BOOK: The Sumerian Swindle – How the Jews Betrayed Mankind – (5000 BC to 1500 BC) – Chapter 6: Time in History, Warfare & Money Lending

Although it was a tradition passed down to the Sumerians that all culture came from the town of Eridu, it was from the much larger town of Uruk that Mesopotamian culture began to flourish.

Uruk is the Sumerian city from which the modern state of Iraq got its name.

NEW WORLD ORDER: IRAQ: Destroying Our Past – Library of Rickandria

Uruk is where both the sky god, Anu, and the goddess of love, Inanna, resided in their great temples.

At its height, Uruk probably had 50,000 to 80,000 residents living in 6 square kilometres of walled area, the largest city in the world at its time.

Uruk was one of the world’s first cities with a dense population.

Uruk also saw the rise of the centralized state in Mesopotamia with a full-time bureaucracy, military, and the stratified social classes of the “Haves” and “Have-Nots”.

All of this was accomplished by 3700 BC by the Ubaidians before writing was invented.

Cities that coexisted with Uruk at this time were only about 10 hectares in area, showing that it was a vastly larger and more complex city than any of its contemporaries.

To the rural Sumerians who began buying up the foreclosed farms from the Ubaidian moneylenders, Uruk, with its high walls surrounding two and three story mud-brick buildings and its five story mud-brick temple, must have been an awesome wonder.

Uruk was an important city because it represented a shift from small, agricultural villages to a larger urban center.

And it is from here around 3200 BC to 3000 BC that the crude bookkeeping scratchings on clay that the Ubaidians had been using were turned into the world’s first writing by the Sumerians.

With this invention, the dawn of written history began.

And through the trade routes between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the invention of writing spread to the land of the pharaohs.

Because the Sumerians bought the land from the Ubaidian moneylenders and so acquired control gradually, they were able to learn the:

• cultural
• religious
• political
• business

and social traditions of the Ubaidians, peacefully without warfare.

The greedy Ubaidian moneylenders were eager to sell the swindled properties for silver and to train the new immigrants in the ways of ownership and confiscation.

The Ubaidian “Have-Nots” could not prevent the new arrivals from displacing them because they were betrayed by the “Haves” who were, in turn, protected by the king.

So, whether the poor Ubaidians worked in the fields for the Ubaidian moneylenders or for the new owners of the property, the pay was the same.

The new Sumerian owners did not come as conquerors so much as they appeared as the new landlords of the land and all that was on it.

All that was on it included whatever slaves, hired hands, and poor farmers who were working the land for subsistence wages.

As their numbers increased through immigration of their relatives, the Sumerians were soon masters of the land.

As co-owners and social equals with the Ubaidian awilum [Haves], the moneylenders taught them everything about:

• Mesopotamian society
• inventions
• agriculture
• urban management

and religion.

Once their children were grown up, within a single generation, the Sumerians had mastered it all and had begun to add their own ingenuity to the culture.

As more Sumerians bought land and moved their foreign relatives onto the property, all traces of the indigenous Ubaidian culture vanished.

A new people speaking a new language had become the owners of Mesopotamia.

The Sumerians continued with all of the cultural traditions that: 

“had always been here”

• the religion
• the social structure
• the inventions

and the frauds and swindles of lending-at-interest.

Sumerian Mathematics and the Babylonian Calendar

Writing on clay tablets not only allowed the Sumerians to communicate over long distances but it created a whole new way of owning property as well.

Actually living on a farm or in a town house became secondary to possessing a clay tablet that said that the owner of the tablet was the owner of the property.

Written deeds of ownership conferred to the “Haves” both power and wealth on a much grander scale.

They could “own” vast estates without having to physically live on those properties.

From the temple priests, the Sumerians learned the myths and the indigenous religion.

From the greedy Ubaidian moneylenders, they learned the ways of land ownership and lending-at-interest.

Enslaving their fellow men to fraudulent “interest-on-a-loan” scams was already in place when they arrived.

They merely made the system more efficient and productive of profit with the invention of compound interest.

The Sumerian Swindle is the basis of everything that we have today in the modern world of:

• banking
• stock markets
• financial schemes
• investment frauds
• credit card scams
• foreclosed homes
• money laundering
• national debt
• inflation
• depression

and related larcenies.

And we accept these criminal activities and let the crooks abscound with the loot merely because:

“they have always been here.”

With writing, the Sumerians made it impossible for men’s memories to forget their promises about loan and rental agreements.

No longer could a farmer, whose property was being confiscated, claim that the verbal agreement was different than what the moneylender had claimed.

Now, their contracts and business agreements were literally “written in stone”.

Once the clay tablet was written upon and baked in an oven, it was literally a stone-hard clay brick.

As far as it’s durability, modern archeologists today can read these contracts just as clearly as the day they were written 5,000 years ago.

Not even modern computer disks or paper documents have that kind of longevity.

So again, don’t look down upon these ancient people as mere “primitives” because they accomplished things than not even modern science has been able to equal to this day.

Along with writing, mathematics became an important and powerful tool that enabled the Sumerians to reach heights of never-before achieved wealth.

Because “it has always been here” some of you modern people may find it difficult to imagine that there was ever any other kind of counting system other than the base-10 method that we use today.

It has only been in the last five hundred years that the Arabic numerals of zero through nine have become common and popular (a counting system that the Arabs stole from India).

These allow us to simply and easily make complex calculations.

But this system was only developed because of the previous seven millennia of experimentation with many other systems of counting.

The first of these counting and mathematics systems was the Sumerian system of base-60 numbers.

Since most of us have ten digits on our hands and toes, it may seem odd that anyone would want to count by multiples of 60 instead of multiples of 10.

But there was a very practical reason to count with a base-60 system.

It may have gotten started by figuring the monthly rations for workers at two meals per day over a 30-day month.

But it proved to be much more ingenious than that.

In a society where people were paid for their work with food rations as well as with silver, a number 60-based counting system was very useful.

The Sumerians were a very practical people in everything that they did.

Their numbering system had a lot of benefits, especially when dividing up goods among many people.

With a base-60 counting system, physical things could be easily portioned out.

Rents paid in produce or wages paid in portions of grain, were easily calculated with a base-60 system.

A base-60 system has many more factors than our base-10 decimal system.

The factors of 60 are 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 30 as compared with only 1, 2, and 5 in our base-10 system.

Thus, a greater variety of equal portions could be evenly divided and distributed with a base-60 system than with our base-10 system.

This means that fractions and weights and measures could be expressed with great precision and individual portions could be evenly divided out of a community lot. [39]

Also, portions could be easily divided for groups of people each having different numbers of individuals in the group.

And in an agricultural society where several families of varying numbers of individuals would work on the same project, being able to equally divide the harvest between them or to portion out the individual shares of the ration payment to them was an advantage for this kind of number system.

Although the base-60 counting system may seem odd and difficult for us to understand, it was really quite simple.

Its only real defect was that it didn’t have a zero.

The Mesopotamians used their base 60 numbering system for 3000 years before it was replaced by Roman numerals, while we have used the Arabic numerals for only 500 years and the metric system for only 200 years.

Take a moment to think about the relative length of those time spans and how young as a People we modern folks really are.

One of the advantages for the base-60 system was that Sumerian weights and measures were also base 60.

One hundred and eighty barley grains (3 x 60) made one shekel weight, sixty shekels made one mina, 60 minas made one talent.

This Sumerian system is hinted at in the Bible where individuals demanded their “portion” while payments were made in shekels of silver.

A shekel is about ten grams or less than a third of an ounce.

The advantage of using the same base-60 for weights and measures was that the math rules were the same as when calculating fractions.

The divisors for conversion of one weight to the next lowest level were, like the denominators, standard.

This numbering system became standard for the entire ancient Near East for twenty centuries. [40]

And of course, the 60 seconds in a minute, 60 minutes in an hour, 360 degrees in a circle, 15-year and 30-year mortgages, are all our inheritance of Sumerian genius that we still use today.

These measurements and their significance for the modern-day swindles of the Jews (such as 15 and 30 year mortgages) will be covered in Volume III, The Bloodsuckers of Judah.

But for now, please understand that even though these Sumerian people might seem to you to be very ancient and very primitive, it must be understood that they were just like you and me, homo sapiens, with all of the same genetic intelligence as a modern person and the same crafty shrewdness of a modern:

• loan-shark
• thief
• banker

To get an idea of the Sumerian skills in mathematics, they developed equations containing two unknowns, using plus or minus in a single algebraic statement.

They did not use mathematical proofs because their main interest was in practical solutions to problems and not to mathematical theories.

Also, they tried at all times to use the base-60 counting system so that it would not produce irregular numbers that were neither prime to nor a factor of base-60.

They used the Pythagorean theorem centuries before the Greeks.

They understood geometric shapes and formulae.

They developed algebraic methods.

They calculated pi to 3 and 1/8th.

Their mathematical tables dealt with:

• multiplication
• reciprocals (for division)
• squares and cubes
• square roots and cube roots
• exponential tables
• logarithms and metrological tables of length
• area
• monetary conversion

and weight units.

They solved equations with up to six unknowns and even to the eighth degree.

Solid geometric figures were dealt with in practical problems which related to: 

• bricks and brickworks
• excavations of canals

and earthwork constructions such as:

• walls
• dams
• ramps

They calculated practical problems such as:

• prices
• commerce
• inheritance or division of property
• the water clock
• field plans
• herd growth
• reed bundles

and standardized measuring containers.

With such a varied and precise system of numbers, not only were the Sumerians able to create the world’s f irst civilization but also they used their math skills to finely tune the Sumerian Swindle to its present-day perfidious perfection.

“Interest-on-a-loan”

“usury”

“time payments”

and that diabolical invention known as:

“compound interest”

were all refined to a high business science by the Sumerians.

Yes, the Sumerians developed the “scientific math” upon which the wonders of modern engineering and science are established.

But they also developed that grand larceny known as “business math” upon which our modern burdens of:

• high taxes
• national debts
• banking swindles

are firmly bound.

The Sumerian landowners and moneylenders used a funnel in the middle of an ox-drawn plow for dropping seeds into a furrow.

With this invention, they were able to precisely seed an entire field and to calculate in advance how much seed would be needed for every field to a precision of just one seed kernel.

With such math skills combined with greed and craftiness, the Sumerian moneylenders developed a finely honed pincer and shackle for extracting every shekel from the purses of the people around them.

From the skills of planting fields to a precision of a single seed grain, to calculating exact volumes of water for irrigated fields along with precise times of watering both during the day and night, calculating rations for work crews and profits from investments, the Sumerian awilum [Haves] became master schemers.

But wealth, itself, is made over a period of time.

NEW WORLD ORDER: GLOBAL BANKING: Power of the Purse – The Origin of Money – Library of Rickandria

And time was something else these people learned to manipulate.

The ancient Mesopotamians were aware of both the lunar and solar calendar, but the lunar calendar took precedence.

In fact, in their mythology the Sumerians depicted the moon as the father of the sun.

An intercalary month was added to guarantee that the religious festivals, which were connected to the lunar calendar, were observed at the proper time.

Gradually, by the eighth century BC a regular intercalation of seven months every nineteen years was established; its accuracy in reconciling the lunar and solar calendars is still admired.

By the fourth century BC, mathematical astronomy was used for this intercalation.

The calendar produced was called the Metonic Cycle, which was the basis of the Babylonian calendar which the Jews use today.

Yes, the Jews of today, though they boast about being the first Adam and-Eve-original-people, actually prove the fallacy of their ridiculous claims in so many, many ways.

Their use of the Babylonian calendar, which they merely re-named “the Jewish calendar”, is one of the proofs that they are liars since the Babylonians lived tens of centuries before there were any Jews – but more about this later.

Through observation and calculation, the Mesopotamians were able to compile tables of fixed stars and the distances between them.

The results were amazing considering the available equipment:

• tubes used as viewfinders
• the water clock
• a rudimentary sundial

and a kind of shadow clock.

The distance between the stars found on the Tropic of Cancer was even measured using three systems:

1. time between the passages of two stars at the meridian as measured with a water clock
2. the arc
3. length according to either linear measurement or according to degrees.

The mathematical astronomy of Mesopotamia was highly sophisticated. 

Basic knowledge of astronomy was collected and organized relating to:

• the moon
• the position of the planets
• solstices
• eclipses
• equinoxes
• Sirius phenomena
• meteors
• comets

and so on.

The tables of new and full moons were accurate.

In fact, it was a Babylonian astronomer, Kidenas, who calculated the length of the solar year with a margin of error of 4 minutes and 32.65 seconds. [41]

Thus, you can see how very intelligent and precise the knowledge of these ancient people was.

They were not stupid.

So, do not misunderstand that these were modern people who were living in ancient times and we are ancient people living in modern times.

And their skills at calculating interest-on-a-loan was as precise as any modern banker.

By developing an accurate way to divide the weeks and hours, workers could be better controlled and expenditures planned.

With accurate ways to predict the seasons, planting and harvesting could be regulated.

The festivals and feasts could be planned for the entire country with accurate times prescribed.

With planning in relation to time, came the ability to plan and coordinate the movements of people, the logistics and projected profits from business deals, the coordination of armies and the profits from war.

And when it comes to calculating profits, nothing is more profitable for a moneylender than is war.

3000 BC Bronze Age Sumerian Civilization

As the year 3000 BC dawned, the new invention of writing coincided with many other inventions and discoveries both from Sumerian genius as well as from the peoples living in distant countries.

This era was also the approximate beginning of the Bronze Age where men could set aside their brittle implements of obsidian and flint and their bendable tools of copper and could make use of a stronger alloy.

For the first time, bronze could be used for all of the tools and weapons that less durable materials had been an inadequate substitute.

By mixing copper and tin in their furnaces, this new metal alloy gave Mankind tough materials for his religious sculptures, corrosion resistant fittings for his ships, sharp tips for his arrows and cutting edges for his swords and daggers.

Bronze enabled civilization to thrive and war to become deadlier.

To again repeat, metals as well as everything else except for:

• mud
• clay
• reeds

had to be imported into Sumeria.

Because Sumeria was the bread basket of the ancient Near East, such things as:

• grain
• flax
• wool clothing
• dates

and woven goods could be used for barter.

Because the trade routes were long and hazardous and the volume of goods to be shipped in wholesale lots was large, only the awilum [Haves] could practice the import-export business.

Smaller merchants worked for the wholesalers and, in turn, distributed goods through traveling agents and peddlers.

Thus, the flow of profits were then, as they are today, always siphoned to the top.

The highest profits were in foreign trade where monopoly of goods was maintained by the big merchants who could distribute through a family network of retail shops and traveling peddlers.

Roads suitable for wagons were few.

Long-distance traffic was usually conducted by donkeys carrying packs. 

Such donkey caravans could follow the most primitive paths and the narrowest mountain trails allowing the merchants to penetrate to all of the outlying villages in the deepest mountains and the most distant oasis.

The length of a daily stage of a caravan was between twenty-five and thirty kilometers.

The load of an individual donkey varied from 130 minas (65 kilograms) to 150 minas (75 kilograms).

From these recorded data, we can estimate the:

• times
• distances
• quantities

of goods that the ancient merchants could handle.

Wagons were used for short hauls such as transporting grain to local granaries.

Farther north, in Upper Mesopotamia and in Syria, roads were more important than rivers and canals.

Wagons were used for loads too bulky and heavy to be carried on donkey back.

The ability to carry such heavy and unwieldy loads as logs of:

• cedar
• pine
• cypress

over great distances on uneven terrain implied the maintenance of ancient wagon roads.

As for building mountain roads for carrying lumber, even greater engineering skill was required.

River traffic in Mesopotamia was always heavy.

Cuneiform tablets record the transportation of:

• grain
• cattle
• fish
• milk
• vegetables
• oil
• fruit
• wool
• stone
• bricks
• leather

and people over the network of canals, for which clay “canal maps” have been found.

As early as the third millennium BC, Mesopotamian seagoing ships sailed to distant lands for raw materials.

• Gold
• copper
• lapis lazuli
• pearls (called “fish eyes”)
• ivory and ivory objects (such as combs, boxes, figurines, and furniture decorations)
• dates

and onions were traded.

All of this became the business of the Sumerians as they bought up farms and shops from the Ubaidian moneylenders and married into the Ubaidian moneylender families.

Although Uruk was a larger city, drawing its wealth from the agricultural productivity of the soil, the city of Ur became more important for its trade links.

Because of the less efficient and rough roads, traders transported large cargos by water routes whenever possible.

So, this should be remembered because it is important to the thesis of this history that all river shipping ended at Ur.

From there, goods were packed on vessels that were able to navigate the bays and lagoons as far as the islands of Failaka and Bahrain.

Thus, merchants of Ur had a particular advantage over the merchants of all other cities in Mesopotamia.

It was from Ur that they were in contact with all of the cities of the Fertile Crescent via the rivers and canals as well as those lands reached by ship across the Persian Gulf – 

• Dilmun (Bahrain)
• Magan (Oman)
• Melukhkha (the Indus Valley)
• the Arabian Peninsula

and the land of Punt (Somalia).

This far-ranging knowledge of distant lands gave the merchants of Ur a very important and unique perspective on not only trade but also on world events.

The route around the Arabian peninsula and into the Red Sea was navigated by 3000 BC.

This early familiarity of the awilum [Haves] with all of those trade routes and all of those distant peoples so early in their history, would be of continuing profit to them throughout the ages.

Lengthy journeys were undertaken in the:

• Red Sea
• Indian Ocean
• Persian Gulf

in the:

• third
• second
• first

millennia BC.

Their ancient ships hugged the coasts and hopped from safe harbor to safe harbor only in the daylight hours.

So, trade was naturally controlled by whichever people controlled those harbors.

Much of the shipping in the Persian Gulf was controlled by the Elamites [42] who could charge a tax for use of their harbors.

As the Bronze Age progressed, the merchants and moneylenders no longer were strictly attached to the temples or to the palace as paid middlemen but they became independent businessmen with their own interests and investments.

Certainly, both the temple and the palace employed underlings who managed the business of those institutions.

But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], as they would be called in later millennia, worked increasingly for their own private profits.

Independent businessmen though they were, they could not do business without the king because the king offered protection throughout his territory.

The king guaranteed diplomatic prestige and official introductions to foreign courts and to foreign cities outside of his territory.

In return, the merchants and moneylenders offered the kings and the temple priests first choice of the best imports of foreign goods as well as political intelligence about foreign peoples.

“Intelligence” is a polite way of saying the word, “spy”.

It should not be underestimated the high value that kings placed on the information that spies brought to them.

Spying was not usually the merchant’s primary reason for traveling to distant lands.

However, the perfect disguise and alibi for a spy was as a traveling merchant because in those days merchants were always welcome in every community.

Not so much in modern times but most certainly in the ancient world, a trader or traveling merchant was always a unique and much-admired visitor to every town both big and small.

A caravan of pack-asses was always an instant attraction to the slow and sleepy towns and villages of ancient times.

Those strangers from distant lands always had new and unique things to sell or to barter.

And if one was lucky enough to share a table with them at a public tavern over a pot of beer, amazing stories of distant places and fantastic goblins and strange creatures were sure to be traded in good fun.

Or even if one was not lucky enough to hear the stories first hand, the tavern keeper or the palace servants were sure to re-tell to their relatives and friends what they had overheard when the merchants were in audience with the king.

Gossip was a primary way for information to be passed around in small communities.

Who needs a telephone when all of the neighbors talk to one another? 

The ancient people were more advanced than we modern people in this respect because in modern communities neighbors no longer talk to neighbors because they are all indoors watching the Jewish lies on television.

Merely by not knowing their neighbors, modern people are less human than their own ancient forbearers.

The wealthiest moneylenders who invested in trade expeditions stayed safely at home port managing:

• their shops
• their farms
• their servants

and their various manufacturing industries.

But their partners, the traveling merchants, did more than just barter and haggle and make profits.

They were the eyes and ears of their business partners as well as of the king.

The traveling merchants were the premier spies of the ancient Near East.

They were spies who worked equally for both sides in politics and in secret for themselves, alone.

As merchant-spies, they sold goods and information to whomever had the silver while they used their spy networks to enrich themselves.

This spying function of the ancient merchants has been very much overlooked by modern archeologists and historians.

Perhaps the historians think that the kings and armies of the ancient Near East went out blindly to war without scouting out the territory first; or that they would risk thirst and starvation without knowing where the wells and oasis were located; or that entire countries would clash in war spontaneously and without diplomatic reason or without military planning.

So, it is a bit odd for the historians and archeologists to overlook this.

But no matter.

Let’s look into this ourselves.

Merchants have always had a unique position among all peoples, most especially among the ancient peoples.

They were strangers and foreigners who brought unique and interesting goods from far places.

In a time when daily life moved as leisurely as a walking ox and the peaceful silence of the countryside pressed in even to the small cities, there was not a lot of excitement other than the local festivals, wedding parties or religious events.

And such events were of a well-known nature, having the same songs and prayers performed by the same groups of neighbors, priests and leaders “just as it had always been” for as long as anybody could remember.

Life was slow-paced and tranquile.

It was a tranquility unknown by modern people who are surrounded by the noise of automobile traffic, jets flying overhead, and the blare of amplified modern noise that passes for “music”.

Nature is filled with peacefulness and the ancient peoples lived within the peacefulness of Nature.

But when foreign traders rode into town or village with their pack-trains of donkeys in tow, now that was something extraordinary!

Who were these dust covered strangers with their pack donkeys and carts loaded with boxes and bundles and accompanied by fierce-looking guards armed with:

• spears and swords
• maces
• bows and arrows

What kinds of rare and delightful goods did they bring with them?

What news did they bring?

What amazing stories would they tell of their adventures?

What stories would they tell to those fortunate ones who could hear them first-hand, stories that would then be repeated countless times from mouth to eager ears to the farthest shepherds in the outback?

Yes, the traders were a very welcome change to the dull routine of agrarian life throughout all of the ancient lands.

Although these merchants traveled quietly so as to attract the least attention possible from bandits, they were not at all quiet when they entered a town or into the district of a city-state.

Then, they wanted as much attention and business as possible.

So, drums and trumpets and horns, tambourines and the loud cries of the carnival barker announced to one and to all that the merchants had arrived with items to sell.

Aggressive self-promotion was a timeless attribute of these merchants and salesmen.

But it took another two thousand years of self-aggrandizement before these merchant-moneylender scoundrels developed what is known as “chutzpah”, or insolent audacity, as a necessary step toward enshrining themselves as the greatest show on earth and the very apple of God’s eye. 

Even when the trade goods had only been obsidian blades and obsidian cores carried laboriously from the northern regions around Lake Van, the traders had always been welcomed even during the earliest Stone Age times.

They brought new things that could not have been obtained without their efforts or without traveling long distances as a trader, oneself.

And they brought news from distant places from over the horizon.

In every sleepy hamlet, the traveling merchants and traders always had a special welcome.

But even if they ran into hostile tribes, they were protected by their special merchant’s threat.

They threatened to never come back with anymore trade goods if their stuff was stolen.

Since they also carried the special letters and seals of safe passage of the various kings, it was only the most remote and barbaric tribes that they had to fear. 

And for those, they usually had their own escort troops as well as the troops of the king to protect them as far as the next kingdom’s borders.

The merchants have always been a specially protected class in society.

They were a class that both the rich and the poor were eager to welcome.

They enjoyed and valued, indeed, they demanded special treatment and special protection because it brought them so much:

• prestige
• profits
• personal safety

When the merchants came riding into town on  their donkeys with horns blaring and drums pounding, it was with an air of confident bravery and customer inveigling mystery amid the clamor and noise.

Whether striding confidently through a town square beside their pack animals or presenting some rarity before the throne of a king, the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] learned the importance of prestige.

They were instant celebrities wherever they went, not because of any virtue of their own but because of the trade goods and wondrous stories that they carried.

It was this “belief” that these ordinary retailers actually possessed something to be envied or admired that gave them prestige in the eyes of the locals.

With high prestige, they could demand higher prices.

Always a quick student in sizing up a customer, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] realized the reverse psychology of this sales technique.

By striking certain noble poses and attitudes and by assuming certain authoritative tones of voice, these petty hustlers found that their prestige could be raised, and their profits increased simply by pretending to be more than they were.

It was with this insolent audacity, this chutzpah, of pretending to possess what they did not have that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] developed Secret Fraud #19:

“Prestige is a glittering robe for ennobling treason and blinding fools; the more it is used, the more it profits he who dresses in it.”

But mainly, it was the wealthier members of society who benefited from the traders and their cargos.

Imported goods were more expensive than local manufactures since they were unobtainable anywhere else and the cost of importing them added to the amount that the traders would ask. 

So, the average people could not afford them.

Since the smaller items often brought the highest prices- such as:

• gems and jewels
• spices
• incense
• perfumed oils
• artistically crafted gold and silver items

these could be safely hidden among the more ordinary goods such as fine linen and wool garments or brass cups and copper pots or at the bottom of grain sacks.

Merchants always had an audience with the kings and ministers simply because of the goods that they offered.

The more costly and rare items, in addition to their high profit margins, were useful as bribes to officials or to tribal leaders or as a means of ingratiating themselves to the kings.

The kings and their ministers were always eager to buy expensive luxury goods as gifts for favored wives and as symbols of personal:

• wealth
• status
• power

Thus, it was from the palace of kings and ministers that the merchants expected their greatest rewards for the small and expensive items.

Even better, since the import items had cost them very little at their places of origin, these deceiving merchants could bribe the kings and ministers cheaply, gaining great business and political influence from grateful administrators and generals with expensive gifts that had cost them paltry sums.

The merchants also brought news and gossip. In the taverns they told amazing stories of foreign peoples, tales spiced with awesome adventures and stories of:

• fantastic creatures
• ghosts
• monsters

and acts of the gods – all, of course, totally unprovable but since no one could say otherwise, their fabulous stories could not be anything other than true.

And like any story told for the satisfaction of seeing the wide eyes and awe-struck faces of their listeners, the merchants were masters of fabricating whatever most pleased themselves and astounded their audience.

This is the way of all merchants from the most ancient times.

Telling stories was a part of the merchants’ craft.

Like any salesman from every age, fanciful stories and droll fibs helped him to sell his goods in the market.

Telling stories also added to his skills for deceit, that is, knowing just how much could be told so as to be believed, but not saying too much so as to lose the sale.

The merchants told stories to impress the local fools and to elevate their own heroism and prestige in the eyes of the local populace.

They told stories that advertised the rarity of their costly wares and – through:

• giant dust storms
• horrible monsters
• sheets of lightning
• bands of robbers
• floods and earthquakes 

– the great difficulty in delivering them to such lucky buyers.

Such stories made them greater profits without greater expenses.

There were stories for demeaning and lowering the price asked for the trade goods that the locals wanted to sell.

And there were stories proving to the seller that the merchant was doing them a favor to buy or trade from them at such low prices because, after all, the poor merchant would barely be able to re-sell those goods in distant lands.

Such stories and prevarications made for them greater profits while costing them nothing more than hot air.

Merchants and salesmen have always used plenty of hot air and flapping lips to sell their goods because it has:

“always been this way.”

And there were the stories reserved solely for the king and his councilors, stories that contained information about surrounding armies, the personnel of distant courts, the peaceful or war-like dispositions of those kings, the logistics and locations of food and water supplies for distant kingdoms and the walled cities and the relative wealth of those places.

No one could judge the relative wealth of a country as well as could a merchant whose greedy eyes take in such knowledge at a glance.

And no one could penetrate the palaces of distant kings as could a merchant whose presence was welcomed and encouraged and who allegedly had only a commercial reason for being there.

Merchants were not suspected of anything other than the buying and selling of goods.

Even if they were suspected of spying, it could not be proven.

And though the kings could make good use of them for gathering intelligence, they could not force them to divulge this intelligence with other than politeness and benevolence accompanied by sumptuous banquets and entertainments.

So, the greedy merchants of the ancient Near East became a favored confidant of many kings. 

With their skills of giving rare presents to court ministers and scribes, with their skills of deceit and bargaining for advantage, with their skills of inventing tales of every description, the merchants and moneylenders were able to gather from each kingdom more than what the king of that kingdom would have wanted them to gather.

Some secrets were for the common peasant.

Some secrets were only for the ears of kings.

Among themselves, however, the merchants kept their very own secrets, secrets of how and where to find the best deals and to sell for the best prices, secrets that they and their sons and their immediate trade partners knew.

These were the ordinary secrets that all merchants keep among themselves.

But there was more.

The merchants discovered that in addition to the Sumerian Swindle, they, and only they, knew more about distant places than anyone else.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] began to realize that through their trade networks, they could foresee events and influence politics from over the horizon.

The majority of the people of 3000 BC rarely traveled more than a day’s walk from where they were born; and they lived in those confined localities for their entire lives.

The majority of the kings of the various city states did not travel much either.

Their use of donkeys and ox carts and, later, their use of horses and chariots allowed them to travel around their kingdoms.

But travel of more than a few twenties of kilometers for the smaller kingdoms and a hundred kilometers for the larger kingdoms was rare.

And even in later times when the:

• Sumerian
• Assyrian
• Egyptian

and Persian kings extended their kingdoms throughout the Near East, from Mediterranean to Persian Seas, even then, among all of these people from lowly servant to highest king, no one knew more about distant lands than did the merchants and traders.

• Traveling
• bartering
• sightseeing

and profiting from the people around them, was all a part of their business.

No matter how big any of the kingdoms that existed in the ancient world were, the trade routes that crisscrossed those kingdoms were far wider and far longer.

From the most distant Paleolithic times where traders carried obsidian blades and cores along footpaths, up to our modern-day world of giant container ships and jumbo jets carrying millions of tons of goods, the trade routes have always been larger in size that the borders of any country.

Thus, the merchants and moneylenders kept a secret belief among themselves.

That secret belief was this:

“Because we tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] have knowledge of distant places that is greater than the kings and far greater than the people, then we tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] are greater than the kings and we are far greater than the people.”

The Kings of Ancient Times Kingship arose in Sumerian society as a natural consequence of the needs of a centralized government.

Even the smallest tribes of people have leaders as chiefs or village headman.

It is a natural consequence of Mankind to have some who, through charisma or intelligence or wisdom or cunning or aggressiveness, become the dominant leaders of their particular group.

Because the Sumerian society was dependant upon irrigated agriculture, this specialization required bureaucratic organization to ensure that the water resources were equally divided among the fields and that the irrigation ditches and canals were kept cleared of weeds and debris.

In a relatively flat and unremarkable landscape, the inevitable disputes over land boundaries required someone to judge between arguing neighbors and to resolve these disputes in a fair manner for the sake of peace.

And in times when the country was under attack from marauding bandits or raiders from the hill tribes, a unifying ruler was necessary to act as the central authority and leader of the army.

And so, kingship arose out of the need of an agricultural society for allocation of water resources and the coordinating of labor for work projects and the defensive needs of warfare.

My use of the word, “king”, does not translate well with the Sumerian words describing that office.

In some cities, he held the title, sanga, or “chief accountant (of the temple).” [43]

This would indicate the dual role of his office as both a civil administrator and the controller of the temple businesses.

Other cities called their king, en, which was a high priestly title.

Other cities called the king, ensi, or “city governor”.

And those who were the greatest city governors over several cities were called, lugal, or “great man”.

From these titles, it can be seen that the king was intimately associated with the temples of the gods and with the gods, themselves.

But at no time in their long history were the kings of Mesopotamia believed to be a god.

In rare instances, certain kings had made themselves divine in cultic ritual but unlike the Egyptian pharaohs, the Mesopotamian kings were men.

At first, an assembly of elders elected the Sumerian kings to their leadership positions.

And they held the position as ruler for a limited time.

But this system was gradually abandoned quite early in favor of a lifetime kingship and later the kingly office became hereditary to the king’s sons.

Regardless of the various peaceful transitions or the violent usurpations throughout their history, the kings recognized in themselves and were believed to be by the People as the earthly representatives of the gods.

It was not a responsibility that they took lightly.

Again remember, none of the ancient people were atheists.

RELIGION: SATANISM: Atheists & Other Skeptics – Library of Rickandria

All of them believed in the divine retribution of the gods.

RELIGION: DEMONS: The Pagan Gods of Hell – Library of Rickandria

An Akkadian proverb provided the metaphor:

“Man is the shadow of a god, and a slave is the shadow of a man; but the king is the mirror of a god.” [44]

This religious element to kingship must be recognized by the modern Reader if you are to understand what was actually a higher form of humanity in those ancient times than what we have in the corrupt political processes today.

Again, it doesn’t matter what you believe; it only matters what the ancient peoples believed and what lessons you can learn from them.

The Mesopotamians believed that kingship was one of the basic elements of civilization and this was a gift of the gods to Mankind.

Miles Williams Mathis: Philip III the Bold & the Crusades – Library of Rickandria

Kingship was bestowed by the gods.

Miles Williams Mathis: Henry VII – Another Jewish Invasion of England – Library of Rickandria

Unique among all men, the king stood at the pinnacle of society and directed society.

Miles Williams Mathis: Henry VIII was Gay & an even bigger surprise revelation – Library of Rickandria

With such power, it was vitally necessary that the king be both strong and wise and that he have the well-being of his people uppermost in his heart and mind.

Miles Williams Mathis: Thrones infiltrated – Library of Rickandria

As a man who was especially chosen by the gods for this office, the king:

“took the hand”

of the gods and sought the guidance of the gods in leading his people.

TRANSMIGRATION: SOULS: ORGANIC PORTALS – Library of Rickandria

Throughout their long history, no matter if the Mesopotamian kings were chosen from among the population of the city, or if they were descended from previous kings, or if they were the sons of kings, or a king’s brother or even if they were merely members of the family of a previous king, they all without exception made claims on their legitimacy by claiming that it was the will of the gods that they be king.

Miles Williams Mathis: The French Revolution – Library of Rickandria

Again remember, dealing with these ancient people, we are dealing with entire societies of highly religious people whose every act was an attempt to be worthy servants of the gods.

Even the highest and most powerful of the kings, demonstrated their subservient nature by submitting to the rituals and prophecies of the priests.

The king was subject to various religious strictures in order to safeguard him against an evil day or an evil omen.

These omens were interpreted by the priests.

What the priests determined as a penance to the god is what the king was required to do.

On some recorded occasions the king had to fast for several days until the new moon appeared; or the king was required to wear the clothes of a nanny and remain indoors; or he donned a white robe for several days or stayed for a week in a reed hut like a sick person. [45]

And so, not only was the king under the direct influence of the priests but he was, more importantly, under the direct influence of his own devotion to the gods and the realization that his kingly office was a gift of the gods and a responsibility to the people.

Our modern self-serving politicians should take a few hints from their ancient forbearers in this regard.

Regardless of his political and military power, and no matter how great and personally powerful he became, the kings were always guided by the priests and under the influence of the gods.

An illustration of this is found during Neo-Babylonian times in the New Year’s festival celebrated during the first eleven days of Nisan, the month of the spring equinox.

After the entire Epic of Creation was recited in public, the king was permitted to enter the inner sanctuary but only after the high priest had removed his royal insignia.

CIVILIZATION: CREATION MYTHS – Library of Rickandria

The king was humiliated by having his cheek slapped and his ears pulled.

Miles Williams Mathis: King Charles’ Portrait & other things – Library of Rickandria

Then he knelt before Marduk and assured the god that during the year he had not committed any sins or neglected Esagila and Babylon.

After a speech by the priest, the king’s insignia were returned to him, and once again he was slapped on the cheek.

The more painful his slap, the better, because the tears in the king’s eyes signified that Marduk was well pleased. [46]

The kings may have been powerful, but they showed their religious piety by submitting to the priests.

Hammurabi (/ˌxæmʊˈrɑːbi/; Old Babylonian Akkadian: 𒄩𒄠𒈬𒊏𒁉, romanized: Ḫâmmurapi;[a] c. 1810 – c. 1750 BC), also spelled Hammurapi, was the sixth Amorite king of the Old Babylonian Empire, reigning from c. 1792 to c. 1750 BC. He was preceded by his father, Sin-Muballit, who abdicated due to failing health. During his reign, he conquered the city-states of Larsa, Eshnunna, and Mari. He ousted Ishme-Dagan I, the king of Assyria, and forced his son Mut-Ashkur to pay tribute, bringing almost all of Mesopotamia under Babylonian rule.

Even the great Hammurabi of Babylon and Ashurbanipal of Assyria submitted themselves to humiliation at the hands of the priests to show their humble devotion to God.

Ashurbanipal[a] (Neo-Assyrian Akkadian: 𒀸𒋩𒆕𒀀, romanized: Aššur-bāni-apli, meaning “Ashur is the creator of the heir”) was the king of the Neo-Assyrian Empire from 669 BC to his death in 631. He is generally remembered as the last great king of Assyria. Ashurbanipal inherited the throne as the favored heir of his father Esarhaddon; his 38-year reign was among the longest of any Assyrian king. Though sometimes regarded as the apogee of ancient Assyria, his reign also marked the last time Assyrian armies waged war throughout the ancient Near East and the beginning of the end of Assyrian dominion over the region.

Our own modern politicians would be less of the treasonous snakes that they are, if they would take a lesson from those ancient people.

Throughout the 3000-year history of Mesopotamian culture, the repeated and recurring theme of the kings was that they were chosen by the gods to dispense justice and to promote prosperity among the people.

And, repeated time and time again over the millennia in clay cuneiform tablets, incised into stone monuments, and buried beneath temples as stone memorials, these kings continued to repeat the phrases that they were doing the will of the gods as reformers of injustices, to right wrongs, to protect the welfare of the people, especially the poor and the weak and the widow and the orphan.

The kings were protectors of society.

One question that you should keep in mind as you read these pages is this:

If these same phrases were used by these hundreds of kings over three thousand years of history, claiming to protect the weak from the strong and to protect the poor from the rich and to save the widows and the orphans, then from whom was this protection necessary?

Three thousand years is a long time to be repeating the same phrases in the official documents over and over again, claiming to be defenders against an unnamed enemy who never seems to be vanquished but who keeps oppressing the poor and the weak repeatedly over the millennia. 

For three thousand years, the kings of Mesopotamia offered their protection to the widows and orphans and to the weak and the poor.

So, we know to whom they were offering protection.

But the question remains, from whom were they defending their people?

The kings of:

• Sumeria
• Babylonia
• Assyria

told us in their cuneiform archives who they were protecting but they never told us from whom their protection was needed because the unnamed enemy:

“had always been here.”

The kings could see its corrosive results, but they were unable to identify its demonic source.

