2nd Sealand&Bazi

SECOND SEALAND DYNASTY

(1026*-1006*)

* All dates marked with an asterisk in this section are believed to be correct relative to one another, but may be shifted up or down by up to five years.

1026*-1009* Simbar-šipak, Sixty-Second King of Babylon. Sealand was the marshy region in the far south of Mesopotamia at the deltas of the Tigris and Euphrates on the Persian Gulf. Kings from this region had ruled Babylon once before, from c.1700-1500 BC, and Simbar-šipak's father, Erība-Sin, claimed to be a direct descendant. On the other hand, his name, which honours the Kassite moon god Shipak, suggests affiliations with the Kassites, the tribal people who had previously ruled Babylonia from c.1500-1150 BC.

He himself began his life as a fairly normal soldier. Somehow he became king, and his reign seems to have been one of renewed prosperity.Temple repairs are testified at Nippur and Sippar. At 1009*, however, there was a revolt from the south and Simbar-šipak died violently.  

• 2) Kaššû-nādin-aḫi, Sixty-Fourth King of Babylon (see below)

1009* Eā-mukīn-zēri, Sixty-Third King of Babylon. He was a priest at Eridu, one of the oldest and most important of the southern cities, until 1009* when he led a revolt and seized the kingship for himself. He did not last a year as king and was buried in a swamp as a usurper.

1008*-1006* Kaššû-nādin-aḫi, Sixty-Fourth King of Babylon. Simbar-šipak's son was now placed upon the throne and the dynasty restored. Like his father, his name (which honours Kaššû, "the Kassite god") suggests Kassite affiliations. They did not help him, for after a few years of famine and hard times (perhaps involving Aramaean attacks) he was replaced by a new king from a new dynasty. 

BAZI DYNASTY

(1005*-986*)

1005*-989* Eulmaš-šākin-šumi, Sixty-Fifth King of Babylon. Born in Baz, a town on the Tigris somewhere to the north of Babylon (the exact location is uncertain) and centre of the Bazi tribe, he somehow became king and in many ways his reign resembled that of Simbar-šipak. Like the Second Sealand Dynasty, his dynasty seems to have had strong Kassite connections. Also like the Second Sealand Dynasty, his dynasty proved very short-lived. 

        Quite unlike the Second Sealand Dynasty, his dynasty seems to have been marked by attempts at repproachment with the Aramaeans. Eventually, some sort of general peace seems to have been achieved, because trade with the Mediterranean, which had been impossible for the last century because of the Aramaeans, slowly began to revive. The Aramaeans seem to have been largely in charge of this revived trade and their language, Aramaic, would eventually become the main trade language of the Near East. Akkadian slowly receded into a literary role, and after the 600s BC it is not clear that anyone spoke it as a first language. This was still well in the future however, and for this period as for the preceding, most Babylonian trade continued to be with the northern Iranian plateau to the east.

         He was buried in the town of Kar-Marduk, as a result of which it has been suggested that that (obscure) city was his capital, rather than Babylon.

• Probably 1) Ninurta-kudurrī-uṣur I, Sixty-Second King of Babylon (see below)

• Probably 2) Širikti-Šuqamuna, Sixty-Second King of Babylon (see below)

988*-986* Ninurta-kudurrī-uṣur I, Sixty-Sixth King of Babylon. He was in charge of Babylon, Isin, Kar-Marduk, and possibly not much else. Very little is known of him; it is not even certain that he was the son of his predeccessor.

• Perhaps 1) Nabû-mukīn-apli, Sixty-Ninth King of Babylon (see below)

986* Širikti-Šuqamuna, Sixty-Seventh King of Babylon. Nothing is known of him, except that he briefly succeeded his brother as king.

ELAMITE DYNASTY

(985*-979*)

985*-979* Mār-bīti-apla-uṣur, Sixty-Eighth King of Babylon. The King Lists identify him as the sole member of the Elamite Dynasty, Elam being the country in southwestern Iran which had conquered Babylonia at the very beginning of the Middle Babylonian period. One suggestion is that they now raided Babylonia again and installed Mār-bīti-apla-uṣur as a puppet king. If that is correct, their appointee was a local - his name is Babylonian, not Elamite. However, Elam otherwise completely kept out of Babylonian affairs from their defeat by Nebuchadnezzar in the 1120s until they were dragged back into the region by Assyrian invasions in the 690s. Therefore, it has been suggested that Mār-bīti-apla-uṣur was merely of Elamite descent. All that is known of his rule is that it did not last long.

NON-DYNASTIC (BAZI RESTORED?)

(978*-???)