buratum (location unknown), from there to Abrum (perhaps on the Euphrates?), on to Zalpa and Halhum, finally reaching the karum at Kanesh, over 900 kilometres from the setting off point at Ashur.

Until recently it was thought that the tin must have been brought on the long trail from Afghanistan to Assyria; however, a tin source has now been found near Lake Urmia, very much nearer, to the north-east of Assyria in the region later to be called Urartu. Most of the annakum ended up at Purushaddum where the great bronze making industry of Anatolia was centred. Silver was a valuable by-product of the smelting process and this was often used as the payment for the annakum.

The local Anatolian princes at Purushaddum, Washushana and Kanesh were not vassals of Assyria as some have suggested in the past, but they did agree diplomatic contacts with Ashur which one might classify as trading oaths, however this was not a form of vassalage in the normal sense of the word.

Textiles – a secondary trade income

Some 100,000 textiles (subat kutanu = 1 garment unit) from Ashur are recorded on the Level 2 tablets [Larsen, p. 89]. Other cloths called TUG(.HI.A) sa akkidie ('Akkadian textiles') came from Babylonia and were traded-on by the Assyrians [Veenhof, p. 98-103].

The Ashur textiles were invariably woven by women relatives of the Assyrian merchants based in Anatolia, and these ladies earned silver and some gold for their efforts – part of the merchants' profits sent back to the city by courier [Veenhof, p. 103]. A letter (TC 311) from the merchant Puzur-Ashur to Waqartum, a female member of his family and probably his wife, mentions half a mina of silver to be sent to the latter for each 9x8 cubit piece of subatum qatnum ('fine cloth') she can send to him [Veenhof, p. 104-5]. Another letter from a female resident of Ashur, one Lamassi, mentions a shipment of as many as 16 textiles. This large quantity suggests that we are dealing here with the produce of several women, but still probably from a single household [Veenhof, p. 113]. It is clear that the women of Ashur had a major role to play in the trading system set up by their husbands, and the family dealings portrayed in the letters indicate that they had considerable say in how the goods were to be manufactured, sometimes chiding their husbands for failing to send them their dues or complaining that the men at Kanesh cannot make up their minds what type and quality of garment they want manufacturing in Ashur.

The trading contracts

As we have already noted, trade was based on a household (bitum) or family business. To understand the way that this business was organised we will take a look at one example – the contract of the merchant Amur-Ishtar. This enterprising individual had arranged finance for his shipment supplies from 14 investors resident in the city of Ashur. Thus, with the contractee also investing his share, a total investment of 30 minas of gold was made at 2 minas per investor. The period of the contract was twelve years, in which time Amur-Ishtar was to trade at Kanesh. After repayment of the original investment, the profits were then to be distributed amongst the investors equally, with the merchant receiving the first third for himself.

In other instances, the Assyrian bankers received a reimbursement of twice the original loan of 2 minas of gold after a period of 4 years plus the usual two-thirds of any profits.

Methods of transportation

Each donkey carried three sacks or packs. On each side were the muttatu (meaning 'halves') which were sealed by the shipper in Ashur. A muttatum held approximately 65 minas of tin; thus a donkey carried a minimum of 130 minas – the equivalent of around 65 kilograms weight. These two packs were transported to Kanesh unopened, whereas the eliatum or 'top pack' held a small quantity of tin and some textiles which could be sold en-route by the caravaneers. Textiles were added to the packs, presumably not only for sale in the karu but also to act as padding to protect the donkeys from rubbing against the hard ore; some 12 subat kutanu (cloth units) were packed in each muttatum and a further 5 or 6 in the eliatum [Veenhof, p. 25-7]. Some caravans consisted of as many as 15 donkeys (a rather large train by average standards) and these could transport some 1950 minas of tin [Veenhof, p. 14].

The donkey-men were given a sum of silver to use for expenses on the journey, but had to repay this on arrival at Kanesh. However, on the way they were permitted to sell as much as 10 minas of loose tin from the eliatum with which they could repay the merchant's loan and, at the same time, make a small profit from their long trek. On arrival at the karu the donkeys were sold and so the trade was very much a one way affair [Larsen, p. 102].

Silver was the principal item returned to Ashur in exchange for the tin and textiles exported to Anatolia. The ingots were brought back to Ashur in couriers' pouches, the return journey being much quicker, uncumbered by the slow progress of a large donkey train. It was from this silver that an export tax (wasitum) of 2 minas value of silver was levied for each muttatum which left for Anatolia on the next shipment; this was also paid to the city of Ashur [Larsen, p. 103].

Silver was not a currency in the sense that we understand it, in terms of a coinage based economy, but the transactions served virtually the same function because the ingots left after payment of the taxes were then exchanged for more supplies of wool and tin intended for further export to Kanesh.

The texts from the Kultepe karum have revealed a fascinating world of economic transactions and family machinations unrivalled in the 2nd millennium. Although the colony only lasted around a century, scholars have also learnt a considerable amount about the functioning of the Assyrian state in its early years and, in particular, the form of kingship which prevailed. This relationship between king and state (including the state deities) spread firm routes and was to undergo little change in the next 1300 years of Assyrian history.

Bibliography

Hallo, W. W. & Simpson, W. K.: 'Caravaneers and Conquerors of the Northland' in The Ancient Near East (London, 1971), pp. 93-6.

Larsen, M. T.: The Old Assyrian City-state and Its Colonies (Copenhagen, 1976)

Lewy, H.: 'Anatolia in the Old Assyrian Period' in CAH I:2A, pp. 707-28.

         –--- 'Assyria c. 2600-1816 B.C.' in CAH I:2A, pp. 729-70.

Mellaart, J.: 'Anatolia c. 2300-1750 B.C.' in CAH I:2A, pp. 681-703.

Veenhof, K. R.: Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and its Terminology (Leiden, 1972).