RELIGION: SATANISM: DAEMON – Library of Rickandria

As the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] bowed at their feet offering delicacies from distant lands and rarities from over the horizon, the kings could not see from whom all of the problems of the people arose because the cause:

“had always been here”

pretending to be loyal servants and humble advisors.

The kings looked to distant enemies and overlooked the treasonous merchants bowing at their feet, offering cheap loans and:

“Oy!

Such good deals!”

The Scribes

Yes, the Sumerians invented writing.

We who are literate might assume that this was a great blessing to all of the Mesopotamian people simply because writing is a great blessing to all of us modern people.

But we would not be entirely correct in our assumption because in Mesopotamia, writing was restricted to only a select few.

It was not a universal knowledge even among the “Haves” and it was a total mystery among the “Have-Nots”.

Education was undertaken only by wealthier families; the poor could not afford the time and cost for learning.

Administrative documents from 2000 BC list about five hundred scribes who are further identified by the names and occupations of their fathers.

Their fathers were:

• governors “city fathers” 
• ambassadors
• temple administrators
• military officers
• sea captains
• important tax officials
• priests
• managers
• accountants
• foremen

and scribes, in other words, the wealthier citizens of the city.

NEW WORLD ORDER: GLOBAL ELITE: The Transnational Capitalist Class – Library of Rickandria

There are references to poor orphan boys adopted and sent to school by generous patrons.

But once educated in the secrets of the cuneiform script, these poor boys became well paid scribes.

There is only one reference to a female scribe.

However, cloistered women, celibate devotees of the sun god Shamash and his consort Aya, served as scribes for their own cloister administration.

Celibate priestesses may also have devoted themselves to scholarly pursuits.

In fact, school texts have been excavated at most private homes in the first half of the second millennium, thereby implying that all boys in wealthy families were sent to school. [47]

It should be noted, too, that these religious people understood the importance of a celibate priesthood.

Although many of their priests married and had sons who inherited their father’s priestly office, only a celibate priesthood can achieve the higher Knowledge of God unfettered by the cares and distractions of married life.

RELIGION: Reaching the Godhead – Library of Rickandria

While all people can have an intimte relationship with the Supreme Being, only a celibate  priesthood can most easily commune with God to the level of transcendence.

Unlike modern people who are deluded by the Jewish concepts of:

• Communism
• Feminism
• Capitalism
• Humanism
• Pornography

and Hedonism, the ancient Sumerians understood religion and kept their high priests and priestesses cloistered and celibate.

NEW WORLD ORDER: Jewish Control of Gay Rights – Library of Rickandria

It was expensive to send a boy to study in a school known as a “tablet house”.

And the studies were rigorous as well.

The cuneiform writing system was composed of over 600 characters that were incised upon a wet, clay tablet with a reed stylus. [Figure 2]

And most of these characters had multiple word and phonetic values. [48]

These complex pictographs with their variety of meanings were difficult to memorize.

And the school curriculum was very long and hard, more difficult than what a modern student could accomplish or be willing to submit to.

The student attended classes daily from sunrise to sunset.

We have no information about vacations, but one pupil explained his monthly schedule like this:

“The reckoning of my monthly stay in the tablet house is (as follows):

My days of freedom are three per month; its festivals are three days per month.

Within it, twenty-four days per month is the time of my living in the tablet house.

They are long days.”

The student began school between the ages of five and seven years and continued until he became a young man.

The most complete list of the subjects studied is best represented by a cuneiform tablet entitled, “A Failed Examination.”

The examination involved a comprehensive test by a scribe for his son.

It took place in the courtyard of the tablet-house before an assembly of masters.

The translated tablet reads the same today as it did 5000 years ago:

Father:

“Come, my son, sit at my feet.

I will talk to you, and you will give me information!

From your childhood to your adult age, you have been staying in the tablet house.

Do you know the scribal art that you have learned?”

Son:

“What would I not know?

Ask me, and I will give you the answer.”

The Father asks a series of questions summated as follows:

• The element of the scribal craft is the simple wedge; it has six directions in which it could be written. Do you know its name?
• The secret meanings of Sumerian words (cryptography). 
• Translation from Sumerian to Akkadian and the reverse.
• Three Sumerian synonyms for each Akkadian word.
• Sumerian grammatical terminology.
• Sumerian conjugation of verbs.
• Various types of calligraphy and technical writing.
• Writing Sumerian phonetically.
• To understand the technical language of all classes of priests and other professions, such as silversmiths, jewelers, herdsmen and scribes.
• How to write, make an envelope, and seal a document.
• All kinds of songs and how to conduct a choir.
• Mathematics, division of fields, and allotting of rations.
• Various musical instruments.

The candidate failed, and blamed both the master and the big brother for not teaching him these subjects but he was duly reprimanded by his Father who said:

“What have you done, what good came of your sitting here?

You are already a ripe man and close to being aged!

Like an old ass you are not teachable anymore.

Like withered grain you have passed the season.

How long will you play around?

But it is still not too late!

If you study night and day and work all the time modestly and without arrogance, if you listen to your colleagues and teachers, you still can become a scribe!

The scribal craft, receiving a handsome fee, is a bright-eyed guardian, and it is what the palace needs.” [49]

While the children of the wealthy studied hard in the tablet house to prepare them to be professional scribes, the children of the poor farmers and laborers helped their parents in the fields or worked in the various industries such as:

• basket weaving
• pottery
• brick making
• fishing

etc.

Not all of the sons of kings or of the wealthy would go to school to learn to read and write. 

They were employed as their father’s assistants or spent their days learning:

• warfare
• hunting
• administration

and business.

They, like their fathers, relied upon the scribes to write all correspondence and calculate all arithmetic problems.

With money, they could hire a scribe to do this sort of work, so they didn’t need to learn it on their own.

Being both wealthy and illiterate was common and not a matter for concern in those days.

Even:

• priests
• kings
• governors

and judges were illiterate, with few exceptions.

They had wealth but not education.

For example, correspondence from Assyrian merchants at Kanesh (Turkey) opens with the standard formula:

“Tell Mr. A, Mr. B sends the following message.”

That is, the letter was dictated to one professional scribe and would be read to the addressee by another professional scribe.

Literacy was highly prized, and only a few rulers had attained it, among them Shulgi, Naram-Sin, Lipit-Ishtar, Assurbanipal, and Darius, who rightfully boasted of their scribal accomplishments. [50]

As you can see from the above school test, becoming a scribe was a difficult educational challenge.

Thus, within the Sumerian leadership hierarchy of kings and priests, a powerful social level of scribes evolved.

Whether they had learned their craft and were associated with a temple or whether they had studied at one of the private scribal schools, matters little to this discussion because it was their special skills that gave them a unique advantage over other men.

Without doubt, the most important man in the ancient society of Mesopotamia was the scribe. 

Kings might extend their sway over hitherto unknown regions, merchants might organize the importation of rare commodities from distant lands, the irrigation officials might set the laborers to utilize the bountiful waters of the rivers and to bring fertility to the soil, but without the scribe to record and transmit, to pass on the detailed orders of the administrators, to provide the astronomical data for controlling the calendar, to calculate the labor force necessary for digging a canal or the supplies required by an army, the co-ordination and continuity of all these activities could never have been achieved.

Ancient Mesopotamian civilization was above all a literate civilization even though literacy was concentrated among a specialized few.

The scribe gained a powerful place for himself in every situation.

Economic and administrative documents are known from the very beginning of writing in Mesopotamia.

Economic documents concern a variety of topics such as:

• sales contracts
• warranty deeds
• marriage settlements
• adoption contracts
• inheritance documents
• loan agreements
• receipts
• court decisions
• wage memos

and so on.

Administrative documents were a bureaucratic tool for recording the movement of goods and the responsibility of personnel; taxes, tribute, yields of temple lands, accounts of animals and animal products, distribution of goods and rations are among the records kept by officials. [52]

And in all of these political and commercial transactions and private letters, the scribe was intimately familiar.

With such a specialized demand for their services, the students who could graduate as qualified scribes found jobs, often in the service of the palace or temple.

The goal of the school (“tablet house”) was to train scribes for the various administrative positions in these institutions as well as in other positions such as:

• royal scribe
• district scribe
• military scribe
• land-registrar
• scribe for labor groups
• administrator
• public secretary to a high administrative official
• accountant
• copyist
• inscriber of stone and seals
• ordinary clerk
• astrologer
• mathematician

or professor of Sumerian. [53]

There was plenty of work for the scribes in the ancient Near East.

Understanding the mathematical skills of the Mesopotamian scribes is important so as to fully appreciate their abilities in calculations of any size or any amount of time.

They helped build huge:

• temples
• cities
• canal systems

with their math skills, calculated the material requirements for entire armies and kept the accounts for international trade and businesses of every kind.

During the later times of Babylon, they calculated an accurate calendar and the movements of the heavenly bodies and so established the basics of modern astronomy.

Much of the mathematical knowledge that we take for granted today, because it

“has always been here”

came from the Sumerians and Babylonians.

I have already described the simple arithmetic of the Sumerian Swindle.

But to get a better idea of the skills and knowledge of these ancient people, momentarily skipping forward in time from the Sumerian to the Babylonian period will round out this tour.

Just as the modern-day swindlers working in the stock exchanges and banks use their computers to defraud the entire world, the increasing mathematical sophistication of the Mesopotamia scribes allowed the ancient moneylenders to work similar swindles during those ancient times.

The Sumerian and the later Babylonian mathematical methods were basically algebraic.

Their mathematicians were able to calculate such values of numbers as square roots and cube roots and to solve quadratic equations, tables of which have been found.

As to their geometrical knowledge, it may be mentioned that the Babylonian mathematicians knew the value of pi very accurately, taking it as 3 and 1/8.

Some cuneiform tablets have been found which deal with the areas of geometrical figures.

Another of the Babylonian scribal activities related to mathematics was astronomy.

The Babylonians had two reasons for paying particular attention to the movements of the heavenly bodies.

One was the need to regulate the calendar so that agricultural operations could be efficiently planned, and the other was the theory that events upon earth were either a reflection of, or at least directly related to, events in the sky. [54]

One of the responsibilities of the King was the regulation of the lunar calendar.

Throughout Mesopotamian history the calendar was based on a year consisting of twelve lunar months.

Since the average period from one new moon to the next is twenty-nine and a half days, twelve lunar months amount to 354 days, which is eleven and a quarter day short of a solar year.

Thus, after three years the lunar calendar would be thirty-three and three-quarter days out of alignment with the solar year and would need an extra month put in (or “intercalated”) to bring it more or less into line.

It was the King’s duty to arrange for this, though of course he did not work it out personally but was advised by his astronomers and scribes. [55]

Numbers could be used for cryptography.

The Mesopotamians assigned a numerical value to each sign.

Thus, every name had a corresponding numerical value.

During construction of his palace at Khorsabad, Sargon stated,

“I built the circumference of the city wall 16,283 cubits, the number of my name.”

Also, the major gods were assigned numbers according to their position in the divine hierarchy.

Thus, Anu, the head of the pantheon, was assigned 60 in the numerical hierarchy:

• Enlil 50
• Ea 40
• Sin 30
• Shamash 20
• Ishtar 15

and Adad 10. [56]

This form of gematria led to a system of codes and superstitious magic among the scribes who used them.

It was later taken up by the Jewish rabbis to perpetuate their own superstitious frauds.

With such mathematical skills, it was not difficult for the Mesopotamian moneylenders to figure out how to swindle the entire country and its people out of everything.

The scribes played a major role in this deceit and trickery.

After all, they were the employees of the moneylenders and merchants who hired them.

The scribes did the bidding of those who paid their salaries.

Like modern day accountants who work for the swindling bankers and financiers, the scribes did as they were told.

They wrote the letters, conceived the contracts, tallied the property and calculated the profits. But they were the employees of monsters.

Laborers 

In the natural structure of human civilization, after the priests and the king, the merchants and moneylenders come next.

Logically, they should be discussed here.

However, for the structure of this history, I shall deal with them last.

In Mesopotamian society, below the hierarchy of:

• priests
• kings
• scribes
• merchants

there was only one other class.

This was the farmers and laborers – and below them, the slaves.

Until the Industrial Revolutions of the 18th centuries AD, all of the civilizations of Mankind have been agricultural societies.

Food production has always been the prime concern to Mankind no matter whether:

• kings
• priests
• merchants

or laborers; after all, without food everybody dies.

As irrigated agriculture revolutionized the living conditions of Sumerian civilization, the excess food that was made available gave these people the leisure time to expand their genius into all of the newly discovered areas of a civilized life.

The farmers certainly made up the vast majority of the labor force.

Their methods of farming were labor-intensive and particularly refined to insure successful harvests.

The crops required both intensive labor and tender care.

What care that was provided tended to be on the side of excess work rather than allowing for any negligence of labor that would result in a less-than-optimum harvest.

The merchants and landowners had much to do with these laborious methods as they strove for the highest profits.

But the specter of starvation gave the greatest incentive to everyone’s labor.

As civilization progressed and the villages turned into towns and then into cities, labor became more specialized.

Cuneiform lists of occupations tell us how complex society was in those ancient times: 

• Carpenters
• fishermen
• potters
• masons
• metal workers
• weavers
• fullers
• gem-cutters
• jewelers
• painters
• perfume-makers
• beer brewers
• farmers
• shepherds
• stone masons
• laundrymen
• goldsmiths
• boatmen
• leatherworkers
• shoemakers
• confectioners
• bakers
• oilpressers
• brick makers
• basket makers
• mat makers
• blacksmiths
• coppersmiths
• millers
• fowlers
• canal-diggers

and sheep shearers were among the multitudinous trades that composed Sumerian society. 

One-fifth of the entire labor population consisted of craftsmen busily producing the products of their trade while the remainder was the farmer and laboring classes.

Pay for these craftsmen and laborers was with commodities as well as with silver.

Payment in rations of:

• grain
• wool
• clothing
• wine
• beer

or cooking oil was acceptable to them because these were things that they could consume, themselves, and any excess above their personal needs they could barter for other necessities.

A laborer paid in bundles of wool, could barter the wool to farmers or fishermen for food.

And the cooking oil was a prime source of edible fats in the diet and for use as skin cleanser and hair oil besides its trade value.

And as you shall see, payment in commodities rather than silver was profitable to the employer as a means of keeping wages to the bare minimum.

After all, this Sumerian civilization that had devolved into a “Have or Have-Not” system (just like in modern times) could not exist without the “Haves” getting for themselves the wealth and labor of the “Have-Nots”.

One example of the pay scale found in the cuneiform tablets was a payment that totaled about two-and-a-half pints of oil per day for working forty-three days for a perfumer.

Not even the worker’s entire family could eat two-and-a-half pints of oil per day so this was certainly used not just in cooking but also in barter.

And since workdays were from dawn to dusk, the perfumer certainly got his “money’s worth” from hiring two men for so little pay.

In the earliest days, wages in Sumeria were high.

But as the Sumerian Swindle worked its evil, wages throughout Mesopotamia became increasingly depressed as wealth was ruthlessly monopolized by the greedy awilum [Haves].

Furthermore, as the poor became poorer, the natural division of society into four classes of priest-king-merchant-farmer became synthetically amalgamated into just the two classes of the rich and the poor, the “Haves” and the “Have Nots”.

And it was the “Haves” who set the wage scale based upon a subsistence minimum that was required to feed a worker and his family just enough to keep them alive and working but not based upon a fair wage.

Such a reduction in wages was perpetuated by cheap immigrant labor being one of the tools of the awilum [Haves] for swindling the muskenum [Have Nots] out of their property.

In the earliest years of their frauds, the bankers could hide their thievery behind the numerous successful awilum [Haves] who still had property and wealth.

The few who fell into debt slavery were a minority of the population.

Thus, the innate evil of lending-for-profit remained hidden from both the rich and the impoverished.

However, through the astronomically inexorable calculations of interest on-a-loan, especially compound interest, more and more of the population fell into debt and then into foreclosure and then into poverty followed by enslavement.

As the numbers of these unfortunates grew, more and more of the population began to notice the great inequality of wealth in the hands of the moneylenders.

The Sumerian Swindle began to be noticed for the larceny that it is.

And the People began to question why it is that the bankers and moneylenders have so much while the People are homeless and starving.

But from the earliest times while the Ubaidian moneylenders were selling their confiscated farms to the newly arriving Sumerians, the Sumerians accepted the system:

“just as it had always been”

They did not question why the People were so poor because they were intent upon acquiring the “good deals” and the foreclosed lands of the native populace for themselves.

Once they had purchased the foreclosed properties, as the new landowners, the Sumerians accepted everything that had given them their start – including the swindle of lending-at-interest.

But the new arrivals, themselves, became entrapped from the very first day.

By accepting the Sumerian Swindle as a legitimate part of Society, they allowed the moneylenders to wrap the tendrils of the Swindle around them, too.

Inevitably, over time and percentages-on-the-loan, the “Have-Nots” among them fell into: 

• debt
• foreclosure
• poverty

and slavery.

And they, too, began to question the strange and puzzling fact that the bankers and moneylenders always obtained the entire wealth of the entire nation without working for it.

As more and more of the People began to reason among themselves and search for an equitable solution to the problem, the bankers and moneylenders used Secret Fraud #11 to dispossess those people and once again give the lands and the country over to some foreign entity.

“Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are impoverished.”

As you shall understand through this study of history, as long as the greedy and ruthless private moneylenders were allowed to gather the wealth of the People into their own hands, no country could exist without becoming involved with:

• betrayal
• war
• dispossession

and finally, conquest by foreigners.

And the cycle was then repeated because it:

“had always been here.”

With new hosts from whom to suck their blood and without doing any work, the moneylenders profited from the work of the new groups of people.

They profited through business as the people built the country.

They profited through the Sumerian Swindle by lending-at-interest and taking for themselves what the People had built.

And finally, as the People began to wonder why they had so little and the moneylenders had so much, the moneylenders would betray the People and make more profits by selling the country to foreigners.

And again, the cycle was purposely repeated by the moneylenders over the millennia.

The Sumerian wage scales were based upon food rations.

“Work for very little or starve”

became the actual rate of pay.

There were no governments that protected worker “rights” because there were no rights.

The governments were composed of the awilum [the Haves], the:

• priests
• kings
• merchants
• scribes

who benefited from the labor and wealth produced by the muskenum [Have-Not] workers .

Except through the urgings of the priests and a few humane and extraordinary kings, there were no official sentiments for alleviating the poverty of the muskenum [the Have Nots].

The “Haves” had what they were able to swindle by stealth or to take by force.

This was accepted because that was how:

“it had always been.”

No one then alive could remember it as ever having been any different – just like in modern times.

Slaves American Negroes should pay particular attention to this chapter since many of their confusions about this issue will be cleared up.

However, all people everywhere can benefit from an understanding of the origins of slavery.

Slavery had been a part of the earliest civilizations, and it has been a part of Humankind since the Stone Age.

It was an accepted institution long before the historical record began 5,000 years ago and it only came to an end because the white, Christian people of Europe and America brought it to an end.

White people did not start slavery; it has been a part of all civilizations worldwide, but white people put an end to slavery.

So, understand this and remember this.

It is not inconceivable that slavery had been a part of human cultures for a hundred thousand years.

But regardless of the length of its history, slavery was only ended with the American Civil War of 1861-1865 AD, thanks to white Christians.

Slavery did not start as a way of capturing people and forcing them to do the hardest and most menial work.

In the entire history of Mankind on every continent, slavery did not start in this way.

It started not as men being cruel to other men but, rather, slavery began from men being merciful to other men.

It began as a way for the defeated to save themselves from death during combat.

Since wars were fought man-to-man with lots of scuffling and wrestling, it was a natural thing for a loser in battle to beg the victor to spare his life or for a victor to offer to spare the loser’s life in exchange for lifelong servitude.

On a small scale, slavery began as a way for a victor to show mercy to the vanquished and for the vanquished to show gratitude to the victor.

“Spare me!”

was the cry of the vanquished.

And the cry of the victor was,

“I will spare your life if you serve me as a helper and as a worker and as a slave.

Life for life, I will spare your life if you will serve me for life.”

But as battles between tribes and cities became larger, the capture of larger numbers of people became an impersonal capture of human subjects.

Slaves became property that could be given or sold by the victorious captor.

So, slavery arose as a result of warfare.

But it thrived as a result of money lending.

Captured people always and at all times had the choice of refusing to become a slave.

Of course, this meant that they would be killed and maybe tortured first as an incentive for the other captured people to accept slavery.

So, slavery at first became an accepted part of the first civilizations that arose in Mesopotamia because:

“it has always been here.”

But it was very much a small-scale and personal relationship between slave and master.

The Mesopotamian people could conceive of no other way to deal with people who they didn’t hate enough to kill and who agreed to become a servant-for-life in exchange for saving their own lives.

The first slaves captured by the Sumerians were men or women seized in raids in the mountains.

This is why the cuneiform characters for “slave” and “slave girl” were composed of the signs for “man” or “woman” plus the sign for “mountain”.

The slaves worked on road construction, digging and clearing canals, as field hands on the farms, laborers in temple construction and military construction, and as workers in the palace and temple factories where they were housed in special barracks.

Temple slaves were drafted from both prisoners of war and the offerings of private citizens.

It should be noted that pre-classical societies were never economically dependent upon slave labor.

But those societies began increasingly to use slaves as military conquests brought in more prisoners of war. [57]

The Reader should keep this in mind that slavery increased as warfare increased.

And warfare increased as the wealth of the money lenders increased.

But there was something unique about Sumerian slavery that you should know.

Sometime before the beginning of written history (~ 3100 BC), people were becoming enslaved not by being captured in war but by being enslaved by the moneylenders as collateral for unpaid debt.

In the third millennium BC, citizens went into debt slavery because they could not repay loans to the merchants.

Starving men and women sold themselves or their children into slavery or were seized by creditors.

Think about this! By 3000 BC it was an accepted custom in this earliest of civilizations for people to be enslaved because of grain or silver that they owed to the swindling moneylenders!

By the eighteenth-century BC, debt slavery was so well established that five of Hammurabi’s laws regulated aspects of it. [58]

Keep in mind that slavery was not a part of the earliest Sumerian society any more than it was a part of any other society around the world.

What relatively few slaves there were had been captured in war.

But slavery increasingly became a very large part of Sumerian culture as warfare increased and through the debt-slavery introduced by the moneylenders’ scam known as “compound interest.”

By the time of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon in 1146 BC, slavery was such an accepted part of civilization:

“because it has always been here”

that the average household in Babylon had two or three slaves.

Some wealthy families owned a hundred or more slaves. [59]

Of this total, there were both slaves who had been captured by warfare as well as debt slaves.

Modern archeologists have been able to calculate through the cuneiform records for wool and cloth rations that Nebuchadnezzar, the mighty king, owned about 9000 slaves. [60]

And none of them were Negroes.

So, you modern black people who have been deceived by the Jews with the lies that white people enslaved your ancestors, you should educate yourselves on the subject.

Perhaps reading Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam book, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, will smarten you up and let you understand who your real oppressors were.

And modern people of all races who are groaning under credit card debt or who have lost your homes to the bankers, you ought to think about this ancient swindle.

Just because the Sumerian Swindle has “always been here” does not mean that it should continue to remain among us.

The Treasonous Class: Merchants and Moneylenders

At first, Sumerian society followed the example set by the earlier Ubaidians and of most other peoples in the world in that they put their gods and their priests at the very top of their social ladder.

The priests were the natural leaders of society simply because they looked to higher things than are found in the domains of mere, mortal Man.

And for dealing with the affairs of their small tribes and villages, the priests were very often the tribal chiefs as well.

But the increasing complexity of the agricultural society that was arising in Sumeria, made it impossible for the priests to serve the gods and to also lead the worldy affairs of civic administration.

Dealing with lawsuits and squabbles over water rights and thousands of petty cases of civil disharmony were not the subjects upon which priests wish to concentrate their time.

Also, the priests practiced long periods of fasting, prayer and meditation that required them to remove themselves farther away from the ordinary people in order that that they could grow closer to the gods.

It was vitally important to know the will of the gods.

The priests could pass along this intelligence to their people – but only if they were closer to their gods and cloistered away from their people.

So, for the day-to-day administration of society a leader who could concern himself with the ten thousand details on a daily basis, was required.

And so, as their villages grew into cities and groups of cities and villages grew into city-states, the priests remained priests while the village chiefs became kings and governors.

At first, the new cities that were arising in the fertile plains of Sumeria were dominated both socially and economically by the temples.

It was the belief of these people that the purpose of Life was to serve the gods.

And they did so on a daily basis both in their humble homes and in the great temples that arose above their mud-brick cities.

The temples were not only the center of their religious and social lives but, in the beginning, were the center of their economic lives as well.

Temples had their own farms and factories that produced goods for local consumption and for foreign trade.

The people whom the priests entrusted to handle these affairs of commerce between cities were the merchants and traders, that is, specialists in:

• barter
• haggling
• profits

and logistics.

As early as 4000 BC, before writing was invented, the temples were the hub of the various commercial interests of the desert shepherds, the fishermen and the farmers because they provided a centralized location for these groups to meet and to trade.

By providing factory and craft facilities for pottery making, cloth weaving and spinning, metalworking, beer brewing and other manufacturing, the temples became the center of the entire culture.

By 3500 BC, in big cities like Uruk, the temple ziggurat was built on a raised platform that could be seen for miles around.

The temple generated:

• writing
• government
• a judicial system
• fine art
• architecture

and so on.

For the first five hundred years of Sumerian history, the temples alone controlled most facets of society and the economy. [61]

The priests were the leaders of society during those times.

Sumerian society was a god-fearing and moral society.

Large-scale commercial enterprises were at first the sole responsibility of the temples.

They had the resources to hire the labor, amass the goods and to sell in wholesale quantities. 

This was beyond the ability of the ordinary local merchant.

In addition, any kind of long-distance trade could only be accomplished on a large-scale basis since the trade routes and sea-lanes were so dangerous.

Even though trade routes had been developed for thousands of years throughout the entire ancient Middle East, there was little traffic on those routes.

Traveling was dangerous due to bad:

• weather
• drought
• dust storms

marauders from the:

• deserts
• migrants
• runaway slaves

and wild animals such as lions.

Only army contingents, foreign ambassadors traveling under military protection, royal messengers, and guarded donkey caravans, carrying loads from city to city, dared to travel these routes.

In fact, there were few periods in the history of Mesopotamia when private persons could travel freely, and private letters could be sent from city to city. [62]

Thus, from the earliest times, only those merchants who were employed by the temples or who had military escort or who had the wealth to organize guarded caravans, could hope to do any business beyond the local level.

The merchants and moneylenders arose in an environment where they could only operate under the protection of either the kings or the temples. 

They could only profit while being protected by a higher power than what they could muster on their own.

And even when they had attained great personal wealth and could afford their own small army of caravan guards and bodyguards, they still needed the permission and the trade licenses of the kings to travel across state borders.

Yes, Mesopotamia had fertile soil and the irrigation water necessary for abundant crops; and yes, the country had plenty of sunshine to grow those crops; and yes, it had plenty of dirt and mud to make bricks and pottery; and yes, it had reeds with which to make mats and huts, but that is all that it had – 

• sun
• water
• mud

and reeds and abundant food.

For all other things, the civilizations of Mesopotamia vitally needed to engage in trade with other kingdoms.

And for gaining the lowest prices and the best quality, the crafty and cunning skills of the merchants were necessary.

As long as the merchants worked for the temples and served the gods, society prospered.

As long as the merchants and moneylenders had the religious feeling of serving their gods first and foremost, society prospered.

But once the merchants began to feel the power that came with wealth and once they began selfishly to do business for their own personal profits, then Mankind’s long history of:

• suffering
• starvation
• disease

and warfare began in earnest.

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: An open letter – Earnest John – Library of Rickandria

Yes, civilization began in Sumeria, but hiding behind this infant civilization and doing its utmost to drain into their counting houses all of the wealth for themselves, was the secretive Treasonous Class, the merchants and money lenders.

But because these swindlers at first grew in power rather slowly as civilization advanced, their deleterious effects on society were not noticed any more than the effects of a tapeworm are noticed by its host.

Yes, the businessmen and moneylenders helped society to increase in material wealth but only for their own benefit, never for any altruistic reasons such as might be expected from the kings or priests.

Those of you who are observers of modern society in the 21st century AD, can see some similarities between what the ancient Sumerians had with what we have today, that is, a society composed of the “Haves” and the “Have-Nots”.

We should not make the same mistake that the Sumerians did in believing that this situation is natural even though:

“it has always been here.”

We have more experience with history than they had.

So, why are we continuing to make the same mistakes of civilization that they made?

Because the Treasonous Class profits from those mistakes and does everything that it can to increase their profits by prolonging the sufferings of Mankind, they keep the Sumerian Swindle a secret even into our modern times.

The awilum [Haves] alone had the obligation to pay taxes to the state and to perform military duty.

And they could bequeath property to their heirs.

It is not necessary that they were all super rich because, again, wealth is relative.

The only necessary requirement for these people to be recognized as belonging to this high social group of “freemen” and “gentlemen” was that they were not in debt to anyone or in servitude to anyone.

They were the “Haves”.

They had.

They owned.

They collected payments and rents.

They bought and sold.

They loaned.

But they were not in debt.

Debt was for the “Have-Nots”.

Muskenum [Have-Nots] is an Amorite term, literally meaning:

“the one prostrating himself.”

Whenever the muskenum [Have-Nots] appeared in relation to the awilum [the Haves, the “freeman” or “citizen”] the status of the muskenum [Have-Nots] was always inferior.

The muskenum [Have-Nots] often served at the palace in exchange for rations or land allotments.

Numerous legal provisions may have been necessary in order to identify the muskenum [Have Nots] with the palace because he was not protected by customary law.

After 1500 BC the word muskenum [Have-Not] appeared in texts with the connotation of “the poor.”

With this meaning, “muskenum” made its way into:

• Hebrew
• Aramaic
• Arabic

and much later, into the Romance languages, namely, French (as mesquin) or “petty” and Italian (as meschino) or “petty”. [63]

So, even though the muskenum [Have-Nots] were not slaves, they were servants.

And to whom were they the servants?

To the awilum [the Haves], to whom they paid obeisance and bowed down and offered their payments for loans.

Perhaps they did not owe money to the awilum [the Haves] but they farmed the land of the awilum as tenant farmers.

They plied the boats of the awilum as boatmen and stevadors

They served in the palace of the awilum.

And they were paid for their services with food and clothing.

This payment in food and clothing kept them alive and clothed but was never enough for them to advance themselves into the society of the “Haves”.

They were the paid servants and the employees of the awilum [the Haves] or they repaid their debts by working for free.

This is why Secret Fraud #5 of the Sumerian Swindle is:

“The debtor is the slave of the lender.”

Those of you who have ever sold off some of your valuable and precious possessions in the panic-stricken attempt to raise cash to pay your credit card and mortgage bills before they accrued late-payment fees, know from experience how you have been a slave of the moneylenders.

But it was worse in Mesopotamia.

In those days of 3000 BC, slavery was an ordinary part of life.

A poor farmer, fully expecting to make a profit and fully confident that he would be able to pay back the loan and the interest, would place as guarantee of the loan, his wife or his daughters or sons.

But the moneylenders of Sumeria usually charged fifty percent interest compounded.

So, getting out of debt was extremely difficult.

A farmer would have to work very hard in the hopes of a bumper crop.

Because of the Sumerian Swindle, the moneylenders were not only parasites but also slave drivers and brothel owners and pimps.

They became the owners of the land and even the owners of the very lives and bodies of the people through no other reason other than that they were swindlers and frauds.

They knew the secret of the Sumerian Swindle and kept it hidden from their fellow men.

Are you seeing any similar pattern in our modern times as the rich get richer and everyone else works for them?

If so, then in modern times you are observing the Sumerian Swindle in action where the rich swindle everything that they have from the poor.

And the poor and the middle class accept being defrauded because the Sumerian Swindle:

“has always been here.”

But in actuality, it has not always been here; it is merely older than anyone’s memory of when it all began.

Another such Sumerian Swindle is Secret Fraud #10:

“Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower.”

Over time, every bit of money in society goes to whomever is allowed to charge interest on a loan.

Through interest fees, there is always less money available than what the banker demands to be paid.

The banker knows this so how can the banker (who offers the loan with a smile on his face) expect to ever be repaid?

Neither the bankers today nor the moneylenders of 3000 BC would give a loan to anyone without collateral.

So, if the money could not be paid back, the moneylender would have a way of recuperating his money-plus-interest by seizing the collateral.

The average person accepts being swindled because it:

“has always been here.”

A moneylender seizing property for defaulted loans sounds fair and reasonable on the surface simply because most people do not understand the Sumerian Swindle.

This excuse to steal is all a part of the sham and the fraud of both ancient and modern banking.

It is nothing but a math trick of demanding more than can possibly exist and then foreclosing on what does exist.

Just as the bankers of today swindle the farmers out of their lands whether in the Mississippi River Valley or the plains of Ontario or the rice patties of Asia, so did the moneylenders of 3000 BC swindle the farmers out of the rich loam laid down by the Tigress and Euphrates Rivers. 

Again simplified, here’s how this swindle worked in ancient Mesopotamia and how it is still being used to swindle the modern farmers today.

The Sumerian farmer knowing the fertility of his land and knowing how much profit he could make with a good crop, wanted to borrow the silver to buy some extra land and seed corn and to hire help for the upcoming season.

So, he borrowed one shekel of silver from the moneylender at fifty percent interest.

As collateral, he put up the land that he owned.

And a merchant who needed to buy goods to sell so that he could travel up the Euphrates to trade in the little river towns there, also needed to borrow one shekel of silver from the moneylender.

So, he put up as collateral his house and shop.

And just as the bankers of today swindle the entire world out of our goods and money, so too did the ancient moneylenders of Mesopotamia keep the secret to themselves and swindle their fellow Sumerians out of their land and goods and wealth.

Using Secret Fraud #10, they used Time as their engineer for profit:

“Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower.”

A moneylender or a banker only has to deal with the unfailing numbers of arithmetic.

One plus one always equals two no matter if the sun is shining brightly or the rains and winds are blowing sheets of water across the fields.

Fifty percent times two shekels plus the two shekels on loan always equals three shekels by arithmetic calculation no matter if the Tigress and Euphrates Rivers dry up and the land is parched; or whether the fields flood and wash away all of Creation.

The business of the money lender and banker is not affected by sun and wind, rain and: 

• drought
• fire
• earthquake
• flood
• pestilence
• locusts
• blight
• disease

or any other act of Nature or act of God that affects other men.

The numbers in his ledger book are all exactly the same.

One plus one always equals two, no matter the weather.

One shekel of silver lent out at fifty percent interest always returns a shekel and a half at the end of the year.

But the numbers are false no matter how exact they are. 

Whether the year was one of prosperity or disaster for the people around him, doesn’t matter to the money lender.

For the money lender, the arithmetic never changes.

He is immune to change.

His profits are a mathematical certainty and not a gamble.

His profits are based on trickery and deceit as he swindles those who trust his honesty.

A banker’s certainty is not linked to the same fate as the farmer.

Rains coming early or late can mean a bad crop.

Bugs and blight, too much sun or too little, a low river from too little snow falling in the distant mountains hundreds of miles away or too much snow melting with rains and floods, fire, cattle breaking into the fields and stomping down the crop, windstorms leveling the crop and a hundred other natural occurrences can spell disaster for a farmer.

And without a crop that can be bartered or sold, the farmer has little to live on and nothing to sell.

A bad year does not usually affect only one farmer but all of the farmers in an entire region or an entire country.

So, where can they obtain help since all of them are left with little?

But the moneylender has only the slow turning of the wheel of time and the sure calculations of arithmetic with which to contend.

He does not gamble.

He does not put himself into the hands of Nature or of Fate like his fellow men.

His is a unique occupation that is insulated from the real world.

The world of the moneylender is a synthetic one where weather, Nature, and even the Gods cannot change what the moneylender creates.

And this was what the Sumerian moneylenders began to discover about their occupation.

They could make a profit not only when times were good but also when times were bad.

They discovered over five thousand years ago that charging interest on borrowed goods produced a profit.

But they also discovered something else.

They found that they could make even more of a profit when their fellow men were destroyed. 

But this profit was only possible if they could keep for themselves the secret of how this destruction came about.

Secret Fraud #10 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower,”

has ancient roots.

But more than farmers are betrayed by this swindle.

Anyone whose money flow is slowed by bad timing also falls into the moneylenders’ snare because time on a ledger book is unlimited and constant while fate and bad luck will throw all men into the money lender’s trap.

Calculated time marked in a ledger book is regular and predictable.

But real time which wears down the fine schemes of Man and upsets his nice schedules and careful expectations, works against Man.

And so, the farmers and petty merchants and ordinary people of Sumeria found that time betrayed them to the moneylenders.

Indeed, the moneylenders knew that to keep the secret of moneylending to themselves was not only a vital means to increase their wealth but also vital to their very lives.

If their fellow townsmen learned that the:

• money lenders
• merchants
• bankers

were nothing but thieves and swindlers, it would not be long before the swindled goods would be confiscated and the swindlers themselves either hung or chased out of town.

And so, the secret of money lending was never written down and was carefully passed along only to sly and reliable sons.

The moneylenders’ sons had to be sly in order to skillfully acquire the criminal methods that their fathers taught them.

In fact, since lending-at-interest is both a trick and a swindle, it is impossible for the lender to be an honest person if he expects to make a profit.

So, from its earliest times the moneylenders were both tricky and dishonest.

They were even more so once arithmetic and writing became a common tool because with the use of arithmetic and writing, the moneylenders could calculate larger loans and swindle entire countries.

And then “prove” that the money was actually owed to them by the fraudulent numbers in the ledger book.

“Numbers never lie,”

they would perfidiously tell their impoverished clients.

But the liars who write the numbers, lie.

Religiously, the money lenders were like everyone else in their villages and towns.

They believed in the gods and performed their duties to those gods through prayer and temple donations.

So, it is useful here to inquire about the actual religious beliefs of the Mesopotamian people.

The Gods in Mesopotamia were very much local in nature because they were believed to reside in certain cities and in certain places.

Each city had its own god as the primary protective deity.

There were both supreme gods and lesser gods, but all of these gods were powerful and worthy of Man’s devotion.

Regardless of the variety of gods, the Mesopotamians had a common belief in a common origination of both gods and men.

Their creation stories began with an abyss or a void from which the waters of the earth and the immensity of the sky were created out of nothing.

The two main ways that their religious stories brought Mankind into Creation was that he was either molded out of clay by a god (the method which the Jews plagiarized for their own creation stories) or a god had decreed that men just sprang out of the ground like weeds.

Regardless of which story was accepted as true, the purpose for the creation of Mankind was believed by all of the People of Mesopotamia to be for the same reason.

Man was created by the gods to serve the gods.

As servants to the gods, Mankind walked a holy path throughout Life.

After all, when your every act is as a servant of God, what else can one’s life be other than a holy life?

What sins there were, were mainly sins of omission or trespasses against the gods.

Trespasses against the gods were often the main topic in Sumerian religious literature.

By the end of the second millennium BC, the text “Surpu” listed two hundred acts and omissions as sins, including:

• not speaking one’s mind
• causing discord in the family
• neglecting a naked person

and killing animals without reason.

Can you see the great Humanity and religious worthiness of those ancient people?

Although the gods punished the sinners, they also forgave them.

But if the gods refused to forgive the sinner, that person could not be helped. [64]

The list of sins were based upon service to the gods.

But since those early people were still inventing Civilization, what they considered to be sins against their fellow man was still in the formative stages.

So, there was a lot of leeway for sinning against one’s fellows since there were so few religious constraints to prohibit such.

What was practiced as religion in Mesopotamia gave the moneylenders the freedom to make full use of their usurious and ruthless proclivities.

There was no “hereafter” for the Mesopotamians.

TRANSMIGRATION: REINCARNATION: The Afterlife – Library of Rickandria

When they died, they did not look forward to a paradise in heaven or rebirth in another life.

To them, their grave was their only future and any life in the Underworld was not something to look forward to enjoying because in the gloomy underworld there was no joy.

This belief gave them all of the incentive that they needed to enjoy the life that they had and to make the most of whatever opportunities the gods bequeathed.

The moneylenders followed the same ideas towards their gods as everybody else.

As the priests advised:

“Daily, worship your god with offerings, prayers, and appropriate incense.

Bend your heart to your god; What befits the office of a personal god, are prayers, supplication, pressing (the hand to) the nose (as greeting) shall you offer up every morning, then your power will be great, and you will, through the god, have enormous success.”

Doing their duty to their god meant offering food and drink to the image and then going about their daily business.

Thus, the moneylenders could:

“feel good about themselves”

as they offered up prayers to their gods in the morning and dragged a farmer and his family off of their land in the afternoon.

Or if a farmer or petty trader had put up as collateral his wife and daughters or his sons, the moneylender had no hesitation about dragging them off to the whorehouses or slave markets after using them for his own sexual pleasures first.

From the very earliest times, the merchants and moneylenders were both slave traders and pimps.

And in this capacity, they had a very deleterious effect upon society.

After all, in a society where there are men who own slaves and prostitutes and who want to profit from them, it does not take long before these men are able to reduce large portions of the population into a debauched lifestyle.

The moneylenders became the foremost slave traders as well as the foremost sex fiends in Mesopotamia.

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: SEX IN GOD’S WORD – Library of Rickandria

Through bondage and slavery, they could realize their every lust.

And when their lusts were satisfied, they could sell their used-up sex slave to someone else or donate her to a temple or sell her to a whorehouse.

By the second millennium BC, the Sumerian goddess Inanna, who was of lesser import in the Sumerian pantheon, came to be called Ishtar and the most widely worshipped Babylonian deity.

She was the goddess of the date storehouse, the goddess of shepherds, the power behind the thundershowers of spring and was also the goddess of love and sexuality and patron goddess of the harlot and the alehouse. [66]

That Ishtar, the goddess of whore houses and booze halls, became the most widely worshipped deity among the Babylonians was because the moneylenders had made her so.

Over the centuries, as the bankers and moneylenders acquired wealth and slaves, they also became the owners of brothels and wine shops.

Banking, brothels and booze, all made them ever wealthier and increased their influence over the people whom they had debauched.

After taking his farm, his wife, his children and his self-respect, the moneylenders could still wring a few grains of silver or hours of labor out of the drunken farmer who staggered miserably about in the moneylenders’ beer halls, digging ditches for his beer or doing odd jobs for his bread. 

But there was also the matter of justice.

Because the sun god, Shamash, could see everything in heaven and on earth with his gleaming eye, then Shamash was naturally the god of justice.

And with this sun god, all of the world could be brought to justice.

So, men who had disputes with anyone could bring their disagreements to the town elders or to the king for resolution before the gods.

Men who felt cheated by the money lenders could ask for justice.

But justice seemed best served by those who could afford to buy it.

This is true in modern times, too, simply because we accept a variety of legal fictions foisted upon us because they:

“have always been here.”

One thing that has always been here, is the injustice of what the money lenders create.

The People could never, ever get justice from the thieving money lenders.

In Sumeria, the god of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] was not the god of justice,

Shamash, the sun god.

The god of the money lenders was the Moon God, Sin, who began his “day” in the evening, after the sun had gone down.

“The evening and the morning”

is how the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] counted their days, the same way the writers of the Old Testament counted their days.

As the farmers were dispossessed of their lands and the laborers were defrauded of their wives and daughters, the Sumerian religion changed in its philosophy.

When righteous men fell into poverty and families were destroyed even as the wicked moneylenders thrived, the simple piety of the people led them to the false conclusion that it was the work of the gods rather than the machinations of evil men.

The actual cause of their loss and suffering – the Sumerian Swindle, itself – was not recognized for what it was because this simple secret was so carefully concealed by the moneylenders.

It was their source of wealth and power and they were not about to divulge it to anyone other than their trusted sons.

By the second millennium BC, so many people had been defrauded and enslaved and their lives destroyed by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] that the problem of the righteous sufferer became part of the Mesopotamian religious consciousness.

Two main works,

“The Poem of the Righteous Sufferer”

(what the rabbis plagiarized when they wrote their Book of Job) and

“The Babylonian Theodicy”

considered the workings of divine justice.

Both works arrived at the same conclusion: in reality, the wicked often fared better than the righteous. [67]

After all, the wicked were the ones who loaned money at interest, foreclosed on farms, debauched and pimped daughters and sons, and profited from wars.

But they had been around longer than anyone could remember, so they were accepted as having:

“always been here.”

The tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] were allowed to continue their depredations simply because no one could remember any time when society was free of those parasites. 

Monied Class versus Kingly Class

Both the kings and the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] belonged to the same awilum [Haves] social class.

While the kings had the responsibility to protect both the People as well as the merchant moneylenders, the merchant-moneylenders’ only responsibility was to make a profit from the kings and the People.

Swindling everybody was their specialty.

If you look at a map of the ancient trade routes [Figure 6], you will see that this extensive network of:

• roads
• paths
• waterways

stretched all across the ancient Middle East and beyond.

No matter how secluded or how cosmopolitan any of the ancient peoples were, it is an indisputable fact that they knew of their distant neighbors over the horizon.

What they knew of those neighbors was transmitted to them not by the mighty kings but by the traders and merchants who plied the trade routes. 

The trade routes were all very much longer and larger in extent than any of the ancient kingdoms ever were.

Even in the days of Assyria’s greatest expansion, the trade routes that ran through Assyria were connected to distant lands and to distant peoples that no Assyrian king had ever seen.

But those distant lands were visited by the merchants who traveled the trade routes.

It was the merchants and traders who connected the various countries and the various peoples and not the kings.

The kings were guarantors of safe-conduct for the merchants within their own kingdoms alone. 

Although a merchant could travel the dangerous trade routes in caravans and with the protection of the king’s troops as well as with his own hired guards and mercenaries, once he had left the country controlled by a particular king, he would have to negotiate protection from the kings and tribal chiefs of the next country that he entered if such protection had not already been arranged by the treaties between the kings.

Being of a protected class was something that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] very much cherished.

It became a demand wherever they went, a demand to be protected by the king while they did their utmost to ravish and swindle the subjects of the king.

In their relations with dangerous territorial bandit chiefs, the merchants were protected by the threat that if they were harmed or their goods stolen, their fellow merchants would never again bring goods to those domains and trade would cease.

This was an old trick used by even the pre-historic obsidian traders and it was a powerful and useful argument.

The traders and merchants became a protected class of con-artists and carnival barkers who could move their swindles across state lines and national boundaries with the strut and swagger of great men even though at heart they were all weasels.

In those days, the slow and gentle pace of life was only enlivened during some religious feast or with a wedding party.

Otherwise, the daily round of early rising, working in the:

• fields
• fishing
• weaving
• spinning

and tending the goats was as it had been for thousands of years without change.

So, when strangers from a distant land came into town beating drums and blowing bugles and leading pack-asses burdened with trade goods, it was a unique event in every community.

Farmers and shepherds from miles around would flock into town to ogle and trade.

The enthusiasm for these events was not lost on the wily merchants who knew how to use showmanship to sell their goods and how to leverage every profit and every benefit from their protected status as traveling salesmen.

It was not just for their trade goods that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] found a profit.

All traveling merchants were good storytellers and were greatly admired for the yarns that they could spin about distant lands and strange peoples with tales of monsters and dragons thrown in for added amusement.

Merchants and traders could get free food and drink and free entertainment wherever they went in exchange for travel-tales and marvelous lies.

Surrounded by gullible farmers or by mesmerized court officials in the taverns and royal residences, with pots of beer and tasty snacks being passed around, stories of distant lands and wondrous adventures became immensely improved upon in every town and with each re-telling.

Back at home base, in their secret guild meetings, the merchants regaled one another with the stories that had won them so much fame and added profits and free beer in each particular town.

Sharing trade information and sales techniques with their guild brothers, along with the lies that had won them applause from gullible fools brought profits to them all.

Their lies about scary monsters and astonishing miracles and works of the gods became established facts when the next band of their tamkarum guild brothers trumpeted themselves into town, hawking new trade goods and embellishing the same tales to the gullible public. 

Any statement left unchallenged is established as truth.

Thus, since the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were the only ones who traveled to distant places, the people had no other choice but to believe the tall tales that the merchants had brought.

Outrageous tales and prevarications that in no way could ever be disproved became one of the fine arts of the traveling tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

These peddlers of foreign merchandise became expert liars, knowing that no one but themselves would ever travel to distant lands to verify their tales.

From ancient times, the merchants and moneylenders realized that they could tell the most outrageous stories, and that those stories would be accepted by the People as true just as long as there were no other competing tales.

Truth was their special enemy.

And when different merchants who arrived in town at different times, all told the same lies, the People were thoroughly convinced through the connivance of these overtly un-related tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] who covertly belonged to the same trade guilds. 

Merchants were not only able to profit from their profession as traders, but they gained the confidence of the various kings in whose territory that they traded because of the information about other kings that they could relate.

The merchants from the very earliest times became the spies and intelligence operatives of every king and tribal chief.

And just as the scribes were in a position to change or alter the information that was transmitted through their writing skills, the merchants were able to transmit intelligence to the various antagonistic kings depending upon their loyalties and the profits they could derive from each.

They were the eyes and ears of distant kings.

But their loyalty to any particular king depended upon the profits that they could best obtain from each.

The merchants at a very early time became the spies against and the betrayers of entire nations.

Because of the swindle of money lending and the profits obtained from the monopoly cartels of international trade, the moneylenders and merchants were able to amass huge fortunes, fortunes that could even rival that of the kings.

Once they were able to break free from being the merchant-servants of the temples, the moneylenders and merchants were able to rival the wealth of the temples.

Because moneylending was not recognized as the fraud that it is because it:

“has always been here”

even the kings respected the loot that the merchants and moneylenders were able to gain.

As the moneylenders gained slaves for their sexual pleasures, they became increasingly perverted.

SPIRITUALITY: ENERGY: SEXUAL ENERGY – Library of Rickandria

When Leonard Woolley excavated the Sumerian city of Ur, he found the grave of a moneylender of Ur.

Sir Charles Leonard Woolley (17 April 1880 – 20 February 1960) was a British archaeologist best known for his excavations at Ur in Mesopotamia. He is recognized as one of the first “modern” archaeologists who excavated in a methodical way, keeping careful records, and using them to reconstruct ancient life and history. Woolley was knighted in 1935 for his contributions to the discipline of archaeology. He was married to the British archaeologist Katharine Woolley.

His private coffin contained one of the richest finds at Ur.

A double ax made of electrum, a gold dagger with silver sheath hanging from a silver belt, and an amazingly beautiful gold helmet, gold bowls, and a gold lamp, each inscribed with his name – Meskalamdug (“hero of the good land”).

Outside the coffin were two more gold and silver daggers and vessels of:

• gold
• silver
• electrum

Laid to rest among his treasures, this Sumerian money lender was a homosexual pervert and a cross-dresser who was also buried with his collection of women’s jewelry.

A recurring theme throughout history can be observed in those ancient days and this same theme can be observed in modern days:

as the moneylenders and merchants gained wealth and power in society, perversions became increasingly commonplace, warfare increased, poverty increased, and civilizations collapsed. 

This was entirely because those who controlled the wealth and the property of these civilizations, were depraved criminals and lust-filled perverts who brought ruin upon the people around them through their limitless greed.

In Sumeria, they were known as tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

But none of them were Jews because there were no Jews in those ancient days.

In modern times, these parasites are known as:

• merchants
• financiers
• bankers

And today, almost all of them are Jews.

2900-2700 Early Dynastic Period of Akkad

The Sumerians had about three hundred years of uncontested development in which to create a culture that was the greatest ever known up until that time.

Their writing, their religion, their customs were copied by every country around them.

Those Sumerian awilum [Haves] who were ruthless and greedy enough, found that the profits from the Sumerian Swindle were much to their liking.

Although they spread Sumerian Culture to other people, among the moneylenders, the one part of their culture that remained their very own secret was the Sumerian Swindle.

After all, there was a limited amount of silver, so to make themselves rich meant that they would have to make everyone else poor. 

Soon after the Sumerians established their agricultural states in the southern part of Mesopotamia, Semites began moving in from Arabia in the West (Amurru) in small numbers. 

They spoke the West Semite dialect from the Amurru (the West) and so are known to us as the Amorites.

Some of the earliest Sumerian inscriptions contain words derived from Semitic speech. [68] which indicates that they were present at an early time.

But their Amorite dialect disappeared as they became absorbed into Sumerian culture.

Because only irrigated agriculture with its associated canals and ditches could produce crops in this arid region, no one could live among the Sumerians who did not also participate in the organized labor that such agriculture required.

Following the long-established Secret Fraud #11:

“Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are impoverished,”

the Sumerian awilum [the Haves] hired the Amorites as laborers and soldiers.

This method of swindling their own people out of the land through moneylending and then hiring cheap foreign labor to work the foreclosed properties, was very profitable.

The Ubaidian moneylenders had used it to sell the land to the Sumerians.

And now the Sumerian moneylenders used the same treason to sell Sumerian land to the Amorites.

Secret Fraud #11 was profitable, but it inevitably proved to be a weakening influence for the whole country as the numbers of foreigners increased and as the racial characteristics of the Sumerian people became diluted with the Semitic strain.

But there was no dilution of the gene pool in the north as large numbers of Semites settled into the underdeveloped and unpopulated regions of Babylon and Akkad.

The methods of irrigated agriculture became available to any people who could secure land and work the soil.

As the older fields in Sumeria had trouble with salt build-up, the Sumerians shifted to more barley production since this grain can grow in saltier soil while wheat production shifted to the north into Akkad, the land that would one day be known first as Akkadia and then as Assyria.

As the traveling merchants spread word among the scattered tribes of Semites in the West about the richness of crops that could be grown in Sumeria, more Amorites desired those fertile lands.

These tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] instructed the Semitic chiefs where the lands were weakly defended and acting as agents for the Sumerian landlords, which lands were for sale to the highest bidder.

Although the merchants were from the various cities in Sumeria, their allegiance was to their profits and not to their people.

It was the silver in their purses where their loyalties lay.

Continuing with their system of betrayal and treason, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] sold the foreclosed farms and villages that they had acquired through their usury swindles to the Semites from Syria.

Beginning around 2900 BC, large numbers of these Amorites settled into the lands around Babylon, its surrounding towns, and around the city of Kish in the region of Akkad.

Miles Williams Mathis: Iran’s Jewish Rulers – Library of Rickandria

As usual, they adopted the Sumerian culture and lifestyle.

But the Amorites were not fools.

They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Sumerian farmers.

So, their natural suspicions prompted them to ask,

“Why are you selling the land to us?

Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?”

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready answer to overcome such an objection.

“What are those people to us?”

they replied.

“They are not our friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm.

We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy land and purchase property.

As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help them buy the best farms and the finest orchards.

But still, they hate us for our goodness and generosity because they are full of hatred. 

But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying the land.”

And so, the bargain was made.

The Amorites had no reason to hate the Sumerian moneylenders — yet.

So, they accepted the offers of cheap land.

And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new immigrants, those Amorites who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time at low interest rates.

Like bloodsucking fleas, the moneylenders jumped from their old victims who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and guides and mentors.

The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around its prey.

EDUCATION: Dollar Symbol & Caduceus – Library of Rickandria

Its bite would come later.

By 2750 BC, these Semites had had 150 years to increase their population through birth and immigration and to fully absorb the Sumerian writing and culture.

Just as a modern alphabet can be used to write many different languages, so too was the cuneiform characters used by those ancient people to write their own language.

They retained their own language which is called by the name of the region of their greatest power, Akkadian.

These Semitic Akkadians, with their high birth-rate and the increase from the immigration and settlement of their wandering tribes, became the most dominant people in the region.

Up until that time, the southern lands of Sumeria had never been a unified country.

It was a region that had had many city-states, each of which controlled their own territories.

These territories had been gradually falling into the hands of the moneylenders and merchants over a period of five hundred years as the Sumerian Swindle worked its relentless fraud.

By 2500 BC most of the land of Sumeria was privately owned while the remainder was owned by the temples and the palace.

These city states were rather small, so small, in fact, that between many of these city-states, from the top of the ziggurat in each city, one could look across the plain to the distant ziggurat of the neighboring city state.

CIVILIZATION: Pyramidal Constructions in the World – Library of Rickandria

The Early Dynastic inscriptions of Sumeria are full of references to battles between these squabbling city-states.

The Sumerians were a people who insisted upon their individual rights and were quick to haul an opponent before a judge in lawsuits concerning the very same issues that modern people also find to be worth the fight: disputes over:

• lands
• boundaries
• inheritance
• rents
• loans
• marriage

and divorce, and every conceivable argument.

And what they argued over between individuals was also carried across city boundaries into the bordering city state.

An example of these squabbles was between the city-states of Lagash and Umma.

The city of Lagash was set in the middle of a most fertile region crisscrossed with small irrigation canals fed from two large canals connecting the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.

In antiquity these big canals ensured to Lagash not only bountiful crops but also a thriving river borne trade and in consequence considerable material prosperity.

Such economic and social stability provided conditions in which a dynasty founded there by Ur Nanshe (~ 2500 BC) was able to rule in unbroken succession for over a century.

The city of Umma was the residence of the grain god, Shara, so its own agricultural dependence upon the canal system was obvious.

Shara (Sumerian: 𒀭𒁈, dšara2) was a Mesopotamian god associated with the city of Umma and other nearby settlements. He was chiefly regarded as the tutelary deity of this area, responsible for agriculture, animal husbandry, and irrigation, but he could also be characterized as a divine warrior. In the third millennium BCE, his wife was Ninura, associated with the same area, but later, in the Old Babylonian period, her cult faded into obscurity, and Shara was instead associated with Usaḫara or Kumulmul. An association between him and Inanna is well attested. In Umma, he was regarded as the son of Inanna of Zabalam and an unknown father, while in the myth Inanna’s Descent to the Underworld, he is one of the servants mourning her temporary death. He also appears in the myth of Anzû, in which he is one of the three gods who refuse to fight the eponymous monster.

Umma lay to the north of Lagash and was situated on the same two big canals.

The direction of flow of the canals being from north to south, Umma was in a position to interfere with the water supply of Lagash, and this gave rise to conflicts between the two cities on a number of occasions.

It is the documents recording the circumstances of such events which provide our f irst substantial historical narratives, beginning in the period shortly after 2500 BC.

Eannatum (Sumerian: 𒂍𒀭𒈾𒁺 É.AN.NA-tum2; fl. c. 2450 BC) was a Sumerian Ensi (ruler or king) of Lagash. He established one of the first verifiable empires in history, subduing Elam and destroying the city of Susa, and extending his domain over the rest of Sumer and Akkad. One inscription found on a boulder, states that Eannatum was his Sumerian name, while his “Tidnu” (Amorite) name was Lumma.

The earliest of these are some inscriptions of Eannatum, third ruler of the dynasty of Lagash and grandson of Ur-Nanshe.

Ur-Nanshe (Sumerian: 𒌨𒀭𒀏, UR-NANŠE; fl. c. 2520 BC) also Ur-Nina, was the first king of the First Dynasty of Lagash in the Sumerian Early Dynastic Period III. He is known through inscriptions to have commissioned many building projects, including canals and temples, in the state of Lagash, and defending Lagash from its rival state Umma. He was probably not from royal lineage, being the son of Gunidu (𒄖𒉌𒁺) who was recorded without an accompanying royal title. He was the father of Akurgal, who succeeded him, and grandfather of Eannatum. Eannatum expanded the kingdom of Lagash by defeating Umma as illustrated in the Stele of the Vultures and continued the building and renovation of Ur-Nanshe’s original buildings.  He ascended after Lugalshaengur (lugal-ša-engur), who was the ensi, or high priest of Lagash, and is only known from the macehead inscription of Mesilim.

Notably among these is a stone relief set up to mark his defeat of Umma.

The monument is known as the Stele of the Vultures from the gory details shown of carrion birds fighting over the entrails of the slain after the battle in which Eannatum led his city to victory.

A little later, a cone-inscription of Entemena, Eannatum’s nephew, gives a history of the conflict between Umma and Lagash for several generations up to his time. [69]

Mainly, the fights between city-states began over land and water.

In the treeless and unremarkable landscape of Mesopotamia where there was nothing to define boundaries other than dry ditches and water filled canals marked off with boundary stones, the land boundaries and the water rights were often in dispute.

These arguments between city-states led to:

• fist-fights
• village brawls
• wars

Wars led to the enthrowning and the throwing down of kings.

In prosperous Lagash, the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] had become the dominant property owners in the state after 500 years of the Sumerian Swindle.

Very few free men could claim to own their own lands.

Most were required under the alternative of starvation to work the foreclosed properties owned by the moneylenders.

Those who fell victim to the Sumerian Swindle were reduced to servitude and slavery.

Although the Sumerian Swindle:

“had always been here”

the people accepted its legitimacy although they didn’t like its result.

The dispossessed and enslaved people were numerous enough that their voices could be heard.

In a dissatisfied and rebellious mood, the people demanded a change.

Too many proud and free farmers had been reduced to slavery along with their wives and children through the moneylenders’ swindles.

Too many daughters and sons had been turned into prostitutes in the moneylender’s whore houses and as moneylender’s sex slaves.

Too many old people had been thrown out of their houses to starve and be eaten by dogs and wild pigs.

The rich were very rich and the poor were not only very poor but were also increasing in numbers.

The poor prayed to their gods and beseeched the temple priests for aid.

The priests offered what aid they could to the poor but the problems caused by the Sumerian Swindle required both religious and political remedies.

The priests could not solve the problem alone primarily because the temples also practiced the Sumerian Swindle.

The temples had been practicing the Sumerian Swindle for so long that it was an unquestioned fact of life simply because it:

“had always been here.”

Because everyone in Sumeria accepted the legitimacy of the Sumerian Swindle, its methods were never criticized.

Though they tried to help their people, the temples did business as usual because such methods for the past 1,000 years:

“had always been here”

and because the contracts between the moneylenders and their victims were written on the clay tablets and sworn before the gods to be agreeable to all parties.

And so Secret Fraud #5,

“The debtor is the slave of the lender”

was a mechanism that brought both debt slaves and wealth into the temples of the gods where the debt-slaves were cared for.

It was the debt-slaves of the perverted and greedy tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who rallied against their cruel masters.

At that time, some of the temple lands were rented on a share-cropper basis.

A rent equivalent to one third of the crop was paid, one-sixth of it in silver and the rest in kind. 

With this temple-mandated price, even here, where the poor sharecropper had to pay one-third of his crops to the landlord, the Secret Fraud #4 of using silver as a part of the payment prolonged the man-years of labor required of the sharecropper.

The crops alone would give the landlord a profit but when one-sixth of that payment had to be made in silver, the sharecropper was put in danger of being victimized with the Sumerian Swindle.

Under Secret Fraud #4,

“Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral.”

If money was tight, that is, if silver was in short supply, even if he could pay all of the rent in crops, he would still become enslaved to the moneylenders and landlords if he could not obtain enough silver from other sources.

Great wealth and great abuses of the power that wealth can buy, became commonplace in Lagash. [70]

In this city state of Lagash, the dissatisfaction of the poor was championed by a pious leader named Urukagina (2351-2342 BC) who became king with the backing of the temple and the approval of the people.

Uru-ka-gina, Uru-inim-gina, or Iri-ka-gina (Sumerian: 𒌷𒅗𒄀𒈾 URU-KA-gi.na; died c. 2370 BC) was King of the city-states of Lagash and Girsu in Mesopotamia, and the last ruler of the 1st Dynasty of Lagash. He assumed the title of king, claiming to have been divinely appointed, upon the downfall of his corrupt predecessor, Lugalanda.

Under his pious leadership, the ancient and natural class system of:

• priest
• king
• merchant

worker was reestablished among the people of Sumeria who had been reduced to poverty and slavery by a thousand years of money lending.

No king could become a king in Sumeria without the approval of the gods.

The gods expressed their approval through the temple and the priests.

The laments of the people had been heard by the gods, the gods gave their approval to the priests, and the priests passed along this approval to Urukagina who:

“took the hand of the god”

in the temple and became king and champion of the People.

Urukagina understood the divine way of life whereby man was created as the servant of the gods and not the servant of the moneylenders.

He could see with his own eyes the evil effects that the moneylenders had on society.

He questioned the dictum that just because usury and debt-slavery:

“had always been here,”

longer than anybody could remember that it should continue to be here.

And he listened with compassion to the cries and suffering of the people.

Although Urukagina was the world’s first social reformer, everything that can be discovered about his changes in society are found in the cuneiform inscriptions that he left.

He decreed that:

“since time immemorial”

evil men had been undermining the original:

“divinely decreed way of life.”

He wrote that all of the leaders of society –

• priests
• administrators
• powerful men

and even the ensi (“governor”) and their extended families – were not serving the people as the just and good servants of God but were acting solely for their own benefit.

As a true servant of god, Urukagina swore to Ningirsu, the god of rain and irrigation and the patron god of Lagash, to bring justice to the land.

Ninurta (Sumerian: 𒀭𒊩𒌆𒅁: DNIN.URTA, possible meaning “Lord [of] Barley”), also known as Ninĝirsu (Sumerian: 𒀭𒎏𒄈𒋢: DNIN.ĜIR2.SU, meaning “Lord [of] Girsu”), is an ancient Mesopotamian god associated with farming, healing, hunting, law, scribes, and war who was first worshipped in early Sumer. In the earliest records, he is a god of agriculture and healing, who cures humans of sicknesses and releases them from the power of demons. In later times, as Mesopotamia grew more militarized, he became a warrior deity, though he retained many of his earlier agricultural attributes. He was regarded as the son of the chief god Enlil and his main cult center in Sumer was the Eshumesha temple in Nippur. Ninĝirsu was honored by King Gudea of Lagash (ruled 2144–2124 BC), who rebuilt Ninĝirsu’s temple in Lagash. Later, Ninurta became beloved by the Assyrians as a formidable warrior. The Assyrian king Ashurnasirpal II (ruled 883–859 BC) built a massive temple for him at Kalhu, which became his most important cult center from then on.

Like every good leader even up to the present day, he could see the effects of the Sumerian Swindle but did not identify the cause, itself.

He identified the blatant abuses of power but he did not recognize the secret workings of the Sumerian Swindle that was the driving force behind much of the abuse.

He noted such abuses of power as the seizure of property and the enslaving of debtors by temple officials and moneylenders, all working in collusion with corrupt judges.

He saw that the greed for gain had blinded many people from their duties to God.

In his inscriptions from 2350 BC, he stated:

“Since time immemorial, since the seed grain first sprouted forth, the head boatman had the boats in charge for his own benefit, the head shepherd had the asses in charge for his own benefit, the head shepherd had the sheep in charge for his own benefit; the head fisherman had the fishing places in charge for his own benefit.

The incantation-priest measured out the barley rent to his own advantage ….the [temple] oxen of the gods plowed the gardens of the governor; the gardens and the cucumber fields of the governor were in the best fields of the gods; the asses and oxen of the priests were taken away by the governor.

No barley rations of the priests were administered by the men of the governor….

In the garden of a muskenum [Have-Not] a priest could cut a tree or carry away its fruit.

When a dead man was placed in the tomb, it was necessary to deliver in his name seven jars of beer and 420 loaves of bread.

The priest received one-half gur [about fourteen gallons] of barley, one garment, one turban, and one bed.

The priest’s assistant received one-fourth gur of barley.…

The workingman was forced to beg for his bread; the youth was forced to work in the temple factories for free.

The houses of the Governor, the fields of the Governor, the houses of the Governor’s wife, the fields of the Governor’s wife, the houses of the Governor’s children, the fields of the Governor’s children – all were joined together side by side.

Everywhere from border to border there were the priest-judges ….

Such were the practices of former days.”

What Urukagina was observing was the blatant destruction of Society by individuals through their selfish monopoly over resources.

By 2350 BC, the greed of the muskenum [merchant-moneylenders] had thoroughly corrupted Sumerian society.

The Sumerian Swindle had reduced the workers to begging for their rations while the workman’s children had been forced to work in the factories for free to pay off the debts of their fathers.

And above this starvation and poverty stood the awilum [the Haves] taking more than they needed and giving less than they should while growing fat from the labor and wealth of the poor.

To right these wrongs, Urukagina removed corrupt officials.

He:

“removed the head boatman in charge of the boats.

He removed the head shepherd in charge of the asses and sheep.

He removed the head fisherman from the fishing places.

He removed the head of the storehouse from his responsibility of measuring out the barley ration to the incantation-priests….

He removed the palace official in charge of collecting the tax from the priests….

The houses of the Governor and the fields of the Governor were restored to the god Ningirsu.

The houses of the Governor’s wife and the fields of the Governor’s wife were restored to the goddess Bau.

Bau (cuneiform: 𒀭𒁀𒌑 dBa-U2; also romanized as Baba or Babu) was a Mesopotamian goddess. The reading of her name is a subject of debate among researchers, though Bau is considered the conventional spelling today. While initially regarded simply as a life-giving deity, in some cases associated with the creation of mankind, over the course of the third and second millennia BCE she also acquired the role of a healing goddess. She could be described as a divine midwife. In art she could be depicted in the company of waterfowl or scorpions.

The houses of the Governor’s children and the fields of the Governor’s children were restored to the god Shulshaggana….

Everywhere from border to border no one spoke further of priest-judges….

When a dead man was placed in the tomb, (only) three jars of beer and eighty loaves of bread were delivered in his name.

The priest received one bed and one turban.

The priest’s assistant received one-eighth gur of barley.…

The youth was not required to work in the temple factories for free; the workingman was not forced to beg for his bread.

The priest no longer invaded the garden of a humble person….”

These priest-judges were a type of con artist who claimed to speak for the gods and to pass judgment upon the People based solely upon their alleged holiness and special communications with the gods.

They would witness “sins” and: 

“transgressions against the gods”

and their particular scam was to tell their god-fearing victims that the sins could only be extinguished though special sacrifices and prayers that the priest-judge would make on their behalf.

Of course, the priest-judge treated himself to the sacrificed foods and enriched himself with the sacrificed goods.

Urukagina did away with their frauds.

But as you shall see in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon, the priest-judges became a favorite monopoly and swindle of the Jewish rabbis.

Urukagina decreed that:

“If a good ass is born to a muskenum [Have-Not] and his overseer says to him,

‘I will buy it from you,’ then if he wishes to sell it, he will say, 

‘Pay me what pleases me,’ but if he does not wish to sell, the overseer must not force him.

If the house of an awilum [Haves] is next to the house of a muskenum [Have-Not], and if the awilum says to him,

‘I wish to buy it,’ then if he wishes to sell, he will say,

‘Pay me in silver as much as suits me,’ or ‘Reimburse me with an equivalent amount of barley’.

But if he does not wish to sell, the powerful man must not force him.”

After 1000 years of the Sumerian Swindle being used by the moneylenders to betray their people, Urukagina freed the Sumerian inhabitants of Lagash from:

• usury
• burdensome controls
• hunger
• theft
• murder

and seizure of their property and persons.

He established freedom.

The widow and orphan were no longer at the mercy of the rich and powerful.

It was for them that Urukagina made his covenant with the god, Ningirsu.

While Urukagina was reforming the temple, he was rebuilding it as well as the other shrines in Lagash.

He is the first ruler in recorded history who tried to established freedom and equality through reforms in society and in government.

NEW WORLD ORDER: SHADOW GOVERNMENT: The Deep State – Library of Rickandria

But these abuses:

“had always been here”

and the awilum [Haves] and tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] who profited from swindling their neighbors and abusing their power also:

“had always been here.”

They were not about to let a religious reformer take away their material wealth without a fight. 

While good king Urukagina served the gods and the people, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] ruthlessly served themselves with a vengeance fueled by greed.

They profited from the Sumerian Swindle and the corruption to society that it brought.

They did not want good kings and good priests ruling over them because they enriched themselves more when the kings and priests were evil and corrupt.

They benefited immensely from Secret Fraud #6 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will.”

Thus, blackmail works when bribes cannot.

But the moneylenders could not corrupt the virtuous king Urukagina, a man of god.

He had the holy priests and the people on his side, so the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could not oppose him openly for fear of the people.

In the city-state of Lagash, the temple was the only owner of large properties other than the moneylenders and merchants.

Without the blessing of the temple priests, Urukagina could not have seized power.

Obviously, within the priesthood, there most certainly were holy men who objected to the abuses practiced by their fellow priests.

That in his piety and gratitude, Urukagina would bestow gifts and wealth upon the temples probably had something to do with such a temple-backed rebellion because considerations of finance played a big role in all of the temples of the ancient Near East.

These temples were great:

• industrial
• commercial
• agricultural

and cattle-raising establishments in addition to being the center of religious worship for all of Sumeria.

Cynics may say that considerations of:

“what the god wanted”

were directly tied to considerations of what was most profitable for the temple, but in fact, the temples were also repositories of wisdom and mercy.

The priests could see the great hardships that were being forced upon the people by the ever-increasing wealth and the ever-increasing power of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders]. 

And they could see that such abuses were not:

“the straight path”

in the eyes of God.

The chief god of Lagash was Ningirsu, both a grain god and a god of war.

This god was needed for such a city.

For centuries, the city-state of Lagash had battled with the Elamites to the southeast and the tribes from the mountains to the east.

They had had to enforce their boundaries with the Semite cities to the north in Akkad.

The spirit of Lagash can be seen in its coat of-arms:

a lion-headed eagle with wings outspread, grasping a lion in each talon.

But regardless of its fierce nature, the fiercest people in Lagash were the moneylenders who had been ruthlessly enslaving and disenfranchising their own people since the Sumerians had first learned the Sumerian Swindle nearly a thousand years previously.

Urukagina was also the first reformer in world history to learn to his woe the wrath of the money lenders.

As a pious devotee of the gods, his power came from the temple.

He was a reformer more than he was a military general.

His devotion was to his god and to his people.

He followed the Mandate of Heaven in righting wrongs and protecting the weak.

Those people who did not have land, he took the land of the moneylenders and returned it to the poor and the disenfranchised.

Those people who had been sold into bondage by the moneylenders, he freed them and returned children to their parents and wives to their husbands.

He took away from the money lenders their debt slaves and much of the property that they had swindled.

And he confiscated much of the lands that they had stolen.

He returned all of this to the people.

And he did all of this with the blessings of the priests and the gods of Lagash.

In Mesopotamia, every city had its own god.

The god of Lagash was not the god of the other cities because the people of the entire ancient Near East believed that the gods had their own territories and resided in their own personal cities.

Passing through all of these cities throughout the Near East and across the Mediterranean and Persian Seas, throughout the deserts of Arabia, across the waste lands of the far north and the Iranian plateau to the east, were the far-flung trade routes of the money lenders and merchants.

The boundaries of the city-states had limits, but the boundaries of the moneylenders and merchants were bigger than all of the city-states combined.

The city-states were local and national in scope.

The horizon of the moneylenders and merchants was international and stretched far beyond the borders of any state.

The states were wealthier and more powerful than the moneylenders but the city-states were like a powerful insect in the web of a spider.

Just as the insect is subdued little by little with entangling threads of silk, so too were the city-states subdued as they depended upon the trade routes for their wealth and power.

These routes were controlled by the merchants and moneylenders.

So, when Urukagina confiscated the property of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and gave it back to the people, he unleashed upon himself an unforeseen wrath by a secretive, cunning and cruel gang of swindlers.

The secretive guild of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could either be good citizens and kindly neighbors to their people and acquiesce to the confiscation and loss of their wealth or they could resist. 

By this time, after nearly a thousand years of wealth gained by subterfuge and deceit and ruthlessness, the moneylenders were not about to be good citizens or good neighbors.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had never been honest and they had never been good.

They had always been:

• greedy
• acquisitive
• avaricious
• ruthless
• cruel
• secretive

and murderous.

Every occupation in Sumeria had its own professional guilds or social clubs that were open only to members of each particular craft.

It is natural for people to congregate around similar interests.

A modern-day knitting club or coin club or Model-T Ford club is an identical idea to the clubs and guilds that have been a part of Mankind since prehistoric times.

Within the club, members can share information and material resources, talk about areas of mutual interest, and share techniques that benefit the group.

Such guilds allowed them to sell more efficiently their particular products to outsiders at a profit.

Guilds of brewers, smiths, and other trades were organized under an administrator, as part of the palace or temple organization. [71]

These guilds were not only very ancient social frameworks but many of them were very secretive in nature, just as they are today.

As organized institutions, the guilds not only provided capital for investment but also time and freedom from economic pressures for craftsmen to experiment and produce new inventions.

SCIENCE: TECHNOLOGY: Suppressed Inventions & Other Discoveries – True Stories of Suppression, Scientific Cover-ups, Misinformation & Brilliant Breakthroughs – Library of Rickandria

Though crafts were usually taught orally, cuneiform tablets have been found such as the Farmer’s Instructions as well as instruction manuals on:

• horse-training
• glass making
• cooking

and beer brewing.

The technical terminology of the craftsmen were recorded on these tablets along with the caution to:

“Let the initiate show the initiate; the non-initiate shall not see it.

It belongs to the tabooed things of the great gods.” [72]

Secrecy was an important part of such craftsmen’s guilds as glassmaking and leather tanning where secret recipes and methods gave these guild members an economic advantage over other guilds in other cities and over private individuals.

Secrecy was of even greater importance among the guilds of tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] where the methods of the Sumerian Swindle and the cunning skills of the merchant gave them an economic advantage over both citizens and kings.

Merchants had their own guilds of both a general nature as well as specialty guilds for merchants who dealt in particular goods such as:

• copper merchants
• spice merchants
• wool merchants
• grain merchants
• boatmen
• brick dealers

etc.

Trades were passed from father to son so that family connections tended to concentrate members of the same craft into one part of a city. [73]

But the professional moneylenders did not have to congregate in any one particular place other than where money was to be found, which was everywhere.

Unlike brick makers or bakers or boatmen who were tied to places where the convenience of transportation and logistics worked in favor of all, the moneylenders could congregate wherever they chose.

So, they could call their meetings secretly anywhere and locate their guild halls in unobtrusive locations.

Of all the guilds in ancient times up to and including the present day, the most secretive and the most difficult to enter was the Guild of the Moneylenders.

In the first place, the basic commodity that they dealt with was silver and gold which were both very valuable as trade goods as well as easily concealed and quickly stolen if not guarded.

The mud-brick houses and shops of Mesopotamia could be burgled merely by a man digging through the dirt walls with a pick and shovel.

So, secrecy and the hiding of valuables was very much a part of the moneylenders’ methods. 

From the earliest times, they strove to attain Secret Fraud #7 of the Sumerian Swindle, which is: 

“Monopoly gives wealth and power, but monopoly of money gives the greatest wealth and power.”

The moneylenders had learned that if they were to make the biggest profits, then their trade had to be a monopoly.

It would not be a lucrative business if one moneylender loaned at interest rates of fifty percent while another loaned at rates of ten percent.

Of course, both interest rates would produce a profit.

But money lending is not the kind of business where competition increased quality of the product and there-by reduced prices to the consumer.

Competition between moneylenders tended to chase all of the borrowers to the lowest loan rates.

And in a competition for customers, lowering rates could only lead them all into loaning money for zero interest and thereby returning Society to its natural order.

So, they formed guilds and from these guilds they created cartels for the control of interest rates throughout Mesopotamia.

There were moneylender guilds in every city in Mesopotamia, all interconnected as guild brethren, who maintained the same interest rates from city to city.

They could compete with one another for customers, but they did not profit by competing with one another for the lowest interest rates.

Though the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] were all citizens of different city-states, they were also secretly in collusion with one another as guild-brethren.

The money lender guilds were established in every city in the ancient Near East.

They were secret societies not only because of the swindles that they conspired but also because of the danger of bandits and thieves and the tax collectors of the king.

Outsiders were just that, outsiders.

Whether new members were accepted straight away or with a variety of rituals and monetary donations, was determined by the particular city’s guild.

Their personal bodyguards served the additional tasks of aggressive loan collectors and strong-armed goons who could be used for seizing goods and lands and shackling debt-slaves as forfeited collateral.

The moneylenders did not have to dirty their hands.

They could hire plenty of gangsters to coerce the debtors from among both the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have-Nots].

Every trade guild had its own patron deity.

The brick maker’s god was Kulla.

The love goddess Inanna (later named Ishtar) was the patron deity of brothels and beer taverns.

The patron deity of the moneylenders was the Moon God, Sin.

This was not a bright god like Shamash, the Sun God, who was limited to only half the day.

The Moon God lived in both the day and the night sky and was mysterious and full of secrets.

His “day” began in the evening, and he reigned throughout the night, a time when debt-slaves were captured and properties confiscated.

The Moon God was the god of both the city of Ur in Sumeria and the city of Harran in Akkad.

CIVILIZATION: HARRAN – Library of Rickandria

Both of these were major guild cities of the moneylenders and important crossroad cities for the merchants.

Both Ur and Harran were the central terminals of the major trade routes.

So, they also had located at each, the major temples for Sin, the Moon God, the god of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

Once Urukagina began his social and ethical reforms and returned the swindled properties to the People and re-united the enslaved families, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] called upon all of the might of their Moon God, Sin, to avenge their losses.

They met in secret places with their guild brothers to plan strategy.

The moneylenders of Lagash realized that their guild brethren from cities far outside of the territories of Lagash would see a similar fate occurring to their own wealth if the confiscations by Urukagina were not reversed.

They all made their profits by swindling the poor and the ignorant and they did not want Urukagina’s reforms to become popular with the poor and the ignorant in other city states, too. 

None of them made their money from one city-state alone.

All of them were intertwined in business and marriage ties all along the trade routes.

They understood that by uniting in inter-state business guilds, they had a greater influence over kings than did any individual guild within a city-state.

True, the kings and the priests and the people had greater power than the moneylenders and merchants.

But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] began to understand that although they only had wealth at their command, that this wealth could buy influence over kings and priests.

And these kings and priests directly controlled both the people and the state.

Wars could be fomented with the money used to corrupt kings and debauch the priesthood. 

Secret Fraud #6 again came into play,

“High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will.”

What’s more, this power of money was international and reached far beyond the borders of any one state.

So again, the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] were finding that their control of wealth gave them control of both kings and people.

It was from this time in 2350 BC that Secret Fraud #12 of the Sumerian Swindle was developed: 

“All private individuals who control the public’s money supply are swindling traitors to both people and country.”

But treason was not a character flaw new to the tamkarum because for them treason was not a flaw, rather, it was a business technique.

In Secret Fraud #12, the moneylenders and merchants knew how to betray the People and steal their property.

They knew how to make the People work in the fields and give the moneylenders the fruit of their labor.

They knew how to make the daughters and sons of the citizens into slaves to serve them both menially as servants and sexually as whores.

And it was all accomplished with the simple principle of lending out two pieces of money and then asking the impossible – that three pieces of money be returned.

It was in ancient Mesopotamia that all of our modern bankers and financiers got their start in betraying the people of the world and destroying Mankind.

To begin the conspiracy to regain their confiscated wealth, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] did what most traitors of every country do, they approached the worst enemy of Lagash.

His name was Lugalzagesi, the governor of the city of Umma.

Lugal-Zage-Si (LUGAL.ZAG.GE.SI 𒈗𒍠𒄀𒋛; frequently spelled Lugalzaggesi, sometimes Lugalzagesi or “Lugal-Zaggisi”) of Umma (died c. 2334 BC) was the last Sumerian king before the conquest of Sumer by Sargon of Akkad and the rise of the Akkadian Empire, and was considered as the only king of the third dynasty of Uruk, according to the Sumerian King List. Initially, as king of Umma, he led the final victory of Umma in the generation-long conflict with the city-state Lagash for the fertile plain of Gu-Edin. Following up on this success, he then united Sumer briefly as a single kingdom.

Umma was only 29 kilometers from Lagash.

Over the centuries the two cities had fought many times over land and water rights.

Umma was a natural choice in allies for the merchant-moneylenders because of the ancient animosity between the two cities.

Nisaba, the goddess of scribes and grain, had her main temple at Umma.

Nisaba was the Mesopotamian goddess of writing and grain. She is one of the oldest Sumerian deities attested in writing, and remained prominent through many periods of Mesopotamian history. She was commonly worshiped by scribes, and numerous Sumerian texts end with the doxology “praise to Nisaba” as a result. She declined after the Old Babylonian period due to the rise of the new scribe god, Nabu, though she did not fully vanish from Mesopotamian religion and attestations from as late as the neo-Babylonian period are known.  In myths and god lists, she was a part of the circle of Enlil, alongside her husband Haya. In the myth Enlil and Sud she plays an important role due to being the mother of the eponymous deity. Enlil seeks her permission to marry Sud with the help of his sukkal (attedant deity) Nuska. Both this narrative and other sources attest that she and her daughter were regarded as very close.  Outside Mesopotamia her name was used to logographically represent these of other gods, not necessarily similar to her in character, including Syrian Dagan, Hurrian Kumarbi and Hittite Ḫalki.

The scribes were aligned with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] because they offered the scribal guilds the most employment and the richest rewards.

The grain merchants of Umma were also aligned with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Lagash because they profited so much in mutual businesses.

None of the awilum [Haves] of Umma wanted to see a general return of confiscated property to the rightful owners as had happened in Lagash.

All of them wanted to make sure that the reforming ideas of Urukagina did not spread to their own dispossessed muskenum [Have-Nots] and debt-slaves.

So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] from Lagash had plenty of sympathetic allies among the trade guilds of Umma and its surrounding towns.

The awilum [the Haves] of all of the city-states of Sumeria were alarmed by what Urukagina had done for his people.

As a unified Treasonous Class, the scribes and the greedy awilum [Haves] of Umma aligned themselves with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Lagash.

Citing past military defeats and religious differences to Lugalzagesi, the governor of Umma, and warning him that the reforming ideas of Urukagina would spread to his own people if something wasn’t done to stop it, the moneylenders offered their financial backing if a war against Lagash could be waged.

All they asked for was that their loans be repaid-at-interest from the spoils and that their confiscated properties in Lagash be returned to them.

The ambitious Lugalzagesi of Umma agreed.

With the war chest provided, he was able to pay and equip a large army and to defeat Lagash in 2375 BC. 

While Lugalzagesi harangued the people with histories of how Lagash had defeated them in the past battles, the priests of Nisaba stirred up the people with lies and prevarications of how Urukagina had broken the ancient laws of land ownership, how he had stolen the temple property from the priests, how he had stolen the slaves away from their owners, how he had insulted Nisaba, the god of scribes, by smashing the legal contracts of the moneylenders and landlords.

Even though Urukagina had freed the people from debt, the illiterate and ignorant people of Umma were convinced that their leaders were telling them the truth because that was:

“how it had always been.”

The leaders decreed and the people obeyed because in kind-hearted trust, the people believed that their leaders were telling the truth.

The educated and the wealthy were leaders of the illiterate and the poor.

The educated and wealthy sought their happiness in wealth rather than righteousness before God, so they betrayed the illiterate and poor.

The corrupters deceived the innocent.

And with the moneylenders’ financing, Lugalzagesi hired the impoverished laborers from the surrounding countryside and the tribes from the Zagros mountains as soldiers in his mercenary army.

The rich hired the poor to fight for them in exchange for grain and loot.

Grain was cheap pay that the poor would eat and then have nothing.

The loot was also cheap pay since it had cost the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] nothing and they would eventually swindle it away from the poor along with their freedoms.

In Lagash, the reformer Urukagina was a king of the people, not a conquering king intent upon empire.

In this, the wily moneylenders had read his character well.

He was interested in freeing his people from oppression and slavery, but he was not prepared to fight a war with anyone.

As a religious man, he did not have the ruthless heart to slaughter the people of Umma who were just as disenfranchised as his own people in Lagash had been.

He had spent his time as king in rebuilding and refurbishing the temples and reestablishing a religious way of life for his people where God was the first consideration, and the welfare of his people was the first duty of the king just like in the olden days a thousand years before.

To work so hard to free his people from the slavery of the moneylenders and then to see an army of equally enslaved peasants led by the same moneylenders beating at his gates, was too much for him.

He did not have the heart for battle and offered little resistance. 

After only eight years of Urukagina’s rule, the army of Umma led by its governor, Lugalzagesi, attacked Lagash, burnt the shrines, and carried off the divine image of Ningirsu.

Lugalzagesi:

• burned
• plundered
• destroyed

practically all of the holy places of Lagash.

The temples that Urukagina had rebuilt and furnished with gold and silver, Lugalzagesi seized and destroyed.

It was a rare thing for Sumerians to attack the temples even of their enemies.

But these holy temples and their priests had backed Urukagina and had been behind the uprising against the wealth and criminality of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

And so, the temples were destroyed and looted so that Lugalzagesi could avenge the moneylenders and repay his war loans from the plunder stripped from them.

Thus, the moneylenders were avenged and their loses were returned to them plus interest from the looting of Lagash.

With this looted wealth and the enthusiasm of an army of impoverished peasants and fierce tribal mercenaries who were eager for even more loot, Lugalzagesi went on to conquer the Semite city of Kish in the north where he killed Ur-Zababa, the king of Kish.

This void left in the leadership of Kish was to prove to be Lugalzagesi’s undoing.

But defeating Kish was an important strategy to protect his back for his future campaigns and to keep the king of Kish from taking over the lands that were no longer being defended by a defeated Lagash.

Then, he turned south and conquered the rest of Sumeria, unifying it under his kingship and making himself the king of all Sumeria with his capital city at Uruk.

Uruk (biblical Erech) was the city where the sky-god, Anu, had dwelt, the god of heaven, lord of constellations, king of the gods, he who dwelt in the highest heavenly regions.

RELIGION: The Annihilation of Sodom & Gomorrah & the Creation of the People of Anu – A History of Sumerian Origin – Library of Rickandria

Later, this position was absorbed by Enlil, the main god of Uruk.

It was believed that Enlil had the power to judge those who had committed crimes, and that he had created the stars as soldiers to destroy the wicked.

The goddess Inanna (Venus or Ishtar) also had her temple in Uruk where the slave girls who had been seized by the moneylenders were sold in the brothels or dedicated as the temple prostitutes of Inanna.

And so, Lugalzagesi felt that such a city, filled with debt-slaves and whores, befitted such a great king as himself.

With Kish out of the way, and the cities of Sumeria under his rule, he claimed that all foreign lands were subservient to him:

“from the Lower Sea along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers to the Upper Sea.”

That is, Lugalzagesi claimed that he had unified Sumeria and controlled the trade routes from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf.

But these trade routes which he claimed to control were the very routes that extended far beyond his territory and beyond his power.

These routes were traveled by, and best known to, the moneylenders and merchants.

He could claim to be the king of a large empire, but his claims were based upon his control of Sumeria while the trade routes that served Sumeria were serviced by a power that he did not possess and did not understand, the very power that had financed his war against the good king Urukagina.

With Urukagina’s reforms smashed, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were free to enlarge the limits of their secret and subterranean power.

For the first time, these secretive guilds could see the great possibilities and profits that could be realized by manipulating the kings and ministers while disguising themselves as:

• advisors
• financial councilors
• subservient moneylenders

to kings.

By working with secret guile, they could create positive and profitable changes in their mutual fate.

Before the overthrow of Lagash, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had busied themselves with business.

The buying and selling and slave trading and moneylending had proven very profitable to them.

But now with their coffers filled with the loot of conquest and their social prestige raised by the grateful Lugalzagesi who had proclaimed himself king of Uruk and all of Sumeria, they realized a new source of wealth and power for themselves.

They began to understand the huge profits that could be made from war.

NEW WORLD ORDER: JEWISH BANKSTERS’ WAR ON AMERICA & THE WORLD – Library of Rickandria

Lugalzagesi’s “empire” did not long endure.

The huge profits realized by the moneylenders of Sumeria did not go unnoticed by the moneylender guilds of the north.

The northern trade routes controlled by Sumeria were not tightly held and those that ran through Sumeria were worked by the moneylender guilds and the merchants within Sumeria.

Lugalzagesi’s so-called “empire” was, from the very beginning, sapped and undermined by the Treasonous Class.

After two decades of successful rule over all of Sumeria, Lugalzagesi was defeated in battle and brought in a neck stock to the Ekur gate of Nippur to be reviled by all who passed by.

He was reviled not because he was a loser in battle but because he had robbed and desecrated the temples of Lagash.

So, as a public humiliation, he was dragged like a dog and tied to the gates of Nippur, the holiest city in Sumeria.

His conqueror was Sargon of Kish.

Sargon of Akkad (/ˈsɑːrɡɒn/; Akkadian: 𒊬𒊒𒄀, romanized: Šarrugi; died c. 2279 BC), also known as Sargon the Great, was the first ruler of the Akkadian Empire, known for his conquests of the Sumerian city-states in the 24th to 23rd centuries BC. He is sometimes identified as the first person in recorded history to rule over an empire.  He was the founder of the “Sargonic” or “Old Akkadian” dynasty, which ruled for about a century after his death until the Gutian conquest of Sumer. The Sumerian King List makes him the cup-bearer to King Ur-Zababa of Kish before Sargon became a king himself. His empire, which he ruled from his archaeologically as yet unidentified capital, Akkad, is thought to have included most of Mesopotamia and parts of the Levant, Hurrian and Elamite territory.  Sargon appears as a legendary figure in Neo-Assyrian literature of the 8th to 7th centuries BC. Tablets with fragments of a Sargon Birth Legend were found in the Library of Ashurbanipal.

Lugalzagesi’s reign (2340-2316 BC) marks the end of the Early Dynastic phase in Sumeria. [74] 

After this time, the balance of power begins to totter and shift away from the Sumerians and toward the Semites of the north whose capital city was Kish and whose moneylenders were a more ruthless variety.

These moneylenders had no fraternal sentiments toward their fellow moneylenders in Sumeria because where profits are at stake, blood is thicker than water.

The Semitic moneylenders of Kish were not Sumerians.

Although they had their own moneylender guilds which were allied with all of the other moneylender guilds in Sumeria and with the rest of the ancient Near East, they had not shared in the looting of Lagash.

They had lost much in Lugalzagesi’s looting of Kish from where their silver and valuables had been carried off to Sumeria.

It was among the Semites of Kish that Secret Fraud #9 of the Sumerian Swindle was perfected, that is,

“Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph.”

Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive because, as time goes by, and the relentlessly increasing sums of the Sumerian Swindle multiply, the most ruthless banker must destroy the weaker and feast upon the remains.

BOOK: GRAPHIC NOVEL: The Black Monday Murders (2016-2018) – Library of Rickandria

2334 BC. Sargon Gains Control of Sumeria

The city of Kish has a history that goes back to pre-literate times.

Because it was situated away from the more densely populated regions of Sumeria, it was settled by the Semites from the Syrian desert who entered that less inhabited part of Mesopotamia from the north and west around 2900 BC, several hundred years after the Sumerians had arrived in the region.

Like all other people who settled in the Fertile Crescent, they absorbed the older Sumerian culture and made it their own.

They wrote their Semitic language with Sumerian cuneiform characters, and they worshipped the same gods and followed the same cultural patterns that:

“had always been here.”

Because the Semitic Amorites who settled this region built their culture based upon what the Sumerians had already created, nearly everything was Sumerian in origin but with embellishments of a Semitic style.

While Sumeria continued to be a thriving and prosperous culture to the south, the Semites in the area of Babylon and Kish built up their own independent strength and power.

CIVILIZATION: BABYLON: Where Was it & Does it Still Exist? – Library of Rickandria

After Umma’s governor, Lugalzagesi, over-threw Urukagina of Uruk and killed king Ur-Zababa of Kish, Ur-Zababa’s chief minister and cupbearer took over the kingship of Kish.

The cup-bearer’s name was Sharrum-kin, known to us as Sargon.

Sargon the Great (2334-2279 BC) was the first of the ancient personages who was given a divine beginning which, more than a thousand years later, the Jews plagiarized for their own myths about Moses.

According to one tradition, Sargon’s father was unknown, which meant that he was of humble birth.

The Identity of Nimrod – Israel My Glory

One story, as found in “The Legend of Sargon” written around 2300 BC, gives him a peasant origin:

“Sargon, the mighty king of Agade, am I.

My mother was a lowly; my father I knew not.

The brothers of my father loved the mountain.

Cush (Bible) – Wikipedia

My city is Azupiranu, which is situated on the bank of the Euphrates.

Azupiranu – Wikipedia

My lowly mother conceived me, in secret she brought me forth.

She placed me in a basket of reeds, she closed my entrance with bitumen, She cast me upon the river, which did not overflow me.

The river carried me, it brought me to Akki, the irrigator.

Akki, the irrigator, in the goodness of his heart lifted me up; Akki, the irrigator, as his own son…. brought me up; Akki, the irrigator, as his gardener appointed me.

When I was a gardener the goddess Ishtar loved me, And for four years I ruled the kingdom….” [75]

Other legends of Sargon claim that he was the illegitimate son of a priestess of Kish.

Since the king was the chief representative of God, the priests and scribes created the necessary divine link in the legend of Sargon.

The legend told that Sargon was the son of a high priestess who bore him secretly because she was prohibited from having sexual relations with a man.

A high priestess was often of royal lineage and often the consort of a god. [76]

Although his origins are uncertain, the later histories agree that Sargon served as the king’s cup bearer.

The office of Cup Bearer to the King, was an important political station in the hierarchy of ancient Near Eastern politics.

He who stood by the king and offered him a cup of wine was also an official taster to ensure that the wine had not been poisoned.

In addition, he would act as a casual bodyguard so that others could not approach the king too closely.

Such a person would be well acquainted with the entire kitchen staff and the logistics of supplies for the palace.

Also, being present during all official:

• banquets
• ceremonies
• receptions

of foreign dignitaries, the cup bearer of the king was privy to the most intimate secrets of kingly office.

He could overhear or be invited to participate in discussions and entertainments.

Such a trusted person would be asked for his advice by the king.

A cup bearer also met the various merchants who visited the palace.

Such an officer of the court became educated in the far regions of the surrounding countries and gained an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each.

The wily merchants were always alert for those who could be of use to them, weighing their characters and ambitions as carefully as weighing specks of gold.

NEW WORLD ORDER: GLOBAL BANKING: GOLD: For Humans & Others… – Library of Rickandria

Luxury items were important for maintaining the prestige of the royal palaces and the temples. 

Because of the expense and risk involved in obtaining these rare materials, their acquisition remained the business of:

• kings and queens
• powerful governors
• temple priests

All of them would deal personally with the merchants and moneylenders.

Money lending and import-export were usually amalgamated within the same business families of tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

These merchant-moneylender families became intimately familiar with many kings and administrators over many generations.

Just as they do today, these old scoundrels passed this political and personal information along to their sons so that the data base of information about the kings and their families increased and was perpetuated over generations of swindlers while what the kings knew of the money lenders remained relatively constant.

Over the centuries, both raw materials and finished products were imported to Mesopotamia from every direction, such as lapis lazuli from Afghanistan, reaching both Mesopotamia and Egypt through a complicated network of overland routes.

These routes were complicated because over the millennia, the various game trails and foot paths through the mountains and deserts were expanded both to serve outlying villages and to enable caravans to outmaneuver roving tribes of bandits.

Flooding rivers, drought through the deserts, and mountain landslides all contributed to re-routing even the oldest trails through the wilderness.

Commodities arrived by sea from:

• East Africa
• the Arabian Peninsula
• Iran

and the Indian subcontinent. [77]

Under such conditions, trade could only occur through carefully organized and well-funded organizations.

So, an individual merchant had little chance of success against the odds of Nature or in competition with the monopolistic trade guilds.

Although the palaces, temples and kings were the main customers for luxury goods, all of these goods without exception passed through the hands of the merchants and moneylenders who each and every one were members of the same trade guilds.

There were no independent businessmen in those days who were not guild members.

Thus, the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] knew as a corporate entity what the private treasures of the palace and temples were as well as the character and depth of greed of both royalty and priests.

This royal inventory was collected through the generations of merchants within their extended family groups and quietly discussed during guild meetings.

True, the kings knew their own people and something about the surrounding cities and territories.

But it was the merchants and moneylenders who knew the surrounding territories better than the kings.

This scheming group of merchants made it their business to know everybody else’s business and to profit thereby.

Through their guilds and marriage connections, the business families controlled information and spy networks that were larger than that of any individual kingdom.

By the time of Sargon, these secret and subterranean guilds of moneylenders began to flex their power of the purse to control the destiny of peoples.

Secret Fraud #7 of the Sumerian Swindle gave them an important advantage:

“Monopoly gives wealth and power, but monopoly of money gives the greatest wealth and power.”

With their skills in accounting and numbers, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and their scribes could estimate to precise degrees the relative strengths of the various nations and the wealth of their kings.

In an age where even the kings were illiterate and dependant upon the scribes for writing and calculating, the scribes became important sources of information and targets of corruption.

Thus, what the merchants actually controlled was not just wealth but also information about resources.

Besides inventories of the palace treasuries, grain field areas gave them close estimates of grain harvests, valuable knowledge when weighing the strengths and weaknesses of a kingdom.

All of this information was known by the scribes.

Subverting and bribing the scribes for such data, gave the tamkarum guilds military intelligence about the capabilities of every country.

But they could only control the destiny of nations if they worked secretly and kept their best swindles to themselves.

To work secretly meant that only verbal orders and agreements could be made between trusted sons and guild members.

Even though the vast majority of the People were illiterate, that did not prevent them from hiring a scribe to read or write their letters and contracts.

By using cylinder seals and stamps impressed upon wet clay, even the illiterate could mark their possessions and seal their packages. [Figure 7]

With such a unique stamp, everybody could authenticate a legal document.

When pressed into the wet clay, both these impressions and the cuneiform writing, could not be altered once the clay had hardened.

Seals could be rolled on lumps of clay to seal:

• doorways
• pottery jars
• packages

Seals could be carved on:

• stone
• bone
• metal

or shell for sale within the budget of every man among the awilum [the Haves].

The use of cylinder seals continued throughout Mesopotamian history.

Although the clay tablets and cylinder seals are superior even to modern paper and computer disks in terms of permanence and longevity, they did not have any privacy.

Cyphers and secret codes had been used for centuries.

The secret meaning of words was a standard part of the scribes’ schooling.

This need for secrecy brought about a new invention.

Around the time of Sargon (2334-2279 BC), envelopes were invented. [Figure 8]

These were flattened sheets of clay modeled around the clay tablets.

The clay envelopes protected the contents from damage and fraud by safeguarding against someone moistening the clay and changing the writing.

They provided a kind of “notary seal” or a “poor man’s copyright” that protected the legitimacy of the contents.

Sometimes the text was repeated on the envelope so you could read what was sealed inside.

In the case of a dispute, the envelope would be opened and the contents examined and compared.

Some envelopes opened in modern times have been found with the information written on them different from that of the tablets inside. [78]

So, fraud was not unknown.

Lugalzagesi had provided the merchants and moneylenders the means of regaining their property by over-throwing Urukagina, the reformer king of Lagash.

But greed is a demon that is never satisfied just as a fire is never satisfied by adding more fuel.

The huge quantities of gold and silver that had been looted from the temples of Lagash gave the moneylenders new ideas for acquiring even more.

This vast new source of bullion flowed into their businesses from the soldiers and laborers who had looted this wealth during Lugalzagesi’s victories.

For the sacking of temples as direct participants, the moneylenders could plead innocence before the gods.

It was through their businesses that they gained all of this loot.

Silver and gold made available to the people as war booty meant that the people had more silver to buy:

• the grain
• the garments
• the beer
• the prostitutes
• the slaves

and the luxury items that were the stock-in-trade of the merchants and moneylenders.

War was very profitable to the winners.

Profit meant power.

And the Treasonous Class desired ever more wealth and power without themselves being impious or subject to being cursed by the gods.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had learned how to inveigle the poor into doing all of the stealing.

Secret Fraud #20 is:

“Champion the Minority in order to dispossess the Majority of their wealth and power, then swindle the Minority out of that wealth and power.”

Using this method, it didn’t matter whether the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], themselves, took possession of a temple’s wealth or not.

They could avoid the curses of the gods by letting the poor soldiers loot the temples and then they could swindle the loot away from the soldiers with the Sumerian Swindle.

Taking the gold from the gods was a curse, but the gold was not cursed, only the looters who took it were cursed.

The merchants who took the gold from the looters were innocent.

Oy!

So, innocent!

However rich the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] were, only among the kings and the priests were power and prestige found.

Mere merchants and moneylenders were forever spat upon and hated by the people whom they had swindled.

Only among themselves did they have prestige, a prestige based upon who among them was the richest.

According to Secret Fraud #9 of the Sumerian Swindle, among the:

• moneylenders
• bankers
• merchants

“Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph.”

Thus, the most ruthless and greedy of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were also the most prestigious leaders among them.

In every gang, it is the most criminal who is the boss of the gangsters.

For the greedy moneylenders of Kish, Lugalzagesi had been a king for too long.

His twenty-four year reign had allowed him to assemble all of the cities of Sumeria into one, single empire.

This was the first time in over one thousand years that all of Sumeria had been united.

But Lugalzagesi was a Sumerian, and he was satisfied with being the king of Sumeria.

He had been financed by the moneylenders of Sumeria to destroy Urukagina of Lagash and to eliminate the Semitic king of Kish before turning south and conquering all of Sumeria.

He was happy with his victories and was not ambitious for further conquests.

But the merchant-moneylenders of Kish had lost their treasuries to him.

They were Semitic Amorites, not Sumerians.

Although they had absorbed the Sumerian Culture, they were of a different race and temperament and language.

As merchants and traders, they were adept at seeing the strengths and weaknesses in men and of taking advantage of their weaknesses while undermining their strengths.

They knew of the great wealth their guild brothers in Sumeria had gained through war.

They had lost much to them.

They wanted some of those profits for themselves.

And they wanted their treasures returned to them.

The moneylenders found their champion in the cup bearer of the former king of Kish.

Like most court officials, Sharrum-kin had the manners, charisma and air of authority to make a natural leader.

He knew the subtle ways of politics and court intrigue.

He had the drive toward avenging his former master’s death at the hands of Lugalzagesi.

And with the assurance from the moneylenders for their unlimited financial support in buying weapons and paying for an army, he had the means of attacking Lugalzagesi at Uruk.

What’s more, he had the information from his tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] informers and merchant-spies.

Sargon was apprised of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the many cities under Lugalzagesi’s rule.

He knew how many men they had, how rich was their treasuries, how full was their granaries, how strong were the walls of the cities and which of the numerous kings would be willing to fight against him and which would acquiesce to his rule in exchange for liberality.

All of this information was compliments of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

Vital information, indeed!

Information that could only have been supplied by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who did business with all of those cities.

In addition, from the earliest days in pre-literate times, none of the city states of Mesopotamia had kept standing armies.

Their armies consisted of the ordinary citizens – 

• farmers
• fishermen
• brickmakers
• court officials

and city governors – assembling whenever there was a threat.

Mankind had not reached such huge numbers in population that necessitated standing armies as protection against other armies in other countries.

When threats of war between cities seemed immanent, it was simply a matter of sending runners to outlying villages and criers throughout the cities to assemble enough farmers and fighters to go to battle.

While supplies were drawn in and city gates were shut, the populace secured themselves behind their city walls of mud brick.

Although this was:

“how it had always been”

this ancient Sumerian system was about to change.

Sargon kept secret his war preparations.

With sufficient financing and access to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] trade routes, he did not need to do business with the Sumerian cities in the South for his supplies but could buy directly from the Semitic cities far to the north and west, away from the knowledge of Lugalzagesi.

Directly to the west of him on the Euphrates was the city of Mari which was a major manufacturer of copper and bronze implements and weapons.

After all, this was still the Bronze Age and such weapons could be bought through the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] monopolies at Mari without raising suspicions.

Once his army was armed and trained, Sargon struck swiftly, attacking Uruk and dragging away Lugalzagesi like a dog in a neck stock to be tied to the gates of Nippur.

While Lugalzagesi had fought against each of the Sumerian city states in order to defeat them, Sargon used politics to win most of his victories.

First, he demonstrated his military might by defeating Lugalzagesi at Uruk.

He then turned to the other cities of Sumeria.

To those kings who refused to acquiesce to his rule, he fought against and defeated them in battle.

But those kings who agreed to accept his rule, he granted them their kingships intact and their cities as their own as long as they paid tribute and maintained Sargon’s own relatives and trusted friends as resident advisors in the palace.

Sargon the Great was a brilliant military leader as well as an innovative administrator.

Sargon was the first king to unite all of Mesopotamia, both the north (Akkad) and the south (Sumer) under one ruler.

His Akkadian empire became a prototype for later kings.

Sargon’s policy was to destroy the walls of cities within his empire, thus depriving potential rebels of strongholds.

He also took members of local ruling families to his capital as hostages.

If the city governors were willing to shift their allegiance, Sargon kept the old administration in office; otherwise, he filled governorships with his own citizens and appointed only Semites to high administrative positions.

In this way, he encouraged the collapse of the old city-state system and moved toward centralized government, backed by reliable garrisons. [79]

Sargon installed military garrisons at key positions to manage his vast empire and to ensure the uninterrupted flow of tribute.

And he was the first king to have a standing army.

In the scribal records, thirty-four battles are recorded with the victorious Sargon gaining control not only of Akkad but of all Sumeria on his way to the Persian Gulf where he washed his weapons in the sea in a ritual commemoration of his victories.

On the way back, he completed his conquest of southern Sumeria.

Sargon then turned west and north, traveling along the trade routes of the Euphrates toward the Mediterranean where he conquered the lands of:

• Mari
• Yarmuti
• Ebla

up to the “Cedar Forest” (Amanus Mountains) and the “Silver Mountain” (Taurus Mountains).

Mention of cedar and silver reveals clearly the motivation for this distant campaign.

Gaining control of the silver and the building materials meant both wealth and power for himself and his economic backers of the Treasonous Class.

Returning to Kish, he then turned east to conquer Elam and neighboring Barakhshi. [80]

Later legend adds still further victories, taking him across the sea as far as Anaku, the “Tin Country” (location uncertain) and Kaptara, Old Testament Kaphtor or Crete.

His victory over two major commercial centers, Mari on the middle Euphrates and Ebla in northern Syria, were important because of their strategic position on trade routes.

Ebla was the center of metal trade in the third millennium BC. [81]

In these decisions can be seen the work of Sargon’s advisors.

Wealth acquisition and trade were paramount.

The “silver mountain” mines provided Sargon with the wealth to increase State power and to buy influence but most importantly, to balance the false accounting books of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

Without an injection of free silver, the debts of the king and the People could never be repaid under the cheating Sumerian Swindle.

By this date in history, silver had become the ultimate commodity with which all other commodities could be bought.

This shiny metal that was too soft for anything other than making trinkets, was useful in its rarity as a type of commodity money.

Those who owned the sources of this metal could dig it out of the ground at low production costs using war slaves and debt slaves.

The silver that was obtained for free as war booty or cheaply from slave-labor mines, actually had a higher buying power than silver obtained through taxes.

Taxes only recycled existing silver and left the problem of the phantom and fraudulent moneylender’s interest un-payable.

However, newly mined silver increased the existing total by digging it out of the ground to pay off the phantom interest that the Sumerian Swindle had created out of thin air.

Theft was the only way for the moneylenders to balance their books because, in reality, interest-on-a-loan creates more debt than there is money in existence to repay it.

Sargon’s power was greatly increased by the monopoly over the silver mines that helped to finance his empire.

And the wealth of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] was increased as the people used their war booty to give to the moneylenders as payments for the fraudulent interest-on-a-loan. 

To judge from the much later legends and chronicles, Sargon’s conquests continued to range far and wide; he may even have sent his armies to:

• Egypt
• Ethiopia
• India

To control so vast an empire, he stationed military garrisons at various key outposts.

Large armies require large taxes and income in the form of tribute.

In Sumeria, itself, where rebellion was chronic, he appointed fellow Semites to the higher administrative posts and garrisoned the cities with all Akkadian troops.

For himself and his huge court of officials and soldiers, the archives boast that:

“5400 men ate bread daily before him.”

He built a resplendent capital city of Agade, not far from Kish though its location is still unknown.

In a brief span of time Agade became the most prosperous and magnificent of the cities of the ancient world.

Gifts and tribute were brought to it from the four corners of Sargon’s realm.

At its quays ships docked from far-off:

• Dilmun (Bahrain)
• Magan (Oman)
• Melukhkha (the Indus Valley)

Most of Agade’s citizens were no doubt Semites related to Sargon by ties of blood and language, and it is from the name Agade, or rather from its Biblical counterpart, Akkad (Genesis 10:10), that the word “Akkadian” has come to designate today the Mesopotamian Semites in general. [82]

Notice should be taken of the importance of the wharves and quays of Sumerian cities.

Water transportation was naturally the most efficient way to move men and materials on the Two Rivers and through the network of interlinking canals and irrigation channels.

Of course, international merchant ships from the Persian Gulf moved upriver and docked at the wharves.

So, their commercial value was carefully monitored.

Because they were a stop for foreign sailors and traders, the wharves also had to function not only as a place of commerce but as a guarded enclave to prevent foreign spies and troublesome sailors from infiltrating into the city proper.

Aside from the walled city with its temples and royal palaces and the suburbs outside of the walls, the average Sumerian city also included a special area of wharves.

The wharf section functioned not only as a docking facility for ships but also as a center of commercial activity.

The wharf had administrative independence and separate legal status for the citizens transacting business there.

Foreign traders had stores there, and their needs were met by the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] of the wharf. [83]

These women tavern keepers provided the sailors with everything that a sailor would want.

So, the problems associated with controlling foreign sailors and sea captains were minimized by keeping them restricted to the wharf area of the cities.

And on the quays and wharves, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could keep a close eye on their cargos and bargain for newly arrived goods.

The close cooperation between Sargon and the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] can be seen throughout his career.

Under his rule international trade flourished between the Mediterranean coast and the Persian Gulf.

Trade goods from as far away as India could be carried into regions of the Mediterranean basin.

Even when a local king as far away as Purushkanda in Asia Minor was oppressing a Mesopotamian merchant colony, Sargon sent a military expedition to protect it. [84]

Rich inducements were offered to Sargon by the merchants, and he marched with great difficulty to Purushkanda where his presence alone brought about a settlement of the merchants’ grievances. [85]

Sargon the Great appreciated the power of the moneylenders and merchants because they had helped him to win his empire.

And he understood the importance of trade to the general well-being of his administration.

Military coercion increased the flow of goods to the imperial center from areas firmly under his control.

But the private enterprise of the merchants not under Sargon’s rule also engaged in limited trade [86] throughout his empire.

For example, Aratta, a city-state most probably in northwestern Iran near the Caspian Sea, is described in Sumerian myths and epics as the rival of Uruk.

Aratta was known for its:

• stone
• metals
• craftsmen

and artisans.

And, of course, Magan and Melukkha were written about in texts from the time of Sargon the Great to the middle of the first millennium BC. Sargon recorded that boats from:

• Magan (Oman)
• Melukkha (Indus valley)
• Dilmun (Bahrain)

dropped anchor in his capital, Agade.

Melukkha was described as the place of “black men” and its people as “men of the black land” or “black Melukkhaites.”

“The black land” was described in:

• myths
• epics
• economic documents

as a prosperous, populous country, full of:

• trees
• reeds
• bulls
• birds
• various metals

and carnelian.

There were always foreigners in Mesopotamian cities.

The Sumerians and later the Babylonians and Assyrians knew about the:

• geography
• economy
• political organization
• religious beliefs

and customs of foreign countries and their peoples.

From archaeological and literary evidence, the world that the Mesopotamians knew about extended north into Anatolia, the Caucasus, and westerly parts of central Asia; to the south into Arabia; to the east to India; and to the west to the Mediterranean Sea, Cyprus, Crete, and Egypt. [87]

Under Sargon the Great, business prospered, and great wealth flowed all across the empire. 

And all of this wealth passed through the hands of the moneylenders and merchants.

Merely by being the middlemen in any transaction, wealth is siphoned by the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] in handling fees and commissions in addition to profits from sales. 

And so developed Secret Fraud #18 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“When the source of goods is distant from the customers, profits are increased both by import and export.”

The new supplies of silver, the tribute from conquered territories and taxes gave Sargon the spending power to not only enrich the merchants through an increase in trade and luxury goods but to buy off the priests and laity.

Rebuilding temples were not just acts of piety but were public works where the wealth of the empire could be used to employ the People and to increase political support from the temple priests.

The new wealth of the laborers gave the merchants bigger profits also.

This new system of centralized government with its bureaucracy of administrators set standards for all future empires in the Near East.

One of Sargon’s innovations was the establishment of the office of high priestess to the Moon-God at Ur as a royal sinecure, apparently in a deliberate move to ally to his Akkadian administration to the loyalty of the 2500-year-old and once powerful Sumerian centers.

His daughter Enheduanna was the first holder of this celebrated post.

For the next 500 years, until the end of the reign of Rim-Sin of Larsa, this appointment was a royal prerogative which was exercised through numerous dynastic changes.

Rim-Sîn I (Akkadian: 𒀭𒊑𒅎𒀭𒂗𒍪, Dri-im-Dsuen) ruled the ancient Near East city-state of Larsa from 1822 BC to 1763 BC (MC). His sister En-ane-du was high priestess of the moon god in Ur. Rim-Sin I was a contemporary of Hammurabi of Babylon and Irdanene of Uruk. His father, Kudur-mabuk, may have been of Elamite descent, notwithstanding his Akkadian name.

This appointment of the priestess provided Sumeria a unifying link even in periods of apparent disunity.

As well as being the first, Enheduanna was the most distinguished in this long line of priestesses.

There survive a number of hymns that she herself, a Semitic Akkadian, is said to have composed – in excellent Sumerian!

Since the ancients did not usually sign their names to their literary creations, we know Enheduanna as history’s first known literary figure; even her portrait has survived. [88]

Enheduanna (Sumerian: 𒂗𒃶𒌌𒀭𒈾 Enḫéduanna, also transliterated as Enheduana, En-he2-du7-an-na, or variants; fl. c. 2300 BC) was the entu (high) priestess of the moon god Nanna (Sīn) in the Sumerian city-state of Ur in the reign of her father, Sargon of Akkad (r. c. 2334 – c. 2279 BCE). She was likely appointed by her father as the leader of the religious group at Ur to cement ties between the Akkadian religion of her father and the native Sumerian religion.

But there was another reason that has been overlooked by the archeologists as to why Sargon put his daughter into the high office of the Moon God at Ur.

As the king of Akkad and Sumeria, he could have installed his daughter in any temple that he chose.

Why not make her priestess in the greatest temple of the highest god in all of Sumeria, the god Enlil in the city of Nippur?

Why make her priestess of the Moon God at Ur?

The Moon God was the tutelary deity of the moneylenders of Sumeria.

And the city of Ur was the main depot of all international trade from the Persian Gulf.

Ur is where the sea-going ships off-loaded their cargo onto shallow-draft river-going boats. 

Because the Semitic moneylenders of Akkad had helped Sargon to take power, it was important in his control of Sumeria to also control the Moon God’s temple in Ur.

In this way, Sargon had both the temple that the Sumerian moneylenders prayed in as well as the main terminal city of the international Persian Gulf trade firmly under the control of both himself and his Semitic merchants and moneylenders of Akkad.

But Sargon had considerable difficulty in controlling his vast empire.

Even during his reign, and among the cities of Babylonia, there were never-ending rebellions. 

The “Sargon Chronicle” tells us that:

“in his old age all the countries revolted against him, and they besieged him in Agade.”

Although Sargon crushed these insurrections, his sons and grandsons did not inherit a peaceful empire. [89]

Sargon’s empire lasted just over a century (~2334 2150 BC).

Its final collapse was prompted by the invasion of a people from the Zagros mountains who disrupted trade and ruined the irrigation system. [90]

Although Sargon could defend his empire during his lifetime, his habit of tearing down the walls of the cities under his rule made it difficult for his descendants to protect what he had created.

He destroyed the city walls so he could keep rebellion in check.

But once again, the limited vision of the kings was not far-ranging enough to see the greater world beyond their domains.

With no safe havens, the people of the empire were easily attacked by the barbarian hoards from the mountains.

The mountains offered safe haven and protection to the barbarians, but the plains of Mesopotamia offered no protection without city walls.

It was not just the mountain tribes who were giving Sargon’s empire trouble but the cities of Sumeria were also in constant agitation and rebellion.

A thousand years of Sumerian rule had been upset by Sargon.

The Sumerians liked things:

“as they had always been.”

Even though Sumerian society had its share of inequalities with the awilum [the Haves] swindling the lands and lives of the muskenum [Have-Nots], at least the People could appeal to the king or to the priests for relief.

In Sumeria, over and above all were the gods and it was to them that the people owed their ultimate allegiance.

Yes, Sargon had shown his loyalty to the gods in the traditional way by rebuilding the temples. 

So, the people could see that their taxes and tribute were being used to serve the gods.

Yet, it was not the way that things:

“had always been”

because the wealth of Sumeria was being siphoned off to the empire of Sargon while the people were ruled by Semites from the north – Semitic Amorites who had always been regarded by the Sumerians as:

• barbarians
• nomads
• lowly paid laborers

But what was just as bad, Sargon had given the merchants and moneylenders full rights of exploitation – full rights of exploitation, that is, if you were a Semite of Kish, an Akkadian.

As in ancient times, merchants could travel the trade routes through the safe passage guarantees of the king to whom taxes were paid.

But it was Sargon’s Amorite moneylenders who had financed Sargon’s empire, not the moneylenders of Sumeria.

The Sumerian moneylenders and merchants were not given the same access to trade routes without a higher tax to the king.

This did much to throw the Sumerian merchants behind the rebellions that were springing up in Sargon’s empire.

Nowhere were the Sumerian merchants more opposed to Sargon than in the city of Lagash.

Lagash is where the pious king Urukagina had freed his people from the greed of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders], so it might seem odd that the merchants of Lagash who had helped to overthrown Urukagina would want a return to Sumerian rule, especially since they had been guilty of overthrowing Urukagina and installing Lugalzagesi in his stead.

But under Sargon, the Amorite moneylenders had been given full authority to practice the Sumerian Swindle throughout his empire and their preferential treatment had reduced the Sumerian moneylenders’ profits.

What was worse for the Sumerian merchant moneylenders, Lagash had been one of the main river ports for trade coming upriver from the Persian gulf.

Once Sargon had built his capital city, this trade by passed Lagash for the quays and warehouses of Agade, leaving the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Lagash without a wholesale source.

Sargon lived to be an old man but his son Rimush on his accession found the empire torn by revolts and rebellions.

Rimush (or Rimuš, 𒌷𒈬𒍑 Ri-mu-uš; died c. 2270 BC) was the second king of the Akkadian Empire. He was the son of Sargon of Akkad. He was succeeded by his brother Manishtushu and was an uncle of Naram-Sin of Akkad. Naram-Sin posthumously deified Sargon and Manishtushi but not his uncle. His sister was Enheduana, considered the earliest known named author in world history. Little is known about his brother Shu-Enlil. There was a city, Dur-Rimuš (Fortress of Rimush), located near Tell Ishchali and Khafajah. It was known to be a cult center of the storm god Adad.

The Sumerian people longed for those holy times when the People served the gods rather than serving the moneylenders.

In bitter battles involving tens of thousands of troops, Rimush reconquered the cities of:

• Ur
• Umma
• Adab
• Lagash
• Der

and Kazallu, as well as the countries of Elam and Barahshi.

To be a king meant to also be a warrior.

A fragment of a vase bearing his name was found at Tell Brak in northeastern Syria and, like his father, he claims to have held “for Enlil” the entire country from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, together with all of the mountains.

Rimush was killed in a palace conspiracy, assassinated by certain of his courtiers, possibly even including his elder brother Manishtushu who succeeded him, and whose name, meaning “who is with him”, perhaps indicates that they were twins. [91]

Manishtushu (Man-ištušu) (𒈠𒀭𒅖𒌅𒋢, Ma-an-ish-tu-su; died c. 2255 BC) was the third (or possibly second) king of the Akkadian Empire, reigning 15 years c. 2270 BC until his death c. 2255 BC. His name means “Who is with him?”. He was the son of Sargon the Great, the founder of the Akkadian Empire, and he was succeeded by his son, Naram-Sin who also deified him posthumously. A cylinder seal, of unknown provenance, clearly from the reign of Naram-Sin or later, refers to the deified Manishtushu i.e. “(For) the divine Man-istusu: Taribu, the wife of Lugal-ezen, had (this seal) fashioned”. Texts from the later Ur III period show offerings to the deified Manishtushu (spelled ᵈMa-iš-ti₂-su or ᵈMa-an-iš-ti₂-su). The same texts mention a town of ᵈMa-an-iš-ti₂-su where there was a temple of Manishtushu. This temple was known in the Sargonic period as Ma-an-iš-t[i-s]u

Rimush reigned only nine years and Manishtushu followed him as king. [92]

Manishtushu (2276-2261 BC), like his father Sargon, carried his victorious armies to far-distant lands, or at least so it might seem from a passage in one of his inscriptions which reads:

“When he (Manishtushu) had crossed the Lower Sea (the Persian Gulf) in ships, thirty-two kings gathered against him, but he defeated them and smote their cities and prostrated their lords and destroyed the whole countryside as far as the silver mines.” [93]

Again, the ancient records name the primary goal and chief prize  of these wars – silver that could be seized rather than paid for, silver that could be mined by the debt-slaves and the war-slaves for the cheap pay of a bowl of barley, silver that could be dug out of the mountains and given to the moneylenders to pay the interest-on their-loans to the king, silver to balance the phantom interest created by the Sumerian Swindle.

Manishtushu brought back “black stone” from the mountains beyond the sea, shipping it directly to the quays of Agade; this was almost certainly the beautifully grained diorite in which his surviving statues are carved in a naturalistic style, striking in its contrast with the stylized conventions of the Early Dynastic period.

That Manishtushu held Assyria is clear from a votive inscription dedicated to him at Assur and from a later text of king Shamshi-Adad who, while restoring the Ishtar temple at Nineveh, found a number of statues and stele recording the Akkadian king’s founding of that temple.
[94]

Manishtushu reigned fifteen years and was followed by his son Naram-Sin.

Naram-Sin, also transcribed Narām-Sîn or Naram-Suen (Akkadian: 𒀭𒈾𒊏𒄠𒀭𒂗𒍪: DNa-ra-am DSîn, meaning “Beloved of the Moon God Sîn”, the “𒀭” a determinative marking the name of a god; died c. 2218 BC), was a ruler of the Akkadian Empire, who reigned c. 2255–2218 BC (middle chronology), and was the third successor and grandson of King Sargon of Akkad. Under Naram-Sin the empire reached its maximum extent. He was the first Mesopotamian king known to have claimed divinity for himself, taking the title “God of Akkad”, and the first to claim the title “King of the Four Quarters”. His military strength was strong as he crushed revolts and expanded the empire to places like Turkey and Iran. He became the patron city god of Akkade as Enlil was in Nippur.[1] His enduring fame resulted in later rulers, Naram-Sin of Eshnunna and Naram-Sin of Assyria as well as Naram-Sin of Uruk, assuming the name.

Naram-Sin was the grandson of Sargon.

He controlled an empire from Central Asia Minor to the southern end of the Persian Gulf.

Ultimately, the empire collapsed under the pressures of the peoples from the mountains of the north and east.

These people were known as Gutians.

This is what most archeologists and historians will tell you.

But, of course, the story goes much, much deeper than that.

Beginning around 2200 BC, a great drought descended upon the entire Near East, bringing the Old Kingdom of Egypt to an end and seriously weakening Sargon’s Empire.

Although Egyptian civilization collapsed from famine, the weakened empire of Sargon suffered from treason within and attack from without.

In his own inscriptions, Naram-Sin records the military defeat of Mani of Magan (Oman) which indicates that he controlled the whole of the western coast of the Persian Gulf at least as far as Oman.

A poetic composition of some centuries later extols the magnificence of Naram-Sin’s times, speaking of mighty elephants and apes, beasts from distant lands, abounding in the great square of the capital.

This suggests trade relations with India.

In the north-east, Naram-Sin penetrated into what are now the Kurdish hills quelling, at least temporarily, the hill-tribes then known as the Lullu, and setting up a great relief carved high in the face of the rock which still exists today, 4000 years later.

To guard the route into Asia Minor he built a great castle at Tell Brak, and it is likely that there was another such garrison at Nineveh.

A stele of his has been found as far north as Diarbekr on the borders of Armenia. [95]

All of this reflects the great wealth and power of Naram-Sin and the entire dynasty of his grandfather, Sargon.

And where there is great wealth, there are the moneylenders and merchants seeking to acquire as much as possible of it for themselves.

These parasites can make a profit both in times of peace and in times of war.

But it was during times of war that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] found their greatest and fastest opportunities for profits.

The moneylender guilds transcended political and geographic boundaries because silver, when used as a type of money, transcended those same boundaries.

But please note that silver was not a true money.

As you will see in Volume Two, The Monsters of Babylon, true money would be an invention of the Greeks.

Silver was a commodity money of barter which was traded in weighed amounts for other commodities.

And so, it was controlled like any other commodity, by those who could manipulate its availability.

By the time of Sargon’s Dynasty, the People of all cities and lands in Mesopotamia were entrapped by both the Akkadian and the Sumerian moneylenders whose ruthless practice of the Sumerian Swindle continued under Sargon who owed them so much.

However, because the Akkadians of Kish now controlled the trade routes of Sargon’s empire, they were in an advantageous position to control prices for goods sold to the Sumerian merchants.

Thus, being out maneuvered and under-cut, the merchants of Sumeria could only sell for the higher prices that reflected the higher taxes to the king and the higher wholesale prices that they had to pay to the Akkadian wholesalers.

This led to a lot of dissatisfaction among the Sumerian merchants since their wealth declined. 

And because they:

“had always been”

a part of the Sumerian community, they expressed their dissatisfaction through sedition.

In every city, the merchants:

“have always been”

in a strategic position in every marketplace and in every shop to foment rebellion among the ordinary people.

The merchants were the middlemen between:

• farmer
• palace
• temple

So, they could spread dissention to all classes.

As awilum [the Haves], they had the ear of the upper classes.

Among themselves, the merchants could gripe about lower profits and discuss ways to improve their lot.

But they could not say the same things to the rest of the People because no one would have any sympathy at all for a moneylender or a merchant who charged the highest prices that he could get while still complaining about not making more.

So, the dissatisfaction of the merchants was always couched in arguments aimed at spreading rebellion without exposing their own self-interest.

Just as in modern times, hypocrisy was a basic technique of the swindling and vicious moneylenders and merchants because that is:

“how it has always been.”

Such hypocrisy and deceit worked well among the illiterate muskenum [Have-Nots] who were told about how much more they had to pay for something to eat because of the increased tribute to Sargon and his sons.

The Sumerian moneylenders were just as ravenous as the Akkadian moneylenders of Sargon’s empire and they practiced the Sumerian Swindle to its fullest profit.

But as merchants who had personal contact with the People everyday, they could plead poverty with conviction.

They could blame the Akkadians of the north for the increased prices because the complaint was true.

Thus, Sargon found constantly rebellious cities throughout his empire and all of his sons fared no better.

Nimrod, Mighty Hunter and King – Who Was He? – TheTorah.com

They could win an empire but to hold it required constant:

• police action
• crowd control
• warfare

NEW WORLD ORDER: GLOBAL INTELLIGENCE: AMERICA: Big Brother Loves You – Library of Rickandria

Constant warfare raised prices which added to the profits of both the Akkadian and Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] because only the merchants and moneylenders belonged to a guild that was devoted solely to buying and selling all things and lending-at-interest grain and silver.

All profits increased during times of war.

So, the merchants and moneylenders found their greatest profits by promoting rebellion. 

Naram-Sin’s own inscriptions mention a general rebellion of the principal cities of Sumeria and 
Akkad, including:

• Kish
• Uruk
• Sippar

While the tradition mentions that the goddess Innin decided to abandon the capital, Agade, the immediate cause of the withdrawal of divine favor is now known.

A Sumerian text, put together from a number of fragments in various museums, describes in the opening lines the early splendor and wealth of Agade, to which people came from all quarters of the world bearing their tribute.

The impious deed of Naram-Sin brought this to an end, for he had allowed his troops to desecrate, sack and loot the Ekur, the great temple of the highest god Enlil in the holiest of Sumerian cities, Nippur.

The Sumerian city of Nippur was a part of Sargon’s conquests in creating the Akkadian empire. But the carefully laid plans of the moneylenders’ dream of gaining wealth and protection under Sargon was overturned by the Sumerian priests.

The religions of Sumeria all without exception were based upon the belief that Mankind was created to serve the gods.

Once Sargon and his sons and grandsons gained the kingship of Sumer and replaced the Sumerian governors and kings with their own men; once the taxes and tribute and labor of the Sumerian people began to be siphoned off toward the construction and embellishment of Sargon’s capital city of Agade rather than being used toward a pious and prosperous life of the Sumerian people; and once Sargon allowed the Sumerian Swindle to again ravage the People through his Akkadian moneylenders, the priests declared the displeasure of the god, Enlil, and so promoted rebellion.

After the rebellion was quashed, when Naram-Sin again took control of Nippur, he punished the priests of the Ekur temple by allowing his troops to loot it.

The importance of Nippur is reflected even today in the great size of its mud-brick ziggurat mound of Enlil’s temple located between Baghdad and Basra in southern Iraq.

Battle of Basra (2003) – Wikipedia

Nippur was one of the longest-lived Sumerian sites, beginning in the prehistoric Ubaid period (5000 BC) and lasting until about 800 AD in the Islamic era.

RELIGION: Jews Promote Christianity & Islam – Library of Rickandria

From earliest recorded times, Nippur was a sacred city, not a political capital.

It was this holy character which allowed Nippur to survive numerous wars and the fall of dynasties that brought destruction to other cities.

Although not a capital city, Nippur had an important role to play in politics.

Kings, on ascending the throne in cities such as:

• Kish
• Ur
• Isin

sought recognition at Ekur, the temple of Enlil, the chief god of the Mesopotamian pantheon. 

In exchange for such legitimization, the kings lavished gifts of land, precious metals and stone, and other commodities on the temples and on the city as a whole.

At the end of successful wars, rulers would present booty, including captives, to Enlil and the other gods at Nippur.

In an effort to win the blessings of the gods and priests and people of Nippur, kings carried out expensive construction and restoration of the:

• temples
• public administrative buildings
• fortification walls

and canals.

The literary tradition that later attached itself so strongly to Sargon and Naram-Sin saw them not only as two of the most illustrious figures in the ancient world but also as rulers whose disastrous final years implied some stigma of ill-fate.

Sargon, following the usual public relations promotion of rebuilding Sumerian temples, had provided all of the cities of Sumeria, including Nippur’s Ekur temple, with renovation work and treasures for the god.

All of his sons followed in this ancient Sumerian tradition.

But during the Akkadian reign, Nippur was among the rebellious cities who chaffed at Semitic rule.

The priests of Nippur were not so foolish as to believe that the gifts of Sargon had been anything but a bribe to the gods offered by a foreign king.

The Sumerian People wanted to be free of the Semites and the rapacious moneylenders who stood behind the throne.

The priests of Nippur wanted to serve the gods and protect their people.

And the moneylenders and merchants of Sumeria wanted the wealth that was being siphoned away from them by the Dynasty of Sargon.

So, together the priests and the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] put their wealth and prestige behind whatever anti-Akkadian alliances arose.

We know from contemporary inscriptions that Naram-Sin had refurbished the Ekur temple and dedicated statues there celebrating his victories.

So, like his grandfather, Sargon, he had given the temple even more wealth.

But when rebellion broke out Naram-Sin did not forget his grandfather’s generosity or his own gifts toward what appeared to him as an ungrateful temple of priests at Nippur.

And knowing from his spies that the Sumerian moneylenders were involved in these rebellions and tribal uprisings, he decided to take the silver and gold that was helping to finance those revolutions.

Naram-Sin sacked Nippur as well as the Ekur temple.

His ships docked at the quay by the temple in order to load and carry off the loot to Agade.

Once again, the moneylenders and merchants had lost their wealth to the confiscations of a king, even though it was stored in the holiest temple of the greatest god.

Pillaging a temple was not something that was usually done in Sumeria since the armies on both sides feared all of the gods equally.

Very few individuals would dare to risk the curse of a god for doing so.

Sargon respected this and his humility before the gods can be seen in his kingly titles, which were comparatively modest and reflected little more than the titulary used by the Early Dynastic kings.

But under his grandson, Naram-Sin, a change took place so startling that it proved in the long run unacceptable.

Naram-Sin could dare to pillage Nippur’s temples because he considered himself a mighty king who was as strong as a god.

Naram-Sin adopted a naming style that was previously the exclusive prerogative of the gods.

On his own inscriptions his name appears preceded by the determinative for “divinity”, that is, the cuneiform sign “god” normally written before the name of a god.

The language in texts dedicated to him was even less reserved, and in these his servants address him not merely as divine but literally as “god of Agade”.

This divine form of name was adopted by Naram Sin’s son, Shar-kali-sharri, and the later kings of Ur and Isin.

Shar-Kali-Sharri (𒀭𒊬𒂵𒉌 𒈗𒌷, DShar-ka-li-Sharri;[3] died c. 2193 BC) reigned c. 2218–2193 BC (middle chronology) as the ruler of Akkad. In the early days of cuneiform scholarship the name was transcribed as “Shar-Gani-sharri” In the 1870s, Assyriologists thought Shar-Kali-Sharri was identical with the Sargon of Akkad, first ruler of the Akkadian Empire, but this identification was recognized as mistaken in the 1910s. His name was sometimes written with the leading Dingir sign demarking deification and sometimes without it. Clearly at some point he was deified and two of his designations marked his divine status, “heroic god of Akkade”, and “god of the land of Warium”. He was the son and successor of Naram-Sin who deified himself during his lifetime.

Although there is evidence to suggest a widespread cult of the divine king under the succeeding dynasty at Ur, the principle of a divine kingship was never wholeheartedly adopted in Mesopotamia.

Certainly, the deified Mesopotamian king was in no way comparable with the divine and absolute Pharaoh in Egypt.

Even divine Mesopotamian kings, along with their people, remained at all times subject to the will of the gods. [96]

Sargon and his sons, Rimush and Manishtushu, and his grandson Naram-Sin were adept at smothering rebellion.

The uncoordinated uprisings scattered around the Akkadian Empire were efficiently suppressed.

Remember, Sargon had torn down the walls of the Sumerian cities precisely as a preventative to such rebellion.

Without safe refuge and with Akkadian troops stationed in all cities, rebellion was difficult.

And the king was supported in all of his actions by his own Amorite:

• moneylenders
• priests
• merchants

But the Sumerian moneylenders not only wanted their confiscated wealth back, but they wanted the fruits of empire as well.

Since the Sumerian people, who had Akkadian troops stationed around their various cities, could not raise an army strong enough to defeat the Akkadians, the moneylenders and city governors devised a plan to induce the wild tribes of the mountains to attack the Akkadians. 

Far up in the mountains, away from the prying eyes of Akkadian spies, through:

• gifts
• bribes
• supply of bronze weapons

and promises of future wealth, the moneylenders hired an army of wild tribesmen to attack Akkad on many fronts.

This would be a recurring technique throughout history, Secret Fraud #15 of the Sumerian Swindle,

“Loans to friends are power; loans to enemies are weapons.”

By making loans to friends at low interest rates and easy terms, the moneylenders gained the goodwill and cooperation of people who acquiesce to becoming their friends and buying their goods.

The profits are low, but the power is great.

By making loans to enemies, regardless of the loan rates, the moneylenders give enemies strength.

In this case, the Sumerian moneylenders gave gifts as well as loans of:

• silver
• grain
• weapons

to the Gutian tribes and encouraged them to attack and loot the cities of Akkad.

To hide the Sumerian sources of Gutian financial backing, the moneylenders blamed the god, Enlil, for bringing the attacks upon the Akkadians.

According to the priests at Nippur, it was their furious god, Enlil, who brought down from the hills upon the fertile land the barbarous race of Gutians.

These savages disrupted communications and trade, upset and ruined the irrigation system, which always required:

• careful
• constant
• centralized

control and produced famine and death throughout the land.

To turn aside Enlil’s wrath from Sumeria and Akkad as a whole, eight of the senior gods undertook that Agade should itself be destroyed in reprisal for the violation of Nippur.

It has been plausibly argued that, in fact, the Gutians were neither the sole nor the deciding factor in the downfall of the Agade dynasty.

There is no indication in the Akkadian inscriptions that the Gutians were recognized as a menace sufficiently serious to disrupt this situation, and this can hardly be due to deliberate suppression of the truth, since conflict with rebellious city-states is freely mentioned. [97]

But the Akkadian inscriptions could only recognize overt threats of actual rebellions, not covert threats of secret alliances and subversive activity.

Because the Sumerians did not have walled cities as strongholds and with Sargon and his sons stationing troops throughout Sumeria, it was not possible for the Sumerian people to free themselves from foreign domination without outside help.

This help came from secret alliances with the mountain tribes of Gutia.

And these alliances could only have been arranged by the merchants and the envoys of the Sumerian leaders who traveled in disguise with the merchant caravans.

Rebellion is not something that occurs overnight but requires years of planning if it is to be successful.

Secrecy requires patience.

And the Sumerian moneylenders understood both secrecy and patience as well as the horrible penalty of discovery.

According to the cuneiform tablets, with the increasing rebellions within the cities and the increasing attacks from the mountain tribes, Naram Sin’s son, Shar-kali-sharri, appears to have tried to undo some of the mischief wrought by his father.

Several of his dedicatory inscriptions in which he describes himself as:

“the builder of the Ekur, the house of Enlil,”

show his panic-stricken piety as he attempted to appease the god for Naram-Sin’s looting and transgressions.

But appeasing the angry god did not help in the least to appease the conniving moneylenders and merchants of Lagash, Nippur and all of Sumeria.

With famine and desolation rampant, so the tablets continue, eight of the major Gods decide that for the good of Mankind, Enlil’s rage must be assuaged.

They vow to Enlil the total destruction of Agade and pronounce upon that city a lengthy curse: 

“May your groves be heaped up like dust…. 

May your clay [bricks] return to the depths of the earth…. 

May your palace built with joyful heart be turned into a depressing ruin…. 

Over the place where your rites and rituals were conducted may the fox who haunts the ruined mounds glide his tail…. 

May no human being walk because of snakes, vermin and scorpions….”

And concludes the poet-historian who wrote of the fall of the Akkadian Empire, such indeed was the case.

Thereafter, Agade remained desolate and uninhabited. [98]

The site of Agade remains unidentified today though it is almost certainly to be found in the vicinity of Kish or Babylon.

Indeed, it is possible that the city was situated somewhere within the later city boundaries of Babylon itself or even buried today in the ancient dust beneath streets and buildings of modern Baghdad.

No one knows.

The Third Dynasty of Ur and Ur-Nammu, 2250-2120 BC

The dynasty founded by Sargon the Great, though it endured for little more than a century, left a permanent imprint on Mesopotamian history.

Sargon’s administrative skills proved that many cities could be consolidated into a single empire, all with the central administrative city of Agade at its core.

Sargon’s empire, which had been financed by the Semitic moneylenders of Kish, flourished through its monopoly of the trade routes and its control of the silver mines.

With silver as the international medium of exchange:

• political power
• material goods

could be purchased across international boundaries with the cheap silver that Sargon’s empire dug out of the Taurus Mountains.

A shekel of silver that could buy a large quantity of grain, gained in its buying power when it was seized for free as war booty or mined from the Silver Mountains by debt-slaves for next to nothing.

Circulation of all of that free silver from:

• mining
• war booty
• tribute
• taxes

and loot, allowed the People to pay their debts with real metal, real metal that the phantom numbers of the tamkarum account books claimed as interest.

With their Sumerian Swindle paid off and with balanced account books, the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were ready to increase their investments.

With a larger empire, the moneylenders and merchants realized the enormous wealth that could be swindled more efficiently from larger numbers of people when the volume of business increased through international trade and taxes.

The government could be sustained with taxes, war booty and tribute while the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could be enriched with a monopoly over a larger market and by swindling the war booty away from the soldiers.

Unlike modern times, the moneylenders did not have an international interlocking monopoly over all finances in every country like they do today.

In 2200 BC, civilization was still young.

The moneylenders still worked in extended family groups, in clans, in city-wide cartels and in city-states where the guilds of several cities controlled prices.

Armed with the best weapons and fed with Sumerian grain, the Gutian tribes rushed out of the Zagros Mountains and attacked Akkad on a broad front.

As Sargon’s empire fell, the brunt of the Gutian attacks were directed against his grandson’s capital at Agade and the other cities of Akkad.

Since the war material, food and financing for the Gutian tribes came from the Sumerian moneylenders of Lagash, Nippur and other cities of Sumeria, the attacks avoided those cities and were directed at the center of Akkadian might to the north of Sumeria, that is, the cities of: 

• Agade
• Kish
• Babylon

and surrounding areas.

However, controlling wild barbarians once unleashed has never been a simple matter.

Although the Gutians’ allies were the Sumerians, some of the northern Sumerian cities inevitably suffered from the Gutian attacks.

Since their defensive city walls had been torn down by Sargon, they were easy pickings.

Yet, whether they were allies or not, the Gutians were like the 800-pound gorilla invited to dinner – friendly as long as he is fed but not at all easy to un-invite.

The defeat of Sargon’s grand-son, Naram-Sin, at the hands of the Gutians brought political confusion and anarchy as the Sumerians threw off the foreign domination and began to re-establish their society:

“just as it had always been,”

that is, devoted to serving the gods and living the peaceful life of agrarian society under Sumerian governors speaking the Sumerian language.

Although:

“just as it has always been”

was a good slogan for attracting the common people to fight in the battle, it also meant that the Sumerian moneylenders could practice the Sumerian Swindle:

“just as it had always been.”

The Twenty-One Secret Frauds of the Sumerian Swindle had been fully operational during the Akkadian occupation.

So, the People were glad to be offered a relief from the mounting debts and confiscations of the Semitic moneylenders of Akkad.

The Gutian destruction of the Akkadian Empire canceled all debts and tribute that the Sumerians had paid to their Semitic overlords.

As the empire of Sargon and Naram-Sin fell, the Akkadian temples were plundered and neither women nor children were spared.

The Akkadian moneylenders who had placed their trust in the protection of the gods by putting their silver on deposit in the temples lost everything.

While the impact of the Gutians was felt most severely in Akkad, in Sumeria only a few of the old city-states suffered some material damage in the first wave of barbarian invasion.

However, all of the Sumerian cities and, most importantly, the wealth of the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] remained virtually autonomous.

The Gutians knew who their friends and benefactors were.

Even though the Sumerian cities had no defensive walls, the Gutians spared both the Sumerian cities and the wealth of their “friends” the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant moneylenders]. 

Even though it was geographically close to the battles over Kish and Agade, one of the cities which suffered the least was Lagash.

This city had been rebuilt during the prosperous days of the Agade dynasty and immediately regained much of its old importance as a river-port.

Once the Akkadians were defeated and the Gutian troubles had subsided, Lagash was now able to recover much of its past splendor.

Lagash once again controlled the Tigress River trade from:

• Melukkha (India)
• Magan (Oman)
• Dilmun (Bahrain)

Even though they did not have an army at their command, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Sumeria were able to destroy the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Akkad.

Their use of outside military might was ingenious.

Without actually leading or controlling the Gutian hoards but merely through financing them, they were able to have their enemies destroyed and the Sumerian lands of their ancestry unencumbered.

But they still did not have a free hand in swindling the people because it was the priests of the temples and the governors and kings living in the city palaces who actually managed society, not the moneylenders.

And both kings and priests served the god and thereby saved the people.

So, the kings and priests were a constant impediment to the unrestrained, voracious greed of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

Although the Gutian rulers were the dominant political element throughout the seven or eight decades following the death of Naram-Sin; they were ignorant and illiterate tribesmen who ruled through military domination.

The Gutians were too primitive to understand the Sumerian Swindle and were perfectly happy with taxes and tribute alone.

They were illiterate tribal barbarians who were unfamiliar with the complexities of civilization.

They did not have the knowledge or skills to control large populations or to operate complex societies.

Besides, their homes were in the mountains.

They had conquered the Akkadians for the loot, not for the land.

For actually administering the cities and controlling the canals and the grain growing operations and businesses, the Gutians, content with tribute, appointed Sumerian governors.

A list of twenty-one so-called kings of the Gutian period is given in the Sumerian King List, but in view of their extremely short reigns (only one exceeded seven years and about half of them were three years or less) it seems likely that they were chiefs appointed for a limited term of office.

BLOODLINE: European Royal Bloodline of the American Presidents – Library of Rickandria

Later tradition emphasized the barbarity of the Gutians, and if their social organization was primitive, it is likely that kingship as a developed and permanent institution had not yet arisen among them.

Some of the later names in the list of Gutian rulers are Semitic, which indicates that assimilation of the barbarians was taking place.

A few dedication inscriptions show that, as was the custom of people living among resident gods, that they had adopted the religious cults of the land.

The Gutian period, which may be taken as beginning at about 2250 BC, during the reign of Naram-Sin’s son, was certainly at an end by 2120 BC.

In later days, the civilized peoples of Babylonia remembered the period of Gutian domination with abhorrence, as a time of barbarism. [99]

But it was also a time of profits for the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

The Gutians favored Lagash since their richest Sumerian allies lived there and because its Tigress River traffic and trade advantages brought supplies close to the overland routes into their Zagros homeland.

Lagash became the dominant city in southern Sumeria, controlling at times:

• Ur
• Umma
• Uruk

As their strength returned under the leadership of the governors of Lagash, the Sumerian people began to throw off, but not to completely eliminate, the Gutian barbarians.

The founder of the new Lagash dynasty of governors was Ur-Bau, who has left several dedicatory inscriptions recording his reconstruction of numerous temples in Lagash.

Ur-Baba or Ur-Bau (Sumerian: 𒌨𒀭𒁀𒌑 ur-Dba.ba6 or ur-Dba.U2, servant of the goddess Bau; died c. 2144 BC) was ensi of Lagash from 2093 BC – 2080 BC (short chronology) or 2157 BC – 2144 BC (middle chronology), roughly contemporaneous with the last king of Akkad, Shu-turul. In one of his inscriptions, he refers to himself as a child of the god Ninagal (Sumerian: 𒀭𒎏𒀉𒃲).  According to inscriptions of Ur-Baba, during his reign, Lagash enjoyed prosperity and independence from the Akkadians. His daughter Ninalla married Gudea, who succeeded him as ensi.

He was also in control of Ur.

He was influential enough to have his daughter installed as high priestess of the Moon God, Ur’s tutelary deity.

Note once again the importance that a king placed on having his daughter installed as high priestess of the guild deity of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

As governor, he controlled through his daughter, both the guild city of Ur and the temple of the Moon God where the moneylenders worshipped.

Ur-Bau had three sons-in-law:

Gudea

Gudea (Sumerian: 𒅗𒌤𒀀, Gu3-de2-a) was a Sumerian ruler (ensi) of the state of Lagash in Southern Mesopotamia, who ruled c. 2080–2060 BC (short chronology) or 2144–2124 BC (middle chronology). He probably did not come from the city, but had married Ninalla, daughter of the ruler Ur-Baba (2164–2144 BC) of Lagash, thus gaining entrance to the royal house of Lagash. He was succeeded by his son Ur-Ningirsu. Gudea ruled at a time when the center of Sumer was still ruled by the Gutian dynasty, and when the Akkadian king Ishtup-Ilum ruled to the north in Mari. Under Gudea, Lagash had a golden age and seemed to enjoy a high level of independence from the Gutians, a language isolate speaking people who had arrived from regions to the northeast of Mesopotamia.

Urgar

Nam-mahani

each of whom became governor of Lagash. [100]

FAMILY – Library of Rickandria

Gudea was the best-known of these.

Gudea’s authority extended well beyond Lagash – he claimed to be suzerain to Nippur and Uruk and even undertook a campaign to loot the Elamite city of Anshan.

But according to his inscriptions he was principally concerned with religion and in the building or restoration of temples and the fulfillment of his duties to the gods. [101]

The ancient ways as they:

“have always been”

had returned to Sumeria.

The:

• kings
• priests
• people

served the gods with piety and happiness.

And:

“just as it had always been”

the Treasonous Class of merchants and moneylenders served themselves with:

• usury
• fraud
• deceit

without the Akkadian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] siphoning away their profits.

The moneylenders were happy to have gotten rid of their Akkadian competitors but under the Sumerian governors of Lagash, the reforms of Urukagina had once again been instituted to limit their ruthless application of the Sumerian Swindle.

Once again, the kings and priests were standing between the moneylenders and their victims, the People.

Gudea’s peaceful face, reflecting his blissful piety, have become familiar to the modern student from the numerous statues of him that have been recovered.

Some of these carry long inscriptions recording his religious activities in connection with the building and rebuilding of Lagash’s more important temples.

From them we learn that, in spite of Gutian domination, Gudea had trade contacts with practically the entire “civilized” world of those days.

He obtained:

• gold from Anatolia and Egypt
• silver from the Taurus range
• cedars from the Amanus
• copper from the Zagros
• diorite from Egypt
• carnelian from Ethiopia

and timber from Dilmun (Bahrain).

Nor did he seem to f ind any difficulty in obtaining craftsmen from Susa and Elam for the decoration of his temples. [102]

“Cedar beams from the Cedar-mountain (Lebanon) He had landed on the quayside … ; Gudea had … bitumen and gypsum brought in … ships from the hills of Madga (Kirkuk) …. Gold dust was brought to the city-ruler from the Gold land (Armenia)…. Shining precious metal came to Gudea from abroad, Bright carnelian came from Melukha (the Indus valley).” [103]

And all of this was purchased with grain from the fertile soil of Sumeria, from manufactured trade goods and from taxes.

Regardless of the Gutian victories over the Akkadians, the Sumerian People demanded that their leaders fulfill their promises to make Sumeria like:

“it had always been.”

Both the Sumerian leaders and the Sumerian people believed that the Akkadian domination of them had been a result of neglecting their service to the gods.

So they were happy to rebuild temples and dedicate pious works.

Taxes were recycled back to the people through wages for labor in the rebuilding operations.

The Akkadian moneylenders had ruthlessly utilized the Sumerian Swindle, and the inevitable results had been excessively burdensome, so the governor of Lagash re-instituted Urukagina’s reforms of a hundred and twenty years earlier.

Society once again operated in the ancient and natural way with the People serving the gods while sustaining the government; and the governors serving the gods while protecting the People.

Ur-Ningirsu (Sumerian: 𒌨𒀭𒎏𒄈𒋢, Ur-D-nin-gir-su)[1] also Ur-Ningirsu II in contrast with the earlier Ur-Ningirsu I, was a Sumerian ruler (ensi) of the state of Lagash in Southern Mesopotamia who ruled c. 2110 BC. He was the son of the previous ruler of Lagash named Gudea.

Gudea was followed by his son, Ur-Ningirsu, and his grandson, Ugme, who between them ruled less than a decade.

They were succeeded by Urgar, another of Ur-Bau’s sons-in-law, whose rule, however, was ephemeral.

There then followed the third of Ur-Bau’s  sons-in-law, Namhani, who was probably governor of Umma as well as of Lagash.

The power of the Gutians in Sumerian society is reflected in a Sumerian year date under Namhani, who dates one of his inscriptions to the days when

“Yarlaganda was king of Gutium.” [104]

Sumerian society had once again attained the Ancient Way, but the Gutian barbarians were still there, collecting tribute.

Politics being what it is, alliances rise and fall as easily as taking off one cloak and putting on another.

The Gutians were very useful to the Sumerians for helping to rid them of Akkadian domination. 

Unlettered and barbaric as they were, the Gutians recognized the advantage of cooperating with the civilized moneylenders and governors of Sumeria.

As barbarians standing in awe of civilization, they allowed Sumerian culture to continue very much as:

“it had always been”

even taking on the Sumerian religion and culture and becoming more civilized, themselves.

The rich harvests of Mesopotamia gave them plenty of food and the silver and the trade goods of the merchants gave them the wealth through tribute and taxes that they could not glean from their mountain strongholds.

But the Sumerians, who had been managing their society for a thousand years, were not happy with the Gutian barbarians lording over them.

Gutian rule in Mesopotamia – Wikipedia

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], as well as the people, were losing money through the taxes and tribute required to support both the Sumerian government and the Gutian occupiers.

So, the Sumerian people were ready to support whomever Sumerian leaders could rid them of this burden.

They found their hero in Utu-hengal of Uruk.

Utu-hengal (Sumerian: 𒀭𒌓𒃶𒅅, Dutu-ḫe₂-g̃al₂), also written Utu-heg̃al, Utu-heĝal, and sometimes transcribed as Utu-hegal, Utu-hejal, Utu-Khengal, was one of the first native kings of Sumer after two hundred years of Akkadian and Gutian rule, and was at the origin of the foundation of the Third Dynasty of Ur by his son-in-law Ur-Nammu. He was officially “King of Uruk” in his inscriptions, and is therefore considered as the founder, and only member, of the “Fifth dynasty of Uruk” (Uruk V).

Utu-hengal led his people out of the wild, though benign, rule of the barbarian Gutians and into the grasping claws of the merchant-moneylenders.

Warring against armed invaders requires both armaments and food.

And these cost lots of silver.

Who else had lots of silver other than the moneylenders who only loaned it out for a price?

The price that the moneylenders asked of Utu-hengal was a return to:

“the way it has always been”

– but not with the debt-easing reforms of Urukagina that the governors of Lagash were practicing under Gutian protection.

What the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] wanted was the:

“way it has always been”

with the merchant-moneylenders practicing the Sumerian Swindle without restraints.

With the backing of the moneylenders and the patriotism and blood of the People, Utu-hengal of Uruk arose to break the Gutian yoke and to bring back the kingship to Sumeria. [105]

Utu-hengal of Uruk (2120-2114 BC) drove out the last of the Gutians and was duly recognized at Nippur as “King of the Four Regions” (a title first employed by Naram-Sin).

Utu-hengal was included in the Sumerian King List.

Sumerian King List – Wikipedia

This marks the re-emergence of the system of centralized government employed by Naram-Sin; subordinate city-states were ruled through governors who recognized Utu-hengal as overlord.[106]

However, a popular uprising against the Gutian rule was not sufficient because good leadership of the post-war empire was also necessary.

Although Utu-hengal of Uruk could free the country of barbarians, he did not understand the basic threat to the wellbeing of the people that was caused by the invisible and pervasive Treasonous Class.

In exchange for their support, he had agreed to do away with Urukagina’s reforms.

For Utu-hengal, returning Sumeria to the way that:

“it had always been”

meant allowing the moneylenders and merchants to swindle the People just as they had always done.

So, high prices, false weights and measures from the thieving merchants; loansharking, foreclosures and debt-slavery from the greedy moneylenders; and extortionate transportation costs from the boatmen were once again allowed to increase under his rule.

Utu-hengal freed his people from the barbarian Gutians but he then turned them over to the ruthless swindles of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

In spite of his resounding victory in ridding the country of the Gutian barbarians, Utu-hengal did not long hold power over Sumeria.

He had the military strength, but he lacked the moral strength to hold together a religious people.

Under Utu-hengal’s rule, the people were being once again defrauded and swindled by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

They cried out to their priests for relief.

After some seven years of corrupt rule, Utu-hengal’s throne was usurped by Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC), one of his more ambitious governors, who succeeded in founding the last important Sumerian dynasty, commonly known as the Third Dynasty of Ur.

Ur-Nammu (or Ur-Namma, Ur-Engur, Ur-Gur, Sumerian: 𒌨𒀭𒇉, ruled c. 2112 BC – 2094 BC middle chronology) founded the Sumerian Third Dynasty of Ur, in southern Mesopotamia, following several centuries of Akkadian and Gutian rule. Though he built many temples and canals his main achievement was building the core of the Ur III Empire via military conquest, and Ur-Nammu is chiefly remembered today for his legal code, the Code of Ur-Nammu, the oldest known surviving example in the world. He held the titles of “King of Ur, and King of Sumer and Akkad”. His personal goddess was Ninsuna.

The Third Dynasty of Ur (2112-2004 BC) was a time of revival for all things Sumerian.

The people glorified their ancient past, the Sumerian language was spoken once again, and the entire Sumerian culture was revived:

“just as it had always been.”

Ur-Nammu, who reigned for sixteen years, proved to be a capable military leader, a great builder, and an outstanding administrator.

He promulgated the first law code in man’s recorded history. [107]

At this point, I want to emphasize something in regard to laws.

Laws are not usually made for no reason at all.

When a need arises in society, laws are made to address that need.

Just laws are made to protect both the people and society from those who would do harm.

Unjust laws are made to protect the corrupt from just retribution.

Merely because a law is created, does not mean that such a law is necessarily a just law.

Some laws are created by corrupt officials that are unjust and designed to benefit only certain classes of people while causing injustice and harm to the rest of society.

Modern society is filled with examples of this.

So, again, I caution not to consider the ancient people to be inferior especially because they have proven to be superior to us in many ways.

Be this as it may, Ur-Nammu is the first leader in history to see the injustices in his society and to try to correct them in an enduring way with written laws.

In the previous three thousand years, what society had experienced was the usual tyranny of the strong over the weak and the rich over the poor.

Although everyone could see the injustice in this, the problem had never before been addressed other than with the uneven and patched-together opinions over the millennia of the priests and kings and governors who were, themselves, not bound to any established reference of justice other than the opinions of their own minds and the urgings of their own hearts.

Up until the time of Ur-Nammu, what laws there had been, were oral laws, laws that the king would declare but which were quickly forgotten, oral laws that did not survive the king.

According to Sumerian belief, Mankind had been created by the gods to serve the gods.

All that was necessary in Life was to do one’s duty toward one’s god.

One’s duty was very much as each man saw such a duty, combined with daily prayer and offerings.

Other than this, there were no hard and fast rules of conduct for men except for the traditional mores involved in:

• marriage
• theft
• murder

Marriage was handled in a tribal way between kin.

Theft required a double replacement of the goods and murder required execution or banishment.

These were all obvious social and legal situations that could be recognized by everyone.

But even as society grew and evolved, the more subtle crimes of usury and its related corruptions of:

• poverty
• confiscation
• foreclosure
• slavery
• cruelty
• debauchery
• prostitution

and warfare, were not understood as being interrelated phenomenon.

Nor were the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and their Sumerian Swindle recognized as the prime cause and profiteers of those crimes.

But Ur-Nammu could witness with his own eyes the evil that had resulted which came from those who practiced money lending and dishonesty under the protection of king Utu-hengal.

So, as a means of gaining political power through promises to the people, he put a stop to those abuses of the moneylenders, and he made laws to restrict them.

With written laws, the power of both the king’s decree and the power of the written contract were combined to give the common man a solid point of reference.

With written laws, Ur-Nammu made a contract with the People.

This contract was composed of laws that the king decreed along with the punishments to be meted out to those who broke the law, all ensconced within the unchangeable and eternal words written on the clay tablets for all to see.

Among the many and varied documents of the Third Dynasty of Ur, a special group, largely from Lagash, reveal the structure and operation of an elaborate judicial system.

Entemena, also called Enmetena (Sumerian: 𒂗𒋼𒈨𒈾, EN-TE-ME-NA; fl. c. 2400 BC[4]), was a son of Enannatum I who re-established Lagash as a power in Sumer. He defeated Il in a territorial conflict through an alliance with Lugal-kinishe-dudu of Uruk, successor to Enshakushanna, who is in the king list. The tutelary deity Shul-utula was his personal deity.[6] His reign lasted at least 19 years.

Although the royal proclamation of social reforms and remission of debts was already known under two earlier governors of Lagash – Entemena and Urukagina – it is Ur-Nammu who is especially remembered as the promulgator of the world’s first-known law code.

Court procedure is clearly shown in court records known as ditilla, literally “case closed”, the phrase with which these tablets end.

Proceedings were heard occasionally before the king himself, but more often by his govenors or his judges.

Cases involved such subjects as breach of contract and disputed inheritance of property.

From documents dealing with marriage law it is clear that the legal position of Sumerian women was equal to that of men.

This equality should be noted because, over the centuries, as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] gained wealth and power, the position of women deteriorated.

Penalties were financial, not corporal.

Because they were not Semites, lex talionis was unknown, or is at least unrecorded by the Sumerians at this period. [108]

Eye for an eye – Wikipedia

Even in modern times, Ur-Nammu’s justice, piety and humanity shines brightly from his words written on those 4000-year-old tablets of clay.

Again note, laws are generally made to address a social problem. 

Studying his words will give us insight into his solutions for the problems of his times.

In the Laws of Ur-Nammu:

“The mighty warrior, king of the city of Ur, of the lands of Sumer and Akkad … he established 21,600 silas (liters) of barley, 30 sheep, 30 silas (liters) of butter per month as regular offerings in the land.”

In this way, in his piety, he insured that the temples and priests were provided for while limiting what they could take from the people to a set number of supplies.

After all, it was the eternal gods whom they were serving, not a growing crowd of priestly families. 

“I, Ur-Nammu, mighty warrior, lord of the city of Ur, king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad, by the might of the Moon God, Nanna, my lord, by the true command of the Sun God, Utu, I established justice in the land.”

He promoted Namhani to be the governor of the city of Lagash.

He re-established the trade between Magan (Oman) and Ur.

This re-routed the Persian Gulf trade from Lagash to the quays of Ur.

At that time, the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] had swindled the fields away from the People.

These fields, Ur-Nammu returned to the rightful owners.

The practice of taking away the livelihood of the People by confiscating their sheep and oxen was done away with.

He righted whatever wrongs the People brought before him.

Pirates (sea captains) were also a problem in the Persian Gulf.

He established:

“freedom for the Akkadians and foreigners in the lands of Sumer and Akkad, for those conducting foreign maritime trade free from the sea-captains, for the herdsmen free from those (rustlers, thieves and moneylenders) who appropriate oxen, sheep and donkeys.”

He waged war against Anshan and freed the cities of:

• Akshak
• Marad
• Girkal
• Kazallu
• Usarum

and their settlements from oppression by the Gutians and the ravenous moneylenders.

He freed the people from the thefts and frauds of the merchants by standardizing the weights and measures.

No longer could the merchants buy a farmer’s produce using large measures and heavy weights and then re-sell the produce using small measures and light weights.

The river boatmen were also monopolizing the traffic and raising their prices for transporting goods and passengers. Ur-nammu put a stop to this and regulated the traffic, requiring inspections of goods and standardization of transportation charges.

Along with the river traffic, he made the roads safe for travel.

Like most modern-day leaders and politicians, Ur-Nammu did not actually understand the moneylenders’ fraud of the Sumerian Swindle.

But he could see with his own eyes and feel with his own heart the wrongness that was the result.

So, he forbad the enslaving of people for debt.

Unlike our craven modern politicians who allow the bankers and credit card swindlers to defraud our wealth and impoverish our modern nations in their entirety, Ur-Nammu did not allow the rich and powerful to take advantage or defraud the poor and the weak.

The widow could no longer be enslaved for the debts of her dead husband.

The orphan could no longer be enslaved for the debts of his dead parents.

Ur-Nammu did not allow the moneylenders to seize and enslave people for debt.

If they did so, they would be imprisoned and pay 15 shekels of silver to their victim.

Slavery was an accepted social position in those ancient times, so Ur Nammu made just laws to protect both the slaves and the masters.

Ur-Nammu put a stop to the excesses of the moneylenders.

But, like so many leaders who followed him, he did not put a stop to lending-at-interest simply because:

“it has always been here.”

Dishonest swindle that it is, he overlooked its criminality because it was practiced long before he was born.

So, he accepted lending-at-interest as an ordinary business model.

In the Laws of Ur-Nammu, he stated:

“I did not deliver the orphan to the rich, I did not deliver the widow to the mighty.

I did not deliver the man with but one shekel to the man with 60 shekels.

I did not deliver the man with but one sheep to the man with one ox.”

He did not place his own relatives over the citizens of the various towns as had been done by most previous kings and governors, but he settled them in their own lands and did not allow them to tell him how to run the empire.

“I did not impose orders, I eliminated enmity, violence and cries for justice.

I established justice in the land.”

Unlike the modern Jewish lawyers and Communists who tear down society by promoting murder and crime while they protect criminals from justice, Ur-Nammu used his God-given common sense in his Laws.

“If a man commits a homicide, they shall kill that man.”

What is unusual about this law is that it protected the poor from being murdered by the rich as well as the rich being murdered by the poor.

In those early days of somewhat lawless societies, if a rich moneylender could not collect the principle and interest on a loan, he could enslave and beat the debtor.

If he killed him, there was not anything except personal vendetta that the poor could do.

Likewise, after a moneylender had seized a farm or enslaved a beloved daughter, the poor might retaliate with a physical attack.

Walking in the marketplace or in the countryside became dangerous pastimes for a moneylender if his vengeful victims could hide in wait some dark night and beat or kill him.

With Ur Nammu’s Laws, both the rich and the poor were equally punished for murder.

In disputes, where the judges could not make a determination of truth, the divine River Ordeal was used to determine truth from falsehood.

The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature | Harvard Theological Review | Cambridge Core

There was none of the lex talionis “eye for an eye” cruelty of the Semites in the Laws of Ur-Nammu.

If a man brought physical injury to another, the law merely prescribed a payment in silver, not the reprisal of an equal injury committed upon him. [109]

It is not merely as a lawgiver that Ur-Nammu’s memory should be cherished but as an example of a true leader in the Natural Way of Life, a king who served God by also serving his people. 

Ur-nammu was a rarity among men.

It was also rare for a king to die in battle.

Ur Nammu – to judge from the statement that:

“he had been abandoned in the battlefield like a crushed vessel”

– probably died in battle with the Gutians, who, in spite of Utu-hengal’s great victory, continued to trouble Sumeria throughout the period of the Third Dynasty of Ur.

He was succeeded by his son, Shulgi, who ruled forty-eight years and ushered in a period of relative peace and prosperity for Sumeria. [110]

Shulgi (𒀭𒂄𒄀 dšul-gi, formerly read as Dungi) of Ur was the second king of the Third Dynasty of Ur. He reigned for 48 years, from c. 2094 – c. 2046 BC (Middle Chronology). His accomplishments include the completion of construction of the Great Ziggurat of Ur, begun by his father Ur-Nammu. On his inscriptions, he took the titles “King of Ur”, “King of Sumer and Akkad”, adding “King of the four corners of the universe” in the second half of his reign. He used the symbol for divinity (𒀭) before his name, marking his apotheosis, from at least the 21st year of his reign and was worshipped in the Ekhursag palace he built. Shulgi was the son of Ur-Nammu king of Ur and his queen consort Watartum.

It was a time when the People served god, the king protected the people, and the merchants and moneylenders were restrained in their greed.

And all was well.

Shulgi was also motivated by economic concerns.

He was anxious to expand the northeastern trade routes, which afforded access to lapis lazuli for jewelry and tin for the manufacture of bronze. [111]

Leaders of society cannot ignore the economic needs of society.

But like so many other leaders, the corrosive effects of those who operated the Sumerian Swindle went uncorrected, like festering boils on society as the various merchants and moneylenders in every city worked their swindles.

Politically, however, the most important feature of the new dynasty was the return to prominence of the city of Ur.

Already at an earlier period (around 2600 B.C.) Ur had been a leading center of Sumerian civilization, and it was in royal tombs of that period that Sir Leonard Woolley discovered the famous art treasures with which his name is associated.

Now, at about 2100 BC, Ur had become the capital of the Third Dynasty of Ur, which governed the whole of Mesopotamia with an efficient bureaucracy.

Wealth flowed into the capital by way of the Persian Gulf.

We have some of the actual trading documents showing that the great temple of Ur exported textiles and cooking oil to the distant port of Magan (Oman), in exchange for:

• copper
• beads
• ivory

[112]

Although the merchant-moneylenders could not get back everything that they had lost because of the reforms of Urukagina and the Laws of Ur-Nammu, or from the thefts by the Semitic invaders of Sargon, or the tribute paid to the Gutians, they knew that time was on their side.

“Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower.”

was Secret Fraud #10 of the Sumerian Swindle.

As long as a moneylender can charge interest on a loan, simple arithmetic proves that he can, with enough time, own the entire world.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and their scribes had long known Secret Fraud #14 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“Anyone who is allowed to lend at-interest eventually owns the entire world.”

This was powerful incentive for the tamkarum.

With such knowledge, the moneylenders made it a part of their strategy to make ownership of the entire world their main goal.

Driven by the relentless arithmetic of the Sumerian Swindle, it could be no other way for them.

Either the Sumerian Swindle would be discovered for the fraud that it is and stopped by the People and the Kings, or it would continue and all nations and all people on earth would become the private property and slaves of the moneylenders.

There were no other options.

The Sumerian Swindle that the ancient bankers worked, is the same that the modern bankers are today using to defraud the people of wealth and freedom.

Again, it’s just simple arithmetic.

Again, consider its simplicity.

Let’s say there are only two shekels of silver in the world and a banker has one of them and the other is in circulation in the society.

Let’s say this moneylender loans his shekel out at fifty percent interest.

What comes back to him is one and a half shekels of silver, leaving one-half shekel in circulation among the people.

Now, if the banker again loans out one shekel at fifty percent interest, what comes back to him is again one and a half shekels of silver.

He now possesses both shekels.

He now possesses all of the money in the world.

The people no longer have any money to circulate and so a Depression is created, businesses fail, and people are no longer employed, and society suffers.

The only one with money is the banker who is able to use the wealth that he has swindled to buy up cheap properties.

And if he again loans out the money, since there is nothing left in circulation, he is able to confiscate all of the real property that was put up as collateral.

So, if bankers are allowed to loan-money-at-interest, eventually through simple arithmetic, the banks come into possession of all of the wealth and all of the property on earth.

It’s just simple arithmetic.

But it is also an ancient secret that the bankers want to keep hidden.

How else can you be swindled unless you are also deceived?

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Jews Deceiving the Gentiles – Library of Rickandria

The Third Dynasty of Ur was Sumerian civilization in its most fully developed form.

Tablets in vast numbers have been excavated from the period of the Third Dynasty of Ur – perhaps fifteen thousand legal, administrative and economic documents already translated and published, and perhaps a hundred thousand or more still untranslated and unpublished.

Texts from Umma also provide an extraordinary picture of day-to-day administration.

Daily numbers of men:

• working in the fields
• digging canals
• harvesting
• loading

and towing canal boats were recorded.

The amount of work completed was noted, and rates of work and pay minutely calculated. 

Female workers were tabulated:

• cutting reeds
• draining fields
• harvesting

and as weavers.

Ration texts detail the issue of “pay” in the form of:

• beer
• bread
• oil
• onions
• seeds

for seasoning and fish.

Beer was a basic commodity, and its quality was carefully controlled.

Inspections were often carried out, according to one text by a royal princess, and in another, by a constable of the king;

“ordinary”

“royal”

“strong”

and “weak” beer were brewed.

Closely associated with the control of state herds, was a profitable industry in wool and leather. 

Merchants were only allowed to operate by royal warrant.

They imported a great variety of goods by land and sea:

• exotic foods
• aromatic woods
• fruits and herbs
• raw materials for industries such as tanning and metalworking
• timber for roof beams and shipbuilding.

Such items were paid for largely with agricultural products such as:

• wool
• barley
• wheat
• dates
• fish oil
• dried fish and skins

Silver had become a standard of value.

Silver served as a medium of account, thus already fulfilling all of the classical functions of money.

Long lists of commodities valued in silver provide the earliest price index for the staples of Mesopotamian life. [113]

These price lists not only established prices but also indexed the various goods in relation to silver so that they could be used directly in barter.

Again, silver was a commodity money, not a true money.

The ancient Near East was a barter economy.

At Ur, the quays too were rebuilt, and a year name early in Ur-Nammu’s reign records:

“the return of the ships of Magan (Oman) and Meluhka (India) into the hands of (the Moon God) Nanna.”

Ur Nammu’s devotion to the ancient shrines, particularly at Nippur, brought him recognition there by Enlil’s priesthood and early in his reign he adopted a new title, “King of Sumer and Akkad”, which was to assume great importance in the succeeding centuries.

His coronation at Nippur was commemorated in a new literary genre, the so-called royal hymn, which was addressed not to the gods but to the king himself “as a g o d”

The exalted position of the kings of Ur is even more evident during the reign of Shulgi, who not only continued his father’s:

• administrative
• architectural
• literary

interests, but went one step further in emulating the later Agade kings.

Sometime early in his reign he assumed divine status.

Shrines were erected for him.

Local manifestations of the royal god were worshipped and more royal hymns composed in his honor than are known for any other Mesopotamian king.

Like Sargon and Naram-Sin, Shulgi became in later times a favorite literary figure.

Both the great scribal schools at Nippur and at Ur traced their foundation to him.

And he was a devoted patron of Sumerian literature and culture, even claiming to have been trained in his youth as a scribe.

Such education was as rare for a Mesopotamian king as it was for most members of society.[114]

Besides the temple priests, only the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had a high literacy rate since written contracts and calculations for silver amounts were their business.

Direct archaeological evidence witnesses to a considerable material prosperity at this time, in that almost everywhere traces of building activity are discernible.

Ur-Nammu built or rebuilt temples in many of the ancient cities, including:

• Uruk
• Lagash
• Nippur

and Eridu, but his most striking work was at his capital, Ur.

Here he rebuilt, in honor of the Moon god Nanna, the ziggurat, a great rectangular stepped tower in three stages, – about two hundred feet by one hundred and fifty at the base and perhaps seventy feet high with a shrine on top.

This gigantic stack of mud bricks, restored by later kings, still stands today as a monument to the piety of Ur-Nammu. [115]

But the Third Dynasty of Ur collapsed after about a century, leaving Sumer and Akkad in temporary chaos.

The main factor in the collapse was a fresh movement of Semitic peoples, this time the group called the Amurru. [116]

“Amurru” in Sumerian means “west”.

These people from the West became known to us as Amurru or Amorites.

It was difficult to keep these people out of Mesopotamia because the land was relatively flat and lacked any natural defenses other than the mud-brick walls of the cities, the military skills of the governors, and the fighting spirit of the people.

In all of these categories, it is always the fighting spirit and morale of the People that is the paramount and most vital element.

When this spirit is weakened or subverted or diluted in any way, all other factors cannot fill the breech.

The Third Dynasty of Ur was strong and prosperous, but it could not withstand the subterranean and corrosive influence of the moneylenders and merchants.

Once again, the Treasonous Class of merchant-moneylenders worked diligently to enrich themselves at the expense of and the very existence of their own people.

The Sumerian tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] had prospered during the Third Dynasty of Ur, indeed, all of the People had prospered when they served God.

The greed of the merchants was kept in check by the king because they were only allowed to do business under a royal warrant or license.

With over-sight by the king’s agents, profits were reduced because false weights and measures, excessive interest rates, illegal seizures of debt-slaves and property and other of their criminal tricks were not allowed.

And yet, the Sumerian Swindle was still their secret method for over-coming such obstacles. 

Just:

“as it had always been”

the moneylenders and landlords of Mesopotamia had been renting and selling the land to foreigners and hiring cheap immigrant labor to enrich themselves throughout the entire history of Sumeria.

By mixing foreigners into the native population, they were diluting the morale and spirit of the People and creating mixed loyalties, all while stuffing their counting houses with silver and their barns with grain.

Immigrants gave them cheap labor to farm their foreclosed fields and orchards and to undermine the native labor of the Sumerian workers.

Because they had to lower their own wages in order to compete with the cheap immigrant labor, the People were reduced to a lower economic level and robbed of the income necessary to pay their debts to the moneylenders.

Thus, immigrant labor brought poverty and enslavement to the People while enriching the moneylenders.

As the Amorite immigrants displaced the Sumerian workers, unemployed Sumerian workers were hired by the kings and city governors as soldiers to defend the ever-increasing wealth of the awilum [the Haves].

Although the Laws of Ur-Nammu ameliorated the rapacity of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] over the People, his laws did not prevent their subversion of the State.

Subversion of the State and impoverishment of the People are the inevitable results of the Sumerian Swindle.

The Laws of Ur-Nammu also put the moneylenders on alert.

Their swindles were not understood by the people, the priests or by the kings because the Sumerian Swindle was accepted from ancient times just:

“as it had always been”

Lending-at-interest and its related frauds and swindles were simple like a lever and fulcrum.

As simple as a lever is, its power can move the world.

The methods of the Sumerian Swindle are also simple, so simple that it is easy to overlook their diabolical power.

The people of Sumeria respected the ancient ways that they had followed for thousands of years.

Yet the unjustness of the resulting poverty and enslavement that money lending led to, was obvious to all.

As society prospered, the various family groups could avoid borrowing at interest from the moneylenders merely by following the ancient way of loaning to one another within the family. 

This could avoid interest payments while simultaneously strengthening family bonds and family wealth.

It was most efficiently practiced within large families.

The large and conspiring moneylender families and guilds wanted to prevent this from happening since it reduced their incomes.

Their greatest profits came from ignorant and illiterate people who could not read written contracts or understand either simple or compound interest rates.

So, the solution to the problem of too many Sumerian people understanding the moneylenders’ swindle was to eliminate the more intelligent Sumerians and substitute them with ignorant victims.

Thus, both war and immigration became tools in the moneylenders’ technique at a very early time.

War was used to kill off the best and the brightest of the people while immigration was used to substitute less intelligent people to take the Sumerian peoples’ place on the debt-slavery treadmill.

In this way, Secret Fraud #11 of the Sumerian Swindle was perfected:

“Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are impoverished.”

No matter what king ruled or what god resided in the temples, all of society ran smoothly on the invention of silver as a means of exchange for goods and services.

Silver was not a true money.

It was a type of commodity money.

It was an ingenious method for helping society function smoothly, like oil lubricating a machine.

Silver was a good and natural invention for commercial exchange as long as commercial exchange was its sole function.

When silver (as a type of commodity money) was used to generate profits through interest and usury, it became a perverse and unnatural creature controlled by perverse and unnatural men. 

Those who understood money were the only ones who profited from money while all others became the slaves of the moneylenders – all others included:

• kings
• governors
• priests

and people.

Everybody became slaves except the moneylenders.

Although the bankers and moneylenders had slyly and surreptitiously enslaved the people, they were not the masters of the people; they were the betrayers of the people.

The scheming moneylenders were well aware of the Sumerian Swindle and the secret frauds and powers of money.

They profited from the fools who didn’t understand that moneylending-at-interest is a hoax and swindle.

For the criminal tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], their only concern was in obtaining more wealth so as to buy more power and then to use that power to gain more wealth.

And they devised a variety of stratagems for their successful acquisitions of both.

As previously explained, the “illegal aliens” of Mesopotamia – the immigrants, the Amorite shepherds and goat herders, the cheap foreign laborers from other countries whom the Treasonous Class had imported – became a prime method for the moneylenders to enrich themselves and undermine the nation.

Most, but not all, of these immigrant laborers were Semitic Amorites from the Arabian deserts to the west and the Syrian plains to the northwest.

Other non-Semitic peoples were also in evidence at this time, in particular the Hurrians, who became of high importance later in the middle of the second millennium.

There were already Hurrian workers at Nippur during Sargon’s Dynasty (~2334-2150 BC).

They were employed in manufacturing garments and were probably prisoners-of-war taken in the Zagros mountains.

A coalition of peoples in the west also came into military conflict with Naram-Sin, inflicting upon him a severe defeat. [117]

So, there were a variety of different peoples with different language groups who were eager to acquire for themselves the fertile plains and advanced culture of Mesopotamia.

But by far the largest group of these people were the Semitic Amorites whose many wives produced children:

“countless as the sands of the sea.”

References to these Amorites become more and more frequent during the Third Dynasty of Ur. 

One passage shows the contempt of the city dwelling Sumerians for the savage desert dwellers, who are described as:

“the Amurru, . . . who eats raw meat, who has no house in his lifetime, and after he dies lies unburied.”

Quickly, however, these Amorites ceased to be despised desert savages and became a despised threat to the security and the very existence of the Third Dynasty of Ur.

Some of the rulers of that dynasty built fortifications against these people.

Such measures did not, however, succeed in holding back the mounting pressure.

The ancient cities gradually fell under the domination of the Amorites.

But it was a domination through subversion rather than through warfare.

These foreigners had “friends” behind the city walls, friends who were eager to sell them land and make them loans of silver and grain.

Under the empire of the Third Dynasty of Ur there was a considerable amount of peaceful penetration into Babylonia by the Amorites, as the presence of West Semitic names in lists of temple personnel clearly shows.

The merchant-moneylenders once again used the trick that had worked so well for them for twenty-five centuries.

They sold the foreclosed land to foreigners.

With their contacts and business associates scattered along the trade routes of the ancient Near East, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had become an international treason organization.

They were a secret menace that continued with its underground existence while its members went about their lives as respected members of society doing business and making loans just as:

“it had always been”

But the Amorites were not fools.

They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Sumerian farmers.

So, their natural suspicions prompted them to ask,

“Why are you selling the land to us?

Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?”

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready answer to overcome such an objection.

“What are those people to us?” they replied.

“They are not our friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm.

We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy land and purchase property.

As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help them buy the best farms and the finest orchards.

But still, they hate us for our goodness and generosity because they are full of hatred. 

But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying the land.”

SPRITUALITY: SPIRITUAL AWAKENING: So, Your Spiritual Awakening Cost You Some Friends – Library of Rickandria

And so, the bargain was made.

The Amorites had no reason to hate the Sumerian moneylenders — yet.

So, they accepted the offers of cheap land.

And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new immigrants, those Amorites who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time at low interest rates.

Like bloodsucking fleas, the Sumerian moneylenders jumped from their old victims who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their:

• friends
• guides
• mentors

The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around its prey.

EDUCATION: Dollar Symbol & Caduceus – Library of Rickandria

Its bite would come later.

With their high birth rate as a result of many wives and unlimited sexual proclivities, the expansion of Semitic people continued for about two centuries and left a lasting mark on the culture of the area in its:

• political
• religious
• social

aspects.

These immigrants (referred to by modern authorities variously as East Canaanites, West Semites or Amorites) settled in a number of ancient centers where they formed kingdoms which showed some important differences from the earlier Sumerian temple-states.

They were different, too, from the last independent Sumerian political unit, the Third Dynasty of Ur.

One of the main differences was in the conception of land tenure.

In the original pattern of Sumerian society, the city’s land belonged to the local god, while in the Semitic conception land could be owned by the clan, the king or the private citizen. [118]

It was this conception of private property that the land-owning and slave-owning moneylenders desired to perpetuate.

They wanted to maintain ownership of their loot by claiming that “property rights” were superior to either the “rights of kings” or “the rights of the gods” or the “rights of the people.”

The rights of the moneylenders to own all property and to enslave all people, was the only rights that they were interested in promoting.

Since they could not convince the religious Sumerians of this, it was the conspiracy of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds to use immigrant labor and foreign kings to promote their schemes through subversion and treason.

After all, their trade routes “embraced” all countries.

The Third Dynasty of Ur finally crumbled under the pressure of Amorite immigrants who had attained positions of authority and who then betrayed the Sumerians.

At first, city after city ceased to acknowledge the sovereignty of Ur.

The final overthrow of the Dynasty was, however, not actually the work of the Amorites, but of the Elamites (from southern Persia), who seized the opportunity offered by Semitic betrayal to sack and occupy Ur, slaughtering the inhabitants and carrying away the king.

This stunning blow, marking the final overthrow of the Sumerians as a political power, shows clear evidence in the relics of destruction found when Ur was excavated.

This disastrous event was long remembered through the cuneiform writings of Babylonia. [119]

The fall of Ur marks the beginning of what archeologists have named the Old Babylonian Period (2000-1750 BC), a time of contentious Amorite city-states.

This destruction of the Third Dynasty of Ur was brought about by and is an example of the reliance of these people on their gods.

The fear that the Sumerians had of their gods created much superstition.

In fact, the fear that all people in the ancient world had for their gods was remarkable.

Omens and predictions based upon such things as the markings in the liver of a sheep could determine the choices that men and women made in their lives.

Which way a certain kind of bird flew in the morning, the direction smoke traveled, dust-devils on the desert, whether a dog howled in the night, the meaning of one’s dreams and thousands of other omens were looked for and accepted as messages from the gods for a man’s daily choices in life.

RELIGION: SATANISM: How to Interpret & Understand the Messages of the Gods – Library of Rickandria

Important decisions such as whether or not to go to war were made solely on the divination over a sheep’s liver.

One example of this was the last king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, who had been cursed by the markings on a sheep’s liver.

Modern archeologists have heaped much distain upon the unfortunate Ibbi-Sin for his weakness in defending his Sumerian empire.

His cuneiform letters are full of begging and fearful pleading to his subordinates as he attempted to hold the crumbling empire together.

But he had inherited an empire that his own father, Shu-Sin, had cursed by believing the omens found in a sheep’s liver.

Shu-Sin, also Šu-Suen (Akkadian: 𒀭𒋗𒀭𒂗𒍪: DŠuDSîn, after the Moon God Sîn”, the “𒀭” being a silent honorific for “Divine”, formerly read Gimil-Sin) was king of Sumer and Akkad and was the fourth king of the Ur III dynasty. He succeeded his father Amar-Sin, and reigned 2037–2028 BC (Middle Chronology).

Shu-Sin’s inscriptions predicted the disasters that would befall his son and successor, Ibbi-Sin (2028-2004 BC). [120]

And Ibbi-Sin believed that these predictions would come to pass.

So, regardless of his own intelligence, he was a victim of superstitious prediction that – avoid it though he tried – came to pass through his acceptance of its inevitability.

His surviving letters attest to his pitiful pleas for help from treacherous allies.

And they record his Sumerian reliance upon the will of the gods.

In his case, the predictions that a priest made over a sheep’s liver became a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Ibbi-Sin succeeded in holding on as ruler of Sumeria for twenty-four years.

But throughout his reign his situation was insecure and even pathetic.

Much of the time he was confined to the city of Ur itself, which often suffered from hunger and famine.

As a result of the incursions of the Amorites and the attacks of the Elamites, his empire finally tottered and crumbled while the governors of all the more important cities of Sumeria found it advisable to abandon their king and to fend for themselves.

We learn of this piteous state of affairs primarily from Ibbi Sin’s correspondence with his provincial governors, which provides a graphic picture of the rather confused and pathetic Ibbi-Sin and of his:

• scheming
• ambitious
• double-dealing

functionaries.

One such was an Amorite governor by the name of Ishbi-Erra, who was in charge of the city of Isin.

Ishbi-Erra (Akkadian: 𒀭𒅖𒁉𒀴𒊏 diš-bi-ir₃-ra) was the founder of the dynasty of Isin, reigning from c. 2017— 1986 BC (MC). Ishbi-Erra was preceded by Ibbi-Sin of the third dynasty of Ur in ancient Lower Mesopotamia, and then succeeded by Šu-ilišu. According to the Weld-Blundell Prism, Išbi-erra reigned for 33 years and this is corroborated by the number of his extant year-names. While in many ways this dynasty emulated that of the preceding one, its language was Akkadian as the Sumerian language had become moribund in the latter stages of the third dynasty of Ur.

The text of three letters belonging to this royal correspondence contains a report sent to Ibbi-Sin by the scheming Semite, Ishbi-Erra, on the results of a grain-buying expedition with which Ibbi-Sin had charged him.

The letter sheds considerable light on the incursions of the Amorites into western Sumeria as well as on the difficulties the Elamites were making for Ibbi-Sin.

Ishbi-Erra begins his report with the statement that he had succeeded in buying seventy-two thousand gur of grain at the normal price of one shekel per gur. (1 shekel per gur; 1 gur = 300 liters).

So, grain was very cheap even during wartime.

This scheming Amorite heard that his Amorite relatives had entered Sumeria and had:

“seized the great fortresses one after the other.”

So, he shipped the grain not to Ur, the capital where it was desperately needed, but to his own city of Isin from where he sent an artful letter to the besieged Ibbi Sin.

“If the king would now send me six hundred boats of one hundred twenty gur each,”

his letters say,

“I will deliver the grain to the various cities of Sumeria.”

However, he continues,

“I should be put in charge of the places where the boats are to be moored.”

In other words, Secret Fraud #21,

“Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke points and kill the body.”

Ishbi-Erra was asking the king to give him authority over all territories where he could moor a grain boat.

The letter closes with a hypocritical plea to Ibbi Sin not to give in to the Elamites,

“because I have enough grain to satisfy the hunger of the Palace and its cities for fifteen years.”

This was a very strong form of blackmail to make to the starving king of Ur.

In any case, he pleads, the king must put him in charge of both Isin and the holy city of Nippur.

The scheming Ishbi-Erra was also in charge of the king’s northern troops.

Since he was able to carry the grain to Isin by boat, he had both the troops and the transportation to deliver the grain to Ibbi-Sin at Ur.

He had all of the advantages, and he used them to wrest control of Sumeria from Ibbi-Sin.

So, he pressed his advantages and in mock loyalty pleaded with the king to declare him to be governor of both Isin and Nippur.

That Ibbi-Sin actually did entrust Nippur and Isin to him we learn from his letter of reply.

Unfortunately for king Ibbi-Sin, Ishbi-Erra was as disloyal as he was capable and competent.

With plenty of grain and troops, he was successful not only in defending Isin and Nippur but in usurping his master’s throne as well.

This we learn, not from Ishbi-Erra’s correspondence with Ibbi-Sin but from a letter written to the king by Puzur-Numushda, a governor of the city Kazallu, along with king Ibbi-Sin’s reply. 

According to Puzur-Numushda’s letter, the treasonous Ishbi-Erra had become firmly established as the ruler of Isin, which he had turned into his royal residence.

He had, moreover, subdued Nippur and extended his sway all along the Tigris and Euphrates from Hamazi in the north and east to the Persian Gulf.

He had taken prisoner those of king Ibbi-Sin’s governors who had remained loyal and returned to office those who had been dismissed by king Ibbi-Sin because of their disloyalty.

Ibbi-Sin’s pathetic impotence and pitiable vacillation are revealed in his answer to Puzur-Numushda.

Ibbi-Sin realized full well that the latter was on the point of betraying him because Puzur-Numushda had actually failed to march to the help of Ibbi-Sin’s loyal governors although a select body of troops had been put at his disposal for that purpose.

But he could do nothing more than plead with him to stay loyal.

Ibbi-Sin believed desperately that somehow Ishbi-Erra,

“who is not of Sumerian seed,”

would fail in his ambition to become master of Sumeria and that the Elamites would be defeated.

Ibbi-Sin wrote that:

“Enlil has stirred up the Amorites out of their land, and they will strike down the Elamites and capture Ishbi-Erra.”

But king Ibbi-Sin was referring to the very Semitic Amorites who had been plaguing Sumeria from the days of his father, the same Semitic Amorites that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had been immigrating in large numbers as farm workers; the same Semitic Amorites to whom the moneylenders had sold the foreclosed farms; the very Semitic Amorites of whom the treasonous Semite Ishbi-Erra was one.

With the growth of Ishbi-Erra’s independence and power, Sumeria found itself under the rule of two kings, Ibbi-Sin, whose dominion was limited to his capital at Ur, and Ishbi-Erra who controlled most of the other cities of Sumeria from his capital at Isin.

In the twenty-fifth year of Ibbi-Sin’s reign, the Elamites besieged Ur, but they could not capture it.

But as a result of the siege, severe famine overtook Ur’s defenders.

In desperation, they unlocked the city gate.

The Elamites brutally slaughtered everybody and ransacked homes and temples.

The poetic “Lamentation over the Destruction of Ur” recorded this tragedy:

“Dead men, not potsherds, covered the approaches, The walls were gaping, the high gates, the roads, were piled with dead.

In the side streets, where feasting crowds would gather, Scattered they lay.

In all the streets and roadways bodies lay.

In open fields that used to fill with dancers, they lay in heaps.

The country’s blood now filled its holes, like metal in a mold; Bodies dissolved – like fat left in the sun.” [121]

EDUCATION: ANCIENT TEXT: SUMER: Lamentation Texts – Library of Rickandria

The Elamites carried off king Ibbi-Sin a prisoner, leaving a garrison in control of the city.

Several years later Ishbi-Erra attacked this garrison and drove it out of Ur, thus becoming king of all Sumeria, with Isin as his capital. [122]

The treasonous Ishbi-Erra founded a dynasty at Isin which endured for over two centuries, although its later rulers were not his direct descendants.

This is known as the Isin-Larsa Period (2006-1884 BC).

Theoretically, the city-state of Isin laid claim to the suzerainty of all Sumeria and Akkad.

Actually, however, the land was dividing into a number of city states under separate rulers because there was no longer a centralized empire.

For close to a century, it is true, Isin remained the most powerful of these states.

It controlled Ur, the old imperial capital and shipping terminal for the Persian Gulf trade as well as Nippur, which continued as Sumeria’s spiritual and intellectual center throughout this period.

The fourth ruler of the Isin dynasty, Ishme-Dagan, boasts in his archives of restoring Nippur to its former glory.

So, even while the Sumerians were being ruled by the Semitic Amorites, the traditional Sumerian religious values were being maintained.

Prior to his reign, Isin seems to have suffered a severe attack at the hands of an enemy, perhaps the Assyrians who were gaining power in the north.

His son and successor, Lipit-Ishtar (1934-1924 BC), claimed control over the major cities of Sumeria and took the proud title “king of Sumer and Akkad.”

Lipit-Ishtar (Akkadian: Lipit-Ištar; c. 1934-1924 BC (MC) was the 5th king of the First Dynasty of Isin, according to the Sumerian King List (SKL). Also according to the SKL: he was the successor of Išme-Dagān. Ur-Ninurta then succeeded Lipit-Ištar. Some documents and royal inscriptions from his time have survived, however, Lipit-Ištar is mostly known due to the Sumerian language hymns that were written in his honor, as well as a legal code written in his name (preceding the famed Code of Hammurabi by about 100 years)—which were used for school instruction for hundreds of years after Lipit-Ištar’s death. The annals of Lipit-Ištar’s reign recorded that he also repulsed the Amorites.

But Lipit-Ishtar was not the sort of king who was popular with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] because he had the ancient idea that the leaders of society should serve and protect the People rather than to serve and protect the merchants and moneylenders.

Early in his reign, Lipit-Ishtar promulgated a new Sumerian law code, which was later the model for the renowned Law Code of Hammurabi.

The Code of Hammurabi is a Babylonian legal text composed during 1755–1750 BC. It is the longest, best-organized, and best-preserved legal text from the ancient Near East. It is written in the Old Babylonian dialect of Akkadian, purportedly by Hammurabi, sixth king of the First Dynasty of Babylon. The primary copy of the text is inscribed on a basalt stele 2.25 m (7 ft 4+1⁄2 in) tall.

The Laws of Lipit-Ishtar were written in the traditional Sumerian language about 160 years after the Sumerian king Ur-Nammu’s Law Code and about 140 years before the Semitic Hammurabi’s Law Code.

They show a similar concern for maintaining peace by eliminating arguments among the people but are, as you shall see, much different in their social intent.

The Third Dynasty of Ur had marked a return of Sumerian kingship over the Sumerian people in a Sumerian Renaissance of language and culture and moral values.

The Laws of Urukagina and Ur-Nammu, also written in Sumerian, both show a desire to maintain a holy society under God and to free the people from the oppression of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

But because  the moneylenders and wily merchants had:

“always been here”

it never occurred to the Sumerians that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were not legitimate businessmen but were, in fact, criminals.

So, laws were never made that specifically penalized their crimes.

Instead, the laws were made merely to soften the results of their crimes while they were allowed to practice business and grand larceny:

“just as it has always been.”

Although Lipit-Ishtar wrote his laws in Sumerian and even though most of his subjects were Sumerians, he, himself, was an Amorite.

His laws reflect both the necessity of freeing the People from oppression while allowing the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] the continued practice of the Sumerian Swindle to betray and defraud Society.

Semitic king Lipit-Ishtar begins his Laws by extolling the greatest of the Sumerian gods such as An, the Sky god and father of all the other gods, and Enlil, the god of the air.

Anu (Akkadian: 𒀭𒀀𒉡 ANU, from 𒀭 an “Sky”, “Heaven”) or Anum, originally An (Sumerian: 𒀭 An), was the divine personification of the sky, king of the gods, and ancestor of many of the deities in ancient Mesopotamian religion. He was regarded as a source of both divine and human kingship, and opens the enumerations of deities in many Mesopotamian texts. At the same time, his role was largely passive, and he was not commonly worshipped. It is sometimes proposed that the Eanna temple located in Uruk originally belonged to him, rather than Inanna, but while he is well attested as one of its divine inhabitants, there is no evidence that the main deity of the temple ever changed, and Inanna was already associated with it in the earliest sources. After it declined, a new theological system developed in the same city under Seleucid rule, resulting in Anu being redefined as an active deity. As a result he was actively worshipped by inhabitants of the city in the final centuries of the history of ancient Mesopotamia.

Lipit-Ishtar wrote:

“At that time, the gods An and Enlil called Lipit-Ishtar to be prince of the land – Litpit-Ishtar, the wise Shepherd, whose name has been pronounced by the god Nunamnir – in order to establish justice in the land, to eliminate cries for justice, to eradicate enmity and armed violence, to bring well-being to the lands of Sumer and Akkad.”

“At that time, I, Lipit-Ishtar, the pious Shepherd of the city of Nippur, the faithful husbandman of the city of Ur, he who does not forsake the city of Eridu, the befitting lord of the city of Uruk, the king of the city if Isin, king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad, the heart’s desire of the goddess Inanna, by the command of the god Enlil, I established justice in the lands of Sumer and Akkad.”

He goes on to say that:

“at that time I liberated the sons and daughters”

of the cities of

• Ur
• Isin
• Sumer

and Akkad who had been enslaved by the yoke of the moneylenders.

But the debauchery that the moneylenders had brought to the land through their use of alcohol and gambling and whoring and warfare had also produced orphans and illegitimate children who had been abandoned by their fathers.

And because of the loose morals brought on by war and usury, the family bonds between fathers and sons and daughters and mothers had been broken so that the children were not taking care of their parents in old age.

Lipit-Ishtar, the good king, decreed that they mend their ways.

The Good Shepherd took care of his people.

He obligated public works for mending and weeding the canals.

Military service was an obligation of each household depending upon whether the household was composed of the wealthy or of the poor laborers.

The wealthier households were required to do public works for seventy days per year while laborers were required ten days per month.

Once again, the rich were required to work less.

After all, the awilum [the Haves] were the leaders of Society and part of their work was found in that leadership.

And yet, even they were required to do seventy days of manual labor per year.

Striking a woman so that she lost her baby cost the aggressor 30 shekels of silver.

The same crime to a slave woman cost 5 shekels of silver.

If the woman died, it was a capital offense.

As a characteristic of Semitic rule, ownership of property was given a much higher status than the laborer who farmed the property. 

Lipit-Ishtar’s Law stated:

“If he leases an orchard to a gardener in an orchard lease, the gardener shall plant for the owner of the orchard and the garderner shall have the use of the dates from one-tenth of the palm trees.”

(Thus, the landlord got his orchard farmed for a cost to him of only ten percent of the produce.)

Following Sumerian custom, thieves were not tortured or imprisoned but were required to pay a fine:

“If a man enters the orchard of another man and is seized there for thievery, he shall weigh and deliver ten shekels of silver.”

Again, following the humane Sumerian cultural customs, property damage was also fined:

“If a man cuts down a tree in another man’s orchard, he shall weigh and deliver twenty shekels of silver.”

And yet, the moneylenders were allowed a double profit, but no more than a double profit, from their debt-slaves.

Remember, these slaves were:

• Mediterranean
• Caucasian
• Indo-European

people, not Negroes.

“If a man’s slave contests his slave status against his master, and it is proven that his master has been compensated for his slavery two-fold, that slave shall be freed.”

Thus, the moneylender doubled his money on what a debt-slave owed him in addition to whatever he had already collected on the original debt.

But debt-slaves who did not challenge their status could be enslaved for life.

And debt-slaves were not entirely restricted.

They had freedom of movement in their free time:

“If a debt-slave goes into service to a man of his own free will, that man will not restrict him, but that debt-slave may go wherever he wishes.”

Slaves were also sex slaves of the masters.

But for a master to make his slave pregnant meant that she was released from slavery.

This prevented a ruthless slave master from increasing the number of his slaves merely by making them pregnant or to use them without cost to himself.

Illegitimate slave children would also cause social disharmony as the children fought over inheritance.

For the slave women to be forced to bear children without also being cared for, was prohibited in this way:

“If a man marries a wife and she bears him a child and the child lives and a slave woman also bears a child for her master, the father shall free the slave woman and her child; the children of the slave woman will not divide the estate with the children of the master.” 

And in this way: 

“If his first-ranking wife dies and after his wife’s death he marries the slave woman (who had borne him children) the child of his first-ranking wife shall be his (primary) heir; the child whom the slave woman bore to her master is considered equal to a native free-born son and they shall make good his (share of the) estate.”

And in this way: 

“If a man’s wife does not bear him a child but a prostitute from the street does bear him a child, he shall provide grain, oil and clothing rations for the prostitute, and the child whom the prostitute bore him shall be his heir.

As long as his wife is alive, the prostitute shall not reside in the house with his first-ranking wife.”

And in this way:

“If a man’s first-ranking wife loses her attractiveness or becomes a paralytic, she will not be evicted from the house; however, her husband may marry a healthy wife, and the second wife shall support the first-ranking wife.”

To protect the thieving merchant-moneylenders, false testimony and slander were also dealt with: 

“If a man, without grounds, accuses another man of a matter of which he has no knowledge, and that man does not prove it, he shall bear the penalty of the matter for which he made the accusation.”

Moneylenders were in the habit of paying the delinquent taxes on property and then claiming ownership of the property merely for the price of its tax.

But this was prohibited in a fair way like this:

“If the master or mistress of an estate defaults on the taxes due from the estate and an outsider assumes the taxes, he (the master) will not be evicted for three years; (but after three years defaulting on the taxes) the man who has assumed the tax burden shall take possession of the estate and the (original) master of the estate will not make any claims.”

And so, Lipit Ishtar was a Good Shepherd for his people.

Although he, himself, was a Semitic Amorite, most of his people were Sumerians and he ruled them with Sumerian ethics.

He protected women with humane Sumerian ethics and protected the People with justice and the “straight path”. 

He claimed:

“In accordance with the true word of the god Utu, I made the lands of Sumer and bad for business.”

Kings who were honest, virtuous or religious were not as easy to manipulate as kings who were corrupt and perverse.

Secret Fraud #6 of the Sumerian Swindle was their guide in such matters:

“High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will.”

However, when neither bribes nor blackmail can sway a king, then the well-tested basic characteristic of the merchant-moneylenders worked just as well – treason and subversion. 

Akkad hold fair judicial procedure.

“In accordance with the utterance of the god Enlil, I, Lipit-Ishtar, son of Enlil, eradicated enmity and violence.

I made weeping, lamentation, shouts for justice and suits taboo.

I made right and truth shine forth, and I brought well-being to the lands of Sumer and Akkad.” [123]

In this way, Lipit-Ishtar shows the moral uprightness and spiritual goodness of the Sumerian People as well as how the earliest Amorites followed in their path.

But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had already had experience with kings of high morals and feelings of civic duty.

Gungunum (Akkadian: 𒀭𒄖𒌦𒄖𒉡𒌝, Dgu-un-gu-nu-um) was a king of the city state of Larsa in southern Mesopotamia, ruling from 1932 to 1906 BC (MC). According to the traditional king list for Larsa, he was the fifth king to rule the city, and in his own inscriptions he identifies himself as a son of Samium and brother to his immediate predecessor Zabaya. His name is Amorite, and originates in the word gungun, meaning “protection”, “defence” or “shelter”.

In the third year of Lipit-Ishtar’s reign, an ambitious Semitic ruler named Gungunum (1932 1906 BC) came to the throne of Larsa, to the southeast of Isin.

With the financial backing of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], he began to build up the political strength of the city with a series of military successes in the region of Elam and Anshan.

It was from the east (Elam) that the greatest threat to their businesses would come.

So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] needed a king who would defend their profits with pre-emptive strikes.

Only a few years later, this same Gungunum gained control of Ur, the old imperial capital and sea trade terminal that had meant so much to Isin’s prestige and commercial power.

To be sure, it was a “friendly” occupation.

Ur was threatened by a new invasion of even more Amorites.

And Gungunum was demonstrating that he and not Lipit-Ishtar was the protector of the merchant-moneylender’s home port and temple of the Moon God.

From then on, Isin and king Lipit-Ishtar and his moral laws ceased to be a significant political force.

Isin held on to some of its former claims for another century or more, but Larsa was now on the ascent.

The reign of Gungunum at Larsa marked the beginning of the first Semitic Amorite dynasty in the south.

After Gungunum occupied the old capital city of Ur, a group of Amorite-dominated city-states competed for dominance throughout Mesopotamia.

Following the moneylenders’ and merchants’ strategy, the Amorites consolidated their power in the commercial centers such as:

• Larsa
• Eshnunna
• Babylon

But they ignored the prestigious Sumerian cities like:

• Kish
• Ur
• Uruk

where the richest tamkarum [merchant moneylender] guilds had long been firmly established.

As urbanized Amorites rose to prominent positions in Mesopotamia, including kingship in independent states, the Sumerian language was no longer spoken.

Akkadian became the language of daily life. [124]

With the Amorite Gungunum (1932-1906 BC), the fortunes of Larsa improved.

Notable among his achievements was the annexation from Isin of Ur, by which Larsa gained control of the valuable Persian Gulf trade which had apparently languished since the fall of Ur.

Under the protection of Gungunum, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds of Ur had no fear of losing property or silver to the moral king Lipit-Ishtar of Isin.

And once Lipit Ishtar had lost the financial backing of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds and the prestige of controlling many cities with their tax revenues, he became powerless and replaceable.

That there was no open conflict between the two cities, however, can be seen in the traditions of the office of high priestess of the Moon God at Ur.

Both the daughters of Ishme-Dagan and of Lipit-Ishtar of Isin had been made high priestesses of the Moon God.

Both of them continued in office under Gungunum even after a usurper to the throne of Isin made dedications at Ur while that city was under the hegemony of Larsa.

So, obviously worship of the gods transcended the politics of the Sumerian city-states even when they were ruled by Amorites.

Gungunum claimed the titles both of “King of Sumer and Akkad” and “King of Ur”. 

He and his successors did much to improve the political and economic standing of Larsa along with the economic standing of the Treasonous Class, the merchant-moneylenders.

One of the most interesting archives to have survived from this period tells of the revived sea-trade between Ur and Bahrain.

The relevant documents date from the reigns of Gungunum and his two successors.

They reveal an active trade carried out by a group of seafaring merchants with the aid of capital invested by various private citizens who didn’t accept any of the risk involved but who received a fixed return of the profits.

These private investors lived comfortably in Ur while their sea captains risked their lives on the open sea.

Once again, the greedy tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] through their control of the trade routes and the throwing down of any laws regulating their activities, could demand high profits for minimal investments.

(Over 140 years later, the Law Code of Hammurabi of Babylon attempted, unsuccessfully, to compel such investors to share not only the profits but the possible losses.)

In the form of both ingots and finished products, the main object of this Bahrain trade was copper.

Copper was imported in enormous quantities, on which the king made a tidy profit in import duties.

• Ivory
• gold
• lumps of lapis lazuli
• beads of precious stones
• “fish-eyes” (pearls)

and other luxury items are also mentioned in the archives.

In this trade Bahrain was the middleman, importing raw materials and commodities from such places as eastern Iran, Oman and India and trading to the seafaring merchants of the Isin-Larsa Dynasties for products such as cooking oil, grain and highly prized woven garments.

Making use of such distant trade depots and markets marks a noticeable change from the period of the Sargonid kings when ships of Oman and India actually tied up at the quays of Agade.

But the merchant-moneylenders of the Isin-Larsa Period (2006-1884 BC) maintained a tight monopoly at both Ur and Larsa as the only off-loading ports between the sea-faring ships and the boats of the rivers.

With this monopoly over all river traffic between the Persian Gulf and all of Mesopotamia, they increased their profits from the luckless populace through the Sumerian Swindle.

This change in tamkarum [merchant moneylender] strategy was an indication of the international expansion of the merchant and moneylender guilds that were increasingly protective of their wealth and possessions.

The importance of keeping their loot in de-centralized locations was one of the hard lessons many of them had learned during the various wars and confiscations of the kings.

Even when they, themselves, had helped to start a war or had financed a war, they had learned how difficult it is to avoid losses when the war spills over to where their treasure was hidden.

By maintaining their trade colonies and secret guilds in distant lands separated by oceans and deserts, they were more assured of avoiding economic losses from political or religious conflicts.

It was during this changing time as the political power see-sawed between the Sumerians and the Semites of the north, that the Treasonous Class first began to establish themselves as a fully developed, international menace on the world stage.

They had existed as an organized conspiracy since before the arrival of the Sumerians.

But the uncertainties of the Isin-Larsa Period had forced them to better appreciate outlying depositories for their gold and silver bullion.

With guilds established in Oman and India, they could always depend on a supply of silver during an emergency that was beyond the reach of any king.

Even if a warring king stole their treasures, low interest or zero interest loans from the foreign tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds would put them back in business.

One of the major concerns of the Larsa dynasties was water.

Indeed, to judge by the long succession of irrigation schemes mentioned in royal inscriptions and year-names of the period, procurement of water was of major concern.

But Larsa’s problems became unusually acute owing to the damming of its main canal by some unspecified enemy.

In a coup d’etat, one Nur-Adad (1865-1850 BC), “one of the multitude”, took control of Larsa and destroyed the offending dam.

Nur-Adad ruled the ancient Near East city-state of Larsa from 1866-1850 (MC). He was a contemporary of Sumu-la-El of Babylon.

Growing conflict with Isin owed much to increasing shortages of water.

Nur-Adad’s son, Sin-iddinam (1849-1843 BC), was forced to resort to measures perhaps first taken by Entemena of Lagash (2404-2375 BC).

The channel of the Tigris was deepened and:

“eternal and unceasing abundance of water”

was brought to Larsa. [125]

Isin was finally attacked and seized by Rim-Sin, the last ruler of Larsa, who attached so much importance to this conquest that he dated all documents throughout the last thirty years of his reign by this event.

But Rim-Sin, himself, was unable to exploit his victory.

To the north, in the previously unimportant city of Babylon, an outstanding Semitic ruler named Hammurabi came to prominence.

After some three decades of a rather troubled rule, he attacked and defeated Rim-Sin of Larsa, as well as the kings of:

• Elam
• Mari
• Eshnunna

and thus, about 1750 BC, became the ruler of a United Kingdom reaching from the Persian Gulf to the Habur River.

With Hammurabi, the history of Sumeria comes to an end and the history of Babylonia, a Semitic state built on a Sumerian foundation, begins. [126]

The two key dates for Sumerian chronology are the end of the Third Dynasty of Ur, when the Sumerians lost their predominant political position in Mesopotamia (2000 BC), and the beginning of the reign of Hammurabi of Babylon (1792 BC), when to all intents and purposes the Sumerians ceased to exist as a:

• political
• ethnic
• linguistic

entity.

[127]

This period of squabbling city states and shifting alliances, where the last of the Sumerian civilization began to disappear and the Semitic Babylonian state began to rule the region, is known as the Old Babylonian Period (2000-1750 BC) because it is the beginnings of the rise of Babylon into world history.

Strategically, as will be seen again and again throughout history, the driving force of political power is, namely, physical occupation.

Political power comes from physical occupation:

not historical rights, not title deeds, not moral rights – only occupation.

The Sumerians trusted their gods and their leaders to protect them because this was the ancient and the moral way of high civilization, living lives devoted to the “straight path”.

But the kings and priests could not protect the People because behind everyone’s backs, making deals with everyone’s enemies, debauching families and stealing the wealth of the nation, were the moneylenders and merchants conspiring and negotiating for profits at whatever the cost to the People.

Using cheap immigrant labor to undermine and under-employ the People and then defrauding them of their possessions while stirring up foreign armies against them, the moneylenders and merchants reaped huge profits while the civilized Sumerians were destroyed.

However, this time, instead of rising again and continuing their ancient culture, the Sumerian People were dispossessed of their lands entirely.

Their way of life was taken over by the Semitic Amorites.

The Sumerians became muskenum [Have-Nots] in the lands that they had once ruled.

As Sumeria and the Sumerian People fell, the parasitic moneylenders jumped like bloodsucking fleas onto a fresh and unsuspecting host.

2000 to 1750 BC, Hammurabi and Babylon

As we begin to study Babylonia, we find ourselves somewhere at the mid-point in the history of ancient Mesopotamia, not just a changing history in regard to kings and dates and places but a changing history in regard to the moral and spiritual and intellectual life of the People.

And the change was not good.

Under Sumerian genius, the region had grown to the highest level of civilization yet known in the world.

For over a thousand years, the Sumerians had created a society that worked so effectively that very little change took place in all of that time and, except for Egypt, all of the people in the surrounding countries emulated and copied what the Sumerians had developed.

This mid-point in the history of Mesopotamia also includes the earliest time frame for certain groups of wandering goat-rustlers and bandits who would later play a crucial and corrosive part in world history.

These were the tribes of Semitic bandits who were later to weasel their way onto the world stage under the name of Hebrews.

So, it is from this time frame that we begin to unravel from world history the earliest known tendrils of the diseased Semitic aberration of an:

• organized
• parasitic
• criminal 

conspiracy, which is known as Judaism, which later grew a malignant tumor that branched off to form Islam.

Counting the Ubaidian prehistory, Mesopotamian society had functioned smoothly for well over 3,000 years of:

• planting and harvesting
• canal digging
• city and temple building
• raising their families

and praying to their gods.

Change was not necessary since Sumerian civilization provided everything that the Sumerian People could ever want.

Their reed huts and mud houses provided adequate shelter.

And since the reeds and mud were free, all that was required to own a house was their own labor to build it.

Their herds provided:

• meat
• milk
• wool

Fish were in the rivers and ponds; grain was in the fields; fruit was in the orchards.

There was plenty of food.

A workman’s pay was about 10 liters (about 2.5 gallons) of barley per day.

This was enough to feed him and a large family with enough left over to barter for:

• vegetables
• fish
• garments

and beer.

And with barley selling for about 300 liters per shekel of silver, a workman could sell his surplus barley for silver and within a few years save enough to buy some farmland.

With his own farm, he was automatically counted among the awilum [the Haves] and his higher social status became an additional benefit of working hard and saving much.

This is how natural living allowed the Sumerians to thrive and to prosper.

Through their protective kings, their wise priests and service to their gods, they had created a society filled with plenty of everything for everybody.

But independent farmers did not benefit the ruthless and greedy moneylenders who parasitically lived on the wealth that they sucked away from the unfortunate and from the distressed.

Independent farmers who were wealthy enough to never need a loan, did not give the moneylenders the lucre they desired.

It was only from the farmers who fell into difficulties and whose only hope of escaping starvation was to borrow from the moneylenders, could a profit be made.

And so, as the centuries progressed, the moneylenders learned that their profits increased in direct proportion to an increase in the suffering of the People.

Secret Fraud #11 became their strategy for moneylender success:

“Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are impoverished.”

The moneylenders, fat in their bellies, wearing the best in fine clothes, drinking the best in wines and beers and enjoying perverted debauchery among their sex slaves, sought only to bring themselves the highest profits.

And since there were both Sumerian as well as Amorite moneylenders, it only took advantageous marriages to cement the two ethnic groups into a single conspiring organism that spanned the borders of the city-states and connected the dots of guild halls stretching from the Mediterranean to Oman and India.

The question that the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] asked themselves during their guild meetings and their banquets in secret meeting places was this:

How can the People be brought to the most suffering in a way where they are happy and eager to borrow from the moneylenders?

This might seem like an odd question.

But as the moneylenders had learned to their great loss and woe, the People hated them.

And that hatred always got in the way of profits, and it put them into personal danger.

But when that hatred for being cheated and swindled is overcome by a fearful desperation, when the impoverished borrower is frantic from starvation or fearful of losing his farm or his children as debt-slaves; then such a borrower smiles, bows his head with subservient respect and treats the moneylenders with reverence and feigned happiness.

Thus, the scheming merchant-moneylenders found that although the People would never love them, at least the moneylenders could get the gratitude and respect that they craved if the people feared them.

Even when the People hated them with burning fury, the moneylenders learned that they could demand gratitude and respect from the People just so long as the People needed them.

With this in mind, the moneylenders conspired to always create conditions of need.

Secret Fraud #11 of the Sumerian Swindle gave the moneylenders profits from the extreme neediness of the People as they took advantage of the poor by causing them to lose whatever property that they had.

What the poor lost, the rich gained.

The Sumerian Swindle allowed no other inevitability.

In this way, the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] conspired to create hunger and poverty and suffering among the People so that the People, in extreme desperation, would then turn in gratitude to them to relieve that suffering through loans-at-interest.

And who else could give loans other than the moneylenders?

Thus, through ruthless subversion on the one hand and hypocritical offers of loans-at-interest on the other hand, the merchant moneylenders gained the fruits of Secret Fraud #14 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“Anyone who is allowed to lend-at-interest eventually owns the entire world.”

However – and this was absolutely and vitally important – whatever sufferings that the People were caused to receive could not also be seen as coming from the moneylenders whose services the People must be coaxed into accepting.

The Sumerian Swindle had to be accomplished in secret and without any apparent cause pointing to the conspiring moneylenders.

Society can operate quite smoothly without interest-bearing loans.

But for the moneylenders, no loans equal no profits.

So, keeping the People poor, ignorant, and in distress created wealth for the moneylenders in those ancient times, just as it does for the bankers in modern times.

But such social manipulation can only be successful with the most secret of plans and the tightest security because if the People ever learned of the real source of their miserable poverty, they would rise up and kill all of the:

• bankers
• financiers
• merchants

or, at the very least, beat them and take back their stolen property.

Even though the various cities and lands of ancient Mesopotamia were ruled by kings of city-states and tribal chiefs of villages scattered between the Mediterranean Sea across the Persian Gulf to India, all of these kings and people did business with silver as the basic unit of measure.

Barter was the basic method of commerce among both rich and poor and silver was the basic measure of value.

All goods and services were valued in relation to a weighed amount of silver.

Silver, in barleycorn weights or grains (~0.05 grams) or shekel weights (~ 8 grams) or mina weights (~500 grams) or talent weights (~30 kilograms), could be traded across the ancient Near East for any product or any service.

If two merchants did not have silver, they could still barter their goods by first valuing each trade good at its worth in silver and then making a trade of their goods in ratio to those silver valuations.

From the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea, from Arabia to the Mountains of Capadocia, the shekel-weight of silver was the standard in monetary transactions that spanned all languages and cultures for over 3,000 years right up to the days of Jesus Christ.

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Why Jesus was Not a Jew – Library of Rickandria

The moneylenders and their meticulous scribes could calculate the relative wealth and strength of all of the countries around them, down to the tiniest barleycorn-weight in silver.

They could calculate on their moist-clay accounting tablets the value and the manpower of every city.

With this secret money power, the moneylenders were in the position of knowing which kings were strong, and which kings were weak, who could afford the best armaments and who needed loans to get them.

In this Bronze Age, the armaments industry was not complicated.

Yet, it was as secretly controlled and as carefully guarded as it is today.

Since a bronze dagger can kill an enemy just as dead as can an atomic bomb, the manufacture of bronze weapons was a state monopoly controlled by the king and the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds.

Although melting bronze and pouring it into molds to make swords and arrow heads might seem like a simple affair, it did require the skill and knowledge of the metal workers guilds who knew the secrets of smelting and alloy which they did not share with anyone not of their trade guild.

Thus, weapons manufacture was a state-controlled monopoly just as it is today.

The king wanted military control through weapons manufacture.

But the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] wanted profits from arms sales, from copper and tin import sales, and from war, itself.

Although anyone could buy a sword who could afford one, the big money was in arming entire armies.

As the Third Dynasty of Ur fell and with it the Sumerian Peoples’ reliance upon God, the tribes of Semitic Amorites dispossessed the Sumerians of their lands and usurped political control of their cities.

Changes in society occurred that are still being felt in our modern world today more than four thousand years later.

The Semitic peoples cherished the use of craftiness and deceit as a basis of tribal success.

The Semitic Cultures valued the telling of lies if such gave an advantage over other men.

The better man in Semitic Cultures, was he who could deceive his fellows most thoroughly and thereby gain an advantage.

Thus, materialistic, acquisitive greed began to increase in power as spiritual knowledge decreased.

SPIRITUALITY – Library of Rickandria

The Sumerian ideas of social harmony through a godly life, began to give way to the Semitic ideas of social control through property ownership and deceit.

Under the Amorites, the awilum [the Haves] increased their wealth and gained State-enforced protection while the muskenum [the Have-Nots] became ever more impoverished and enslaved.

As the tribes of Semites took over Sumerian society, the true knowledge of God and of spiritual well-being began to disappear.

The People no longer served their gods as their primary goal in Life, but they were forced to serve the moneylenders and kings in a desperate bid to sustain their hungry and increasingly poor families.

With over a thousand years of a relatively peaceful existence, the Sumerians had had first-hand experience with such things as the realization of God-consciousness in the temple meditation halls.

RELIGION: Reaching the Godhead – Library of Rickandria

They had experienced the living holy spirit as a surrounding and protective aura.

This holy spirit radiated as halos and beams of light emanating from their:

• high priests
• priestesses
• kings

and mighty warriors.

This holy knowledge, because it is of a secret nature, was not taught to the Semitic Amorite interlopers.

Wealth and political power was all that the materialistic Semites were interested in having, not spiritual knowledge.

SCIENCE: Jewish Pseudoscience & Materialism – Library of Rickandria

Yes, the Amorites learned the material and obvious elements of Sumerian society such as:

• reading and writing
• administration
• farming

and general culture.

And they learned the outer manifestations of religion such as servicing the idols and celebrating the festivals.

But the secret religious and spiritual knowledge that was only passed along to trusted disciples, they did not learn.

So, it began to disappear.

This is seen in the disappearance worn by the various Sumerian gods in the carvings and cylinder seals, was just a “symbol” of a god since it is worn in all drawings and carvings of the Sumerian deities as if the god had the strength of many bulls.

Although this assumption of its symbolic quality is basically true, the horned helmet was also an indication of the spiritual levels of those wearing it.

The helmet was not a “helmet” per se.

That is, it was not a piece of head gear.

It was, rather, a manifestation of holy spirit.

It was a symbolic representation of the holy spirit radiating from the head of the god as well as the spiritual knowledge of the religious seeker.

The “horns” are levels of muscular dynamic energy surrounding the head of a spiritual person.

Those in the use of the swastika.

This holy symbol, much revered by the Sumerians, [Figure 9] was unknown to the invading Semitic gangs of goat rustlers and bandits.

Knowledge of the spiritual power as represented by the swastika and by the Maltese Cross completely disappeared as the Semites took over Sumeria and the empires of Babylonia and Assyria began to arise.

Those Semitic empires, backed by the moneylenders, were based on commerce and warfare.

They were not based strictly upon serving the gods as had been practiced by the Sumerians.

“Horns of power”

were not seen so much as they were felt.

Anyone who reaches a high spiritual level can experience the “horned helmet” sensation as one’s neck straightens and the muscles and fascia around the cranium stretch.

• the horned helmet
• the swastika
• the “Maltese” cross
• the sun disk

as well as the caduceus serpent-and-staff representing the spiritual knowledge of the physician, all disappeared. [see Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon for a complete explanation of these symbols.]

Although these symbols represented the spiritual knowledge of the Sumerians, the actual knowledge was not passed along to the culture that was created by the scheming moneylenders.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] took over the Sumerian Culture and dispossessed the Sumerian People of their material possessions but the secret knowledge of God remained hidden from them.

They had gold but not God.

NEW WORLD ORDER: GLOBAL BANKING: GOLD: For Humans & Others… – Library of Rickandria

A loss in the knowledge of the horned “helmet” can also be seen in the religious artwork of the Babylonians and the later Assyrians. [11]

Most archeologist assume that this helmet, as seen being worn by the various Sumerian gods in the carvings and cylinder seals, was just a “symbol” of a god since it is worn in all drawings and carvings of the Sumerian deities as if the god had the strength of many bulls.

Although this assumption of its symbolic quality is basically true, the horned helmet was also an indication of the spiritual levels of those wearing it.

Of what use were the secrets of Sumerian religion to the moneylenders?

As long as they donated to the temples and made a show of serving the gods, they were free to swindle the People and to reap the profits.

The moneylenders had learned how to solidify their grip on Society while hiding behind the kings and ministers.

They had learned how to create war in order to profit from other people’s losses.

And they had learned how to use foreign troops as their enforcers.

Foreign soldiers do not have the brotherly empathy for the people whom they police and against whom they are willing to commit any atrocity.

And they are willing to follow any order given by those who pay their salaries.

Two symbols that are falsely claimed by the lying Jews to be Jewish symbols can be traced back to the religious art of ancient Mesopotamia.

These are the menorah, or ritual lamp, and what the Jews call the Star of David or the Seal of Solomon.

RELIGION: SYMBOLS: The Stolen Six-Pointed Star – Library of Rickandria

Both of these occur together on an Old Assyrian seal of the early second millennium BC, long before there were any Jews in the world to lie to us about how venerable and holy they claim to be. [128]

As the moneylenders gained power, the status of women began to break down.

Sumerian women had had basic rights and a high social status on equality with men in most cases. [Figure 12].

But under the power of the Semitic moneylenders, women became personal property and trade goods and whores.

Doing business:

“just as it had always been”

the moneylenders seized the wives and daughters of debtors as payment for debts.

As the moneylenders:

• abused
• beat
• raped

and reduced them to prostitution and servitude in order to pay back the loan-at-interest swindles, the status of women and the respect that they had enjoyed, disappeared.

Women became the moneylenders’ best cattle.

In early Sumerian religion, a prominent position had been occupied by many goddesses who were consorts to particular gods.

But as the merchant moneylenders gained more and more women as their personal property, that is, as the Semites gained control and the Sumerians were disenfranchised, all of the Sumerian goddesses disappeared except for the Semitic goddess Ishtar, the goddess:

• of love
• of beer taverns
• of prostitutes

and of warfare.

The Sumerian underworld, itself, was originally under the sole rule of a goddess.

A myth explains how she came to take a consort; and goddesses played a part in the divine decision-making Assembly of the Gods in the Sumerian myths.

There is even a strong suggestion that polyandry may at one time have been practiced because the Sumerian reforms of Urukagina refer to women who had taken more than one husband. [129]

But in general, as the wealth and power of the moneylenders increased, the poverty and degradation of women also increased because they became slaves, commodities and the playthings for drunks in the taverns.

Defrauded by the moneylenders of their lands, of their husbands and of their children, they became prostitutes trading tricks for a bowl of barley gruel and a sipping straw in a beer vat. [13]

Cheap pay, indeed!

As previously stated, the Third Dynasty of Ur was destroyed and Sumerian control dwindled. 

Amorite dynasties arose in other cities, the two most prominent at first being Isin and Larsa. 

For this reason, the century or so after the overthrow of Ur is known as the Isin-Larsa period (2006-1894 BC).

The Larsa dynasty gradually increased its influence at the expense of Isin but was finally itself overthrown (1763 BC) by the sixth ruler of the Dynasty of Babylon, the great Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC)

From that time, none of the new rulers in the Sumerian cities were Sumerians. 

They were the Semitic Amorite sons of the wandering goat herders and sheep rustlers who had been infiltrating Mesopotamia ever since the Sumerian moneylenders had first hired them to replace the swindled and dispossessed Sumeria farmers.

Similar to the modern-day illegal aliens and foreign workers who infest:

• Europe
• America
• Australia

within a single generation their sons and daughters spoke perfect Sumerian as well as Amorite.

And with the help of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders], they learned how to take over everything that the Sumerians had built – everything except the spiritual knowledge of True Religion, something for which the merchant-moneylenders had no use since they had not yet learned how to make religion produce a profit for themselves.

Finally, in 1894 BC, bringing to an end the Isin Larsa Period, an Amorite dynasty was founded at Babylon which was to bring that city to a pre-eminence that it maintained, psychologically if not politically, for an additional 2000 years.

Up to this time, the rather small city of Babylon had made no mark on Mesopotamian history.

Yet in a little over 100 more years, this city ruled all of Mesopotamia, albeit briefly, and subsequently it was to give its name, Babylonia, to the entire region of Sumer and Akkad.

CIVILIZATION: BABYLONIA – Library of Rickandria

The language written on the cuneiform documents of this time, and presumably spoken by the majority of the population, is known to modern scholars as Babylonian, or more specifically, Old Babylonian, to distinguish it from later dialects.

Archaeologists refer to the period from the fall of Ur (~ 2000 BC) to the Hittite sack of Babylon in 1595 BC as the Old Babylonian period. Babylonian was not a new language but simply a later form of Semitic Akkadian.

That dialect from the time of Sargon and the Agade kings, is specifically designated Old Akkadian to differentiate it from later Babylonian forms.

It was spoken by the same Amorite goat rustlers speaking two different dialects of the same Semitic language.

The existence of the town of Babylon, itself, can be traced back to the latter part of the Early Dynastic period.

By the time of the Agade king, Shar-kali-sharri (~ 2150 BC), this small town of Babylon boasted at least two temples.

Later, under the kings of Ur, Babylon was of sufficient importance to be the seat of a local governor.

The name, Babylon, was first found in the Akkadian form, Babilim and later in the biblical form, Babel or Bab-El, meaning the “gate of god”, and much later – through Greek transliteration – as Babylon.[130]

Please take note of the use of the name, “El”. In this example, the ancient Semitic name of God, “El”, was in use at this early time, long before there were any Jews to utter it with a guttural “H” sound.

RELIGION: El (God) – Library of Rickandria

The First Dynasty of Babylon (1894-1595 BC) is rightly thought of, particularly during the reign of Hammurabi, as one of the highlights of ancient civilization.

It was an age of material prosperity, and it is also one of the periods about which we are best informed.

There are not only many thousands of business documents and letters from Babylon and other cities, but we also have the collection of laws promulgated by Hammurabi himself.

Together, these documents make it clear that the pre-eminence of Hammurabi among his contemporaries, which enabled him to raise Babylon to a cultural supremacy which it was never to lose, was not due solely to his military ability.

His success also owed much to his political insight and aptitude for diplomacy, and to his administrative ability and concern for social justice throughout his land.

But it would be a mistake to think of Babylon as the only city-state of significance at this period.

Farther north there was the kingdom of Assyria, where another prince of Amorite origin, Shamshi-Adad I, an older contemporary of Hammurabi, established himself as king in 1814 BC.

Shamshi-Adad (Akkadian: Šamši-Adad; Amorite: Shamshi-Addu), ruled c. 1808–1776 BC, was an Amorite warlord and conqueror who had conquered lands across much of Syria, Anatolia, and Upper Mesopotamia. His capital was originally at Ekallatum and later moved to Šubat-Enlil.

He exerted considerable influence upon the regions to the south and south-west.

In the early part of his reign, Hammurabi had another powerful contemporary in the King of Eshnunna, who controlled the cities along the Diyala River and in the neighborhood of modern Baghdad.

There were also other Amorite centers of power in North Syria.

The situation is summed up in a cuneiform letter from this period which says:

“There is no king who of himself alone is strongest.

Ten or fifteen kings follow Hammurabi of Babylon, the same number follow Rim-Sin of Larsa, the same number follow Ibal-pi-El of Eshnunna, the same number follow Amut-pi-El of Qatanurn [in Syria], and twenty kings follow Yarim-Lim of Yamkhad [Aleppo in North Syria].” [131]

First of all, note should be taken here that these kings were all Semitic Amorites and not Sumerians.

Also note once again that the names of God were often part of the personal names of the people and of the various kings, not only of Sumeria but of the later dynasties throughout the ancient Near East as well.

Once again remember, all of the ancient people believed in the gods and often named their children with a name of god as a part of their personal names.

This was both a dedication of a child by a parent to a god as well as a God-Name-protection of the child by both parent and god.

These two kings, Ibal-pi-El and Amut-pi-El, were using the Semitic names of the god, El, more than one thousand three hundred years before there were any Jews in existence.

In addition, please note that even before there were any Jews, the Amorite tribe of Banu-Yamina (Benjamin) was a well-known ally to some of the moneylenders of Mesopotamia.

Banu Yamina | ancient people | Britannica

In other words, more than a thousand years before there were any Jews, the tribe of Benjamin was serving the moneylenders of Babylonia.

As Semites, all of the kings of Mesopotamia were all related to one another through their tribal affiliations.

This is very much overlooked by modern historians and archeologists that these people could call upon their tribal and family relationships as a means of bonding distant tribes through their bloodlines to give them a method for infiltrating other peoples while keeping a cohesive unity among themselves.

Thus, among these Semitic goat rustlers, the kings were related to their subjects by genealogy.

So, it is of benefit to take a quick look at this genealogy swindle.

The wandering Semitic tribes of goat rustlers, not having specific cities or a specific place to give them social cohesion, developed the genealogy of their bloodlines as a basis of social stability.

The wandering Amorite bandits and goat herders in those days, like the Bedouins of modern times, did not place a great emphasis on the individual.

After all, they worked in gangs and tribes, so the group took precedence over the individuals within that group.

This is standard gang mentality.

In fact, blood ties serve to link people to the past and bind them in the present.

Members of those early desert tribes could trace their lineage back with genealogy.

The blood-ties with long-dead ancestors formed an important part of their personal identity, at least in their own minds.

Knowing who their fathers were was even more important among these wandering goat herders since polygamy was the rule and not the exception.

While the Sumerians usually were monogamous, the Semitic Amorites were polygamous.

A wealthy Sumerian might take a second wife, but a wandering Amorite could have any number of wives depending upon the size of his herds of goats and sheep to sustain them.

Numerous wives produced numerous children and so the Semite population increased:

“like the sands of the sea”

in comparison to the generally monogamous Sumerians.

Substantively, the Sumerians practiced a kind of natural birth control by nursing their babies for two or three years. [132]

Women do not ovulate and are relatively infertile while nursing a child.

So, children can be born at two-year intervals while the mother can still maintain an enthusiastic sex life without becoming pregnant until after the child is weaned.

The Amorites with their many wives and numerous children quickly became the dominant population wherever they settled.

Numerous children were one method that they used for dispossessing the Sumerians simply by out-breeding them.

Like the modern-day promiscuous:

• Mexicans
• Pakistanis
• Chinese

and Indians who are encouraged by the modern-day Jewish bankers to settle in a birth-controlled America and Europe, the promiscuous Semites of the ancient Near East quickly over-ran the original population of Sumeria both by sheer numbers, as well as by their Semitic proclivities for telling lies and deceiving the naïve.

Again, occupation is the driving force of political power.

The Amorites did not need large armies to overrun Mesopotamia.

All that was required was as many children as possible and the treasonous moneylenders inviting them all in.

That, and the ability to amalgamate dispersed tribes into large forces through genealogical allegiances, gave the Amorites the ability to launch quick raids with relatively large forces and then run away to the desert and hide in a guerilla warfare dispersal of forces.

For these reasons, from the safety of their city walls, the Amorite Dynasties which took control of the Mesopotamian cities, kept a wary eye on the roving gangs of goat rustlers.

They knew the tricks of the Semites simply because they were all from the same Semitic stock.

They had won those city walls because they knew how to infiltrate, deceive, out-breed, and take over an agrarian society.

And they didn’t want the wandering tribes to use the same tactic on them. 

So, they guarded their city walls and defended their farms from their relatives, the voracious goat-rustlers of the ancient Near East.

The ancient peoples did not have the:

• false
• modern
• Jewish-Communist

concepts of genetics as a way confusing and down-breeding themselves. 

They had good common sense and could see with their own eyes the effects of breeding and of bloodlines.

Breed a black goat and a white goat and the issue will be spotted goats and shades of gray.

They knew of the same principles when applied to the marriage of daughters and sons.

And they were careful to choose wisely in their marriage mates by taking into consideration the:

• health
• intelligence
• character
• social standing

and wealth of prospective marriage partners for their children.

After all, they wanted intelligent and heroic sons and strong daughters, not half-wits and weaklings.

So, they prided themselves in their good breeding.

The Amorites and other Semitic goat-rustlers observed that:

• intelligence
• health
• beauty
• strength

and a variety of other physical traits are passed down through breeding.

But oddly enough, they believed that a “special something” other than genetics was passed along in the genealogies.

That “special something” is actually, upon inspection, quite ridiculous.

Certainly, they were wrong about the earth being flat.

COSMOS: EARTH: Flat Earth PSYOP – Everything Old is New Again – Library of Rickandria

They were equally wrong about a certain aspect of genealogy, the error of which is still being perpetuated today by the Semitic Arabs and the perfidious Jews.

To understand that “special something,” consider your own family genealogy.

If you had a relative who lived 200 years ago who performed some heroic act or who was noted as a being a saint, would you therefore consider yourself as brave or saintly simply because you are his descendant? 

Probably not.

No sane person would do any more than concede the characteristics of a long dead relative as his alone and be proud that he was related. 

But just as in traditional Bedouin society today, the Semitic Amorites believed that their ancient relatives passed down to them not only genetic features such as intelligence and hair color but their acts of piety or deviltry as well.

The way one relative acted in the ancient past was claimed to be inherited by the entire tribe.

For example, the foundation of honor in the roaming bands of goat-herder society, then as now, was based on what their ancestors did. 

Whatever honor or virtue or great deeds attained by their ancestors, was equally claimed as an honor or virtue or great deed for each individual goat-rustler.

Like any physical trait that could be passed down through genetics, the goat-rustlers believed that such traits as:

• virtue
• honor
• bravery

or holiness could also be passed down to one’s descendants as well as the reverse and negative of these virtues.

This was not a type of karma where individuals inherit their own good or bad deeds from a previous life.

No, their relatives were dead and gone.

What those Semites believed was that they inherited their dead relatives’ good or bad deeds which were passed along through the family line just like the numbers of their fingers and toes were inherited.

This weird idea was called asl (meaning, “ancestry/origin/nobility”), a term expressive of a range of fraudulent, modern beliefs.

Drawing upon the genealogical notion of inheriting a pure and illustrious bloodline, the idea behind asl implies that moral character is passed on from one’s ancestors.

Thus, asl [pronounced “ass-hole”] is the primary metaphor for virtue and honor among the Semites.

And the virtue and honor of wandering, goat-herding, bandit societies also included such things as admirable stealth and deceit, skills in cheating and lying, and success in raids upon farmers and weaker tribes.

All of these characteristics brought food and wealth to the bandit tribe and thus were valuable assets for survival.

Around a campfire at night, goat rustlers telling tales of their successful raids and burglaries upon farming villages as the whole tribe feasted on the roasting morsels of goat and lamb from their booty, would certainly become admired and envied ancestors to brag about in one’s tribal genealogy.

But such a genealogically-based concept of genetics produces a completely false concept of history, a false concept of history that is still practiced by:

• the Bedouins
• Muslims
• the Jews

of today.

And it is a false concept that modern Christians have accepted because rather than believe Jesus, they believe the lying Jews.

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Why Jesus was Not a Jew – Library of Rickandria

Bragging about a great-great-grandfather who had stolen a herd of goats or who had gotten chased out of a storehouse in Egypt, became an exercise in self-delusion and deceit as these Semites bragged about their asl.

No longer would the stories told around the campfire be:

“a thousand years ago, our ancient ancestor deceived an Egyptian”

no longer would the stories be:

“an ancestor of our tribe deceived the Egyptians”

no longer would the stories be

“our tribe deceived the Egyptians”

but the stories around the Passover candles became:

“we deceived the Egyptians.”

Through the genealogical concept of asl, the Semitic gangs claimed that a virtue by an ancient relative was a virtue inherited by every member of the tribe.

And because it was something that they inherited, then it was as permanent an inheritance as hair color or skin tones.

That is, each tribe member could claim:

“because a relative 2,000 years ago was a good man, then that means that I have inherited his goodness and that I am also a good man even when I roll drunks for their silver and steal the neighbor’s sheep because I inherited my ancient ancestor’s asl.”

It is a false concept, but it was believed by the Amorite goat-rustlers and by today’s Bedouins and Muslims and by today’s Jews.

Through this delusion, the ancient Semitic goat rustlers achieved a miracle! 

Time travel!

By identifying the past with a genealogical connection, they could transform themselves into the exact bodies of their ancestors!

Time no longer had any power over them.

No longer did they speak of an ancient ancestor in the past tense.

What a relative did a thousand years ago was the same as if the storyteller did it, himself, just yesterday.

And it was all accomplished through genealogical transmogrification!

Goat rustlers, dreaming dreams of greatness and grinning at the thought that they were just as wonderful as their mythological ancestors whose stories they told around a campfire made of cattle dung!

Or in modern times, telling the Passover Fable over matzo balls.

In the tribal gangs, each individual in a tribe is related to every other member through careful memorization and discussion of their genealogy. 

If there were great leaders or heroes in one’s own genealogy, then that was assumed to be a glory to one’s own self.

So, a lot of pride was taken by the goat-herders and camel drivers of the Middle East in their genealogies.

Anyone living in those societies who could not recite a genealogy implied that he had a lesser moral worth.

And this moral worth, like the colors of the goats that they bred, was accepted as reflecting down through everyone in that bloodline.

In the same way, individuals of an inferior bloodline who were recognized as having noble qualities and moral qualities associated with asl, then their character was always explained away as having some bloodline from a superior family line – perhaps from a maternal uncle or grandfather. 

Among the goat-rustlers, morality and character were believed to be an inheritable part of one’s genealogy. [133]

This idea that great glories and moral attributes of an ancestor were passed down to one’s own individual self, became an important part of the Semitic mythology.

With asl as a foundation, even the cruelest, greediest, most rapacious moneylender could claim moral superiority merely by alleging the existence of a long dead ancestor who had had a reputation for virtue. Present loathsomeness and psychopathic evil could be instantly erased by calling up ancient virtues from long-dead ancestors.

Genealogies among the Semites became a:

“get out of jail free card”

just as long as they could brag about an alleged hero in their ancient past.

Modern Jews are experts at such deceit and self-delusion, forgiving themselves of incredible atrocities under the cover of an alleged virtue by a prehistoric Moses or Abraham.

That is, they are all virtuous saints because of Abraham’s asl.

Or claiming that every living Jew is worthy of pity because the Nazis allegedly treated a few dead ones with scorn, is a claim based upon their Jewish asl.

There is one more thing to know about the false ideas preserved in goat-herder imaginations and genealogies.

A genealogy is as rigid a framework and as fixed and final a grouping as can be imagined.

From their young boys to their old men, the modern-day wandering Bedouins are expert genealogists; and the names of ancestors, for one reason or another, are never far from their lips.

Names are kept alive by constant use, since all references to inter-group relationships must be in terms of these names.

More than this, the Bedouins are proud to the point of boastfulness of their genealogical knowledge.

But this knowledge tends to become vague and foggy at about the third generation until at about the fifth generation their genealogies get lost and become vague and mythological. [134]

In other words, the genealogy of the wandering goat herders is only useful to them as far back as the fifth generation – at which point their memories fail and the trackless, timeless deserts give any farther remembrance of distant relatives a futility not worth the mention.

But among some of the goat-rustler tribes, the technology of writing gave their genealogies longer branches into the mythical past.

Not only were the fables connected through genealogy to living relatives, but both the genealogies and the fables were written down on real, genuine goat skins, so they had to also be real and true!

The more the goat-rustlers told the ancient myths and fables about long dead relatives, using fact and fiction and theatrical talent around a blazing fire at night, the greater their personal prestige grew – at least in their own minds.

Because the most incredible tales could never be refuted by anyone living, then even the most impossible stories could be told, embellished and retold until all origins of the most fantastically incredible myths were lost.

The origins of fabulous fables were lost, that is, except for the genealogy that connected them to the living tribe.

Because the genealogical lines ended with real people whom everybody knew, then the entire genealogical tree was accepted as true as well as the mythological stories since its branches were connected to living relatives.

So, as a part of this Semitic delusion, the genealogy, itself, became accepted as a “proof” that the stories were true!

Once the genealogy was accepted as true, then the myths and fables were also accepted as true since they are connected to a genealogy that led from the distant past right up to the very tribesman who held the genealogy scrolls in his hands and read the ancient lies as if he had actually been there, himself.

It’s totally ridiculous but what else can be expected from illiterate goat rustlers of 2000 BC telling tales around a campfire of blazing cow patties?

As the Amorite goat rustlers became civilized members of the emerging Amorite kingdoms, and as they learned how to read and write, they began to record their genealogies stretching back farther than the mere five generations usually allowed by human memory.

Through their crude sophistry of claiming that great merit and wondrous virtue are passed down from distant relatives to even the most flea-bitten member of the tribe, the goat-rustlers began to assume a ridiculously overbearing pride in the storied virtue of those ancestors.

With the false concept of asl, the goat rustlers could claim great deeds and virtues as personal attributes of their very own, identical to those of fabled and mythical ancestors.

With a famous and dead ancestor in their genealogy, every thieving knave could claim to actually be as virtuous as a saint through the simple process of genealogical osmosis!

But what would the musings of Amorite goat rustlers telling tales around the flickering shadows of their campfires of 2000 BC have to do with the kings of the ancient Near East?

Because the kings who had taken over the rulership of the Sumerian culture were all Amorites, they were all related to the various tribes that infested those dry and desolate lands.

On the one hand, the various kings – the alleged servants of the gods – had the political baggage derived from a humble origin to overcome.

That is, they were descended from goat rustlers and bandits instead of from noble kings and servants of the gods.

And everybody, both Amorite and Sumerian, knew it.

On the other hand, once the Amorites began to insinuate themselves into kingship, some tribes of bandits and goat-herders thus acquired an Amorite king in their genealogy with whom they could take pride and bask in his glory as it was passed down to them through the asl of their genealogical fantasies.

As you shall see, this delusional pride in the genealogy of the bandit tribes became one of the unifying powers of the Babylonian moneylenders over all of the ancient Near East.

Like the Sumerian Swindle designed to take more than they lend, the gloriously embellished genealogy of the scruffy goat rustlers of Mesopotamia, brought more glory to those religiously destitute people than they had ever had in fact.

While picking off fleas from their shaggy beards, swatting at the flies buzzing around their grimy heads soiled with goat dung and bragging about the glories of their mythical ancestors, these Semitic goat rustlers and wandering Amorite bandits, swooning in the heat of a desert mirage, invented prestigious fantasies and considered themselves the better for it.

After all, a dirty goat-rustler riding into town on his donkey might just find a better bench at the tavern and maybe a free beer if he made it known that he was related to some famous king or pious saint through no-matter-how complicated a genealogical recitation from his furious memory.

The Jews use this same fraud today, claiming that they are each born with the asl of rich and powerful and famous ancestors simply because it is their “inheritance”.

Even the Khazar and Ashkenazi Jews who have next to zero genetic relationship with the Jews of the Bible, claim that the asl of Abraham is their very own asl.

They want you to believe that all Jews have inherited Abraham’s asl; and so, they are all just as big an asl as Abraham.

The Old Babylonian Period: Transition from Sumerian to Semite

Most histories regard the lives of the kings and their accomplishments to be of utmost importance.

But for this history, it is the effects that these kings had upon their subjects and upon the surrounding peoples that are the most important.

After all, a king is but one man.

But this one man affects the lives of many.

So, let’s take just a short look at the kings but be more concerned with what they wrought.

The first few years of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) cannot have been encouraging because he was surrounded with powerful kings in the major cities.

The powerful king Rim-Sin (1822-1763 BC) dominated the south.

The kingdom of Eshnunna controlled the region just to the north of Babylon as far as the Euphrates.

In the far north, Assyria under the astute Shamshi-Adad was a growing power already in control of vast territories.

Rim-Sin’s family is of some interest: his elder brother Warad-Sin (1834-1823 BC) was maneuvered to the throne of Larsa by their father, Kudur-mabuk, a clever tribal sheikh.

Kudur-mabuk’s name and that of his father are Elamite, yet Kudur-mabuk bore the titles

“Shaikh of the Amurrum [Amorites] and of Yamutbal”

Yamutbal was an area east of the Tigris settled by Amorites at the time of the Third Dynasty of Ur.

So, he was an Amorite whose family had at some time entered the service of the king of Elam.

His sons’ names, however, are pure Semitic Akkadian.

Rim-Sin’s daughter was consecrated high priestess of the Moon God at Ur under the Sumerian name Enanedu.

Indeed, we see here the best-documented example of the path from goat-rustling nomad to Mesopotamian monarch.

All accomplished within two generations!

Once again note the importance of the Moon God of Ur; he was the god of the moneylenders in the city where the sea routes and river routes converged.

Like the Isin and Ur kings, Rim-Sin was worshipped with divine honors.

His rival, Hammurabi, never assumed the title of divinity in any form.

And all subsequent kings were to follow Babylon in this respect as the Semitic Amorites completely infiltrated, subverted and overran all of Sumer and Akkad.

Hammurabi’s first few years seem to have been devoted to matters of internal administration. 

In his second year he:

“established justice in the land”

a reference to the inauguration of reforms that culminated in the promulgation of his famous code of laws.

After all, with the Sumerian Swindle of the moneylenders being allowed to rob the People of their wealth, it was a popular political move for the kings to free the people from indebtedness and slavery by:

“establishing justice in the land”

That is, it was popular with everyone except the moneylenders.

During Hammurabi’s first 30 years only three years names record military campaigns, and it was not until the latter part of his reign that Babylon became a major power.

Undoubtedly the dominant personality of the age was Shamshi-Adad (1813-1781 BC), king of the region to the north of Babylon that would become the future Assyria.

Shamshi-Adad was a ruler of great military and administrative ability.

His forceful personality is intimately revealed in letters found among some 13,000 cuneiform documents recovered from the royal palace at Mari.

The city of Mari, as you might recall, was an important way station since ancient times for Sumerian caravan and boat traffic along the Euphrates.

And it was a major manufacturing center for copper and bronze implements and weapons.

In 1796 BC, Shamshi-Adad, taking advantage of a palace revolution in Mari, placed his simple-minded son Yasmah-Adad on the throne of Mari as his sub-king and representative.

Although Shamshi-Adad was a Semitic Amorite, like the other Amorites who began taking over the Sumerian cities and Sumerian culture, he prayed to the Sumerian gods.

In one inscription, he boasts:

“When I built the temple of my Lord Enlil, the prices in my city of Ashur were two gur of grain for a shekel of silver (about 600 liters of grain for a shekel of silver), fifteen minas of wool for a shekel of silver (about 8 kilos per shekel of silver).” [135]

Thus, he is stating that under his rule, prices were cheap, and the People were well fed, fully clothed and prosperous.

An older and more capable son, Ishme-Dagan, was placed as governor at Ekallatum, an administrative center east of the Tigris River above Ashur.

Shamshi Adad, himself, ruled from two capitals, Ashur and Shubat-Enlil in northeastern Syria where an  administrative archive from his time has been found.

The Mari archive covers the period from about 1810 to 1760 BC, and provides a day-to-day view of contemporary events unequalled in the ancient world.

The family correspondence of Shamshi-Adad and his sons is particularly revealing of the politics of the time and includes some of the most touchingly human documents recovered from the ancient world. [136]

From his capital at Shubat-Enlil, Shamshi-Adad could rule the Khabur valley while watching his sons.

Thus, the whole area between the middle Tigris and the middle Euphrates and northward into the mountains was consolidated under a single Amorite family by about 1800 BC. [137]

Just as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families controlled large business enterprises, it should be emphasized that a rather huge territory of Mesopotamia was controlled by a single Amorite family, that of Shamshi-Adad and his sons.

The Semitic kings and crown princes, working as family groups, would most certainly have also assigned their variety of kith and kin to the various political positions below them, not just sons but uncles, nephews and trusted members of the extended family as their genealogical tribal and family relationships gave them a covert chain-of-command alongside of and within any overt political hierarchy.

The Semitic moneylenders and merchants also worked in family and tribal gangs that controlled the:

• trade routes
• markets
• guilds

The business of being the rulers of a country was a family project, just as the trade guilds were dominated by individual families and tribes.

Like the subterranean mycelia of a fungus, this genealogical and covert chain-of-command is found to this very day among the Jews who infest the seats of power in the governments of the modern world.

The Sumerian leaders had also assigned their relatives to positions of trust.

But the Sumerians saw themselves as members of city-states with the god of that city as their supreme focus of attention.

As the shiftless and wandering, promiscuous, desert-dwelling, Semitic goat-rustlers took over Mesopotamia, their genealogical connections which were based on patriarchal hierarchies, replaced serving the gods who resided in each particular city with serving the top tribal goat-rustler who controlled the tribes both inside and outside of the city as their supreme focus of loyalty.

The propensity for the king of the goat-rustlers to claim to be a god was something new that they introduced into Mesopotamia.

But their Semitic claim to godhead was not based upon spiritual knowledge like the pharaohs of Egypt or the priests of the temples.

The Semitic claim to godhead was based upon the coercive dictatorship of a king who could do whatever he wanted and could have whatever he wanted.

These Semites were gods of the material world and bosses of men.

As they profited from the Sumerian Swindle, the Amorite kings, who were backed by shekels of silver, tossed spirituality into the trash heap.

This gained them gold but lost them God.

Although Shamshi-Adad established a powerful Assyrian political and commercial state, his death shattered the unity of the northwest.

Shamshi-Adad’s son, Ishme-Dagan, maintained control over Assyria but lost the rest of the upper Euphrates region.

Finally, Ishme-Dagan was overthrown, and the capital at Shubat-Enlil fell to the Elamites.

At Mari, Zimri-Lim (1782-1759 BC), son of a former king, reclaimed the throne from the simple minded Yasmah-Adad.

Zimri-Lim and Hammurabi exchanged letters and gifts regularly as signs of friendship and good relations.

They also maintained foreign ambassadors at each other’s courts.[138]

Zimri-Lim was an important figure in the cuneiform archives, and many of those letters are reports to him from his representatives at the court of Hammurabi.

Both kings, as was the custom of the time, maintained “foreign advisers”, who used their position like modern ambassadors to report upon the military and political situation.

One of Zimri-Lim’s ambassadors, Ibal-pi-El, was particularly boastful of his inside knowledge of Babylonian affairs:

“When Hammurabi is disturbed by some matter, he does not hesitate to send for me, and I go to him wherever he is; whatever the matter that is troubling him, he tells me.”

On one occasion when messengers were sent to Hammurabi by another ruler, ambassador Ibal-pi-El drew them aside at the palace gate before they were admitted to the Babylonian king, thus discovering their business.

The substance of another report to Hammurabi was acquired through the donkey-drivers who accompanied the messengers. [139]

Thus, the use of intelligence gathering and spying by the Semitic Amorites was a standard procedure.

Although surrounded by so many able kings, Hammurabi still remains the symbol of his age.

However, his modern reputation as great king and legal innovator owes as much to the early discovery of cuneiform documents from his reign as to any unique personal attributes he may have possessed.

Cuneiform letters reveal Hammurabi was an efficient administrator supervising even the most mundane matters and also as a just and humane ruler who genuinely made the welfare of his subjects his personal care.

But one fact alone will ensure Hammurabi’s lasting fame, his role as the most successful king of the dynasty that made Babylon thereafter the leading city in Western Asia.

Never again did any southern city of Sumeria rule Mesopotamia, and indeed the sociological pattern imposed on the country in his time continued to be felt until the end of its history nearly two thousand years later. [140]

This being so, what were these sociological patterns imposed by Hammurabi?

First, it must be understood that the Sumerian people had not completely vanished.

They were being disenfranchised and replaced by the Amorites who thereby became the majority population.

They had been swindled and foreclosed and dispossessed by the moneylenders.

And they were being assimilated by language into the dominant Akkadian-speaking society.

At the same time, however, the Amorites accepted the higher Sumerian culture as their own and began to follow the ancient Sumerian ways.

These ancient ways were represented by worshipping the Sumerian gods and practicing the Sumerian Culture with all of its inventions.

It was only slowly that the Amorites began naming the old Sumerian gods with their own Akkadian names.

But this process took centuries.

Of a more immediate need, Hammurabi found himself as an Amorite leader of territories that included the original Sumerian people as well as increasing numbers of his own Amorite people.

To lead this mixed racial society required political skill and wisdom.

Hammurabi was up to the challenge.

Hammurabi followed a vigorous policy of canal building, to bring agricultural prosperity to his land.

He welded into one kingdom the many city-states of Sumer and Akkad and gave the whole land one language for administration and business and a unified legal system.

But reflecting their debt to and respect for Sumerian culture, the ancient Sumerian language continued to be used liturgically in the temples for as long as Babylonia endured. [141]

Cuneiform texts from the reign of Hammurabi, documents from Larsa at the time of Rim-Sin, contemporary letters from Shemshara in northeastern Iraq, and archives from Mari and Sippar provide social and economic data far greater than exist for many later periods in history, even in western Europe. [142]

And most certainly, this historical data exists in greater extent that those stories found in the Bible.

But these cuneiform documents were only discovered beneath the rubble of millennia during the past 150 years of modern archeology.

Therefore, the persistent lies and myths of the rabbis, repeated for over 2,500 years, have had a longer influence on Western culture than the long-buried and recently translated cuneiform documents of the ancient Near East.

I repeat:

The lies of the Jews have worked to the detriment of Mankind for 2,500 years while the truths of archaeology have had a mere 150 years to correct this Semitic deceit.

Volumes I and II of this study aims to correct those rabbinical prevarications.

BOOK: The Monsters of Babylon: How the Jews Betrayed Mankind – Vol. II – Library of Rickandria

The sociological pattern imposed upon the land by Hammurabi continued to be felt until the end of Babylonian history.

His military achievements, however, did not long survive Hammurabi himself.

Racial movements caused by the stirring of the Indo-European tribes beyond the Caucasus and the effects of the southward migration of these peoples now began to be felt. [143]

During this Old Babylonian phase of Mesopotamian history, new ideas about how a society should be led and why a society exists began to form.

The Semitic Amorites were quite different from the Sumerians in their ideas about what makes an honest and true society.

The Semitic Akkadians and Amorites were an entirely different strain of people than the Sumerians who had founded civilization more than a thousand years previously.

Basically, they were more:

• deceitful
• ruthless
• cruel

They did not have behind them thousands of years of the mellowing effects of reliable crops and full stomachs.

They were more imbued with a scrubby existence with their herds of goats and sheep as they roamed from one watering hole to the next.

Though they absorbed Sumerian Culture and made it their own, the Semites did not value honesty and “the straight thing” as much as they did clever craftiness.

Even in modern times, those traits persist among today’s Semitic peoples where they believe that the worthiness of a man is found in his ability to deceive his fellows and to gain the advantage through trickery and lies.

This is how:

“it has always been”

among these people and 6,000 years has not been long enough to erase this cultural and genetic trait even in today’s modern world of deceiving Jews and lying Muslims.

Herding goats and sheep, dwelling in tents, living the nomadic life in the semi-arid and desert regions of Arabia and Syria, these crude and barbarous people were in awe of the great cities and ingenious ways of the agrarian Sumerians.

When they could leave their stinking, goat-hair tents and half-starved existence on the deserts in exchange for the clean labor and full stomachs of a farming life or when they could exchange military service for land ownership, they did so.

The moneylenders of Sumeria had been hiring cheap labor from the surrounding barbarians for over two thousand years, larcenously replacing the Sumerian native sons with foreign workers.

Also, the Sumerian kings had been hiring foreign mercenaries in exchange for

• farmlands
• army rations
• loot

And so, between the greedy moneylenders and the ambitious kings, the Sumerian people were gradually disenfranchised from their own lands and replaced with foreigners.

But the kings and moneylenders did not disenfranchise or replace themselves.

No, of course not!

They became the Ruling Elite over the new immigrants.

These kings and merchants and moneylenders were the awilum [the Haves], the Ruling Elite who were willing to betray their own people just as long as they could continue to be the Ruling Elite with the muskenum [Have-Nots] bowing at their feet.

And if their own people would not bow down, then this Treasonous Class replaced them with foreign muskenum [Have-Nots] who would accept being the footstool for the feet of the awilum [the Haves] in exchange for a bowl of barley gruel.

But the Amorite immigrants were not fools.

They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Babylonian farmers.

So, their natural suspicions prompted them to ask,

“Why are you selling the land to us?

Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?”

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready answer to overcome such an objection.

“What are those people to us?” they replied.

“They are not our friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm.

We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy land and purchase property.

As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help them buy the best farms and the finest orchards.

But still, they hate us for our goodness and generosity because they are full of hatred. 

But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying the land.”

And so, the bargain was made.

The Amorites had no reason to hate tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] — yet.

So, they accepted the offers of cheap land.

And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new immigrants, those Amorites who could not afford the full price, the money lenders let them buy on time at low interest rates.

Like bloodsucking fleas, the Babylonia money lenders jumped from their old victims who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and guides and mentors.

The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around its prey.

Its bite would come later.

To repeat once again, just as in ancient times so it is today, the driving force of political power is physical occupation.

Political power comes from physical occupation, not historical rights, not title deeds, not moral rights – only occupation.

The moneylenders and merchants claimed title and ownership to all properties that they had swindled from the Sumerians.

Then, they occupied these lands with their own hired gangs of alien labor.

All the while that the moneylenders were betraying their own people, the “good deals” and the “generous loan arrangements” that they had made to the aliens and foreign immigrants made them the “best friends” of these new masters of the land.

This Secret Fraud #15 of the Sumerian Swindle was discovered by the moneylenders at an early date:

“Loans to friends are power; loans to enemies are weapons.”

The moneylenders of Sumeria had used loans at high interest rates as a weapon against their own people so as to:

• betray
• impoverish
• dispossess

and enslave them.

Then, to sell off the foreclosed properties and slaves, they gave loans at low interest rates to the foreigners, thus entrapping the new immigrants into the Sumerian Swindle with cheap loans.

Welcoming the foreigners with smiles and open arms, the merchant-moneylenders used loans at low interest rates to lock the foreigners into payments on the foreclosed properties.

They did not sell the property to foreigners for less than it was worth; they merely sold it at a lower interest rate.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] began their long series of swindles throughout world history by destroying their own people while befriending the enemies of their people.

And why not?

They made a profit both ways.

Once the immigrants were locked into paying low interest rates with the Sumerian Swindle:

“just as it had always been”

then the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] raised the rates on their next loans and eventually they swindled their new “best friends” out of the property.

The moneylenders never lost money; they merely manipulated the People and the market so that sometimes they made more profit and sometimes they made less profit.

But they always profited from the Sumerian Swindle.

Historically, the Semitic Amorites (2200-2000 BC) were followed by the Semitic Aramaeans (1200 1000 BC) who, in turn, were followed by the Semitic Arabs (800 BC).

But they all had in common their Semitic language dialects and nomadic lifestyle that was not tied to a single geographical area.

Because they had no permanent territorial claims, these groups identified themselves not by city or country but by tribes and by the ties of their genealogical bloodlines.

Not being associated with a geographical area, descent from a common ancestor was of great importance in tribal affiliation.

As they all moved about in search of grazing lands and water, tribal affiliations changed, tribes constantly absorbed other tribes or split up and individuals even changed their tribal status. [144]

So, their connections to one another through genealogy became an important part of their personal identity.

Though this genealogical identity could be altered merely through craftiness and deceit, it was still an important part of the tribal hierarchy and social prestige between tribes and between individual members of tribes.

The relationship of the Semites to one another transcended any affiliation or loyalty to any particular city or country because they were racially and genetically related and all a single nation connected genealogically.

At least, that is what both the ancient and the modern gangs of Jews claim even though it is just another Semitic lie.

The incursion and settlement of nomadic groups was and remains today a complex process of interaction between settled and tribal societies that has often been misunderstood.

Certainly, these peoples at times preyed upon the people of the settled lands.

A Sumerian story describes the Amorites as:

“hovering over the walls of Uruk like flocks of birds”

but in general, their incursions took the form of raids, not invasions.

Economic distress caused by drought or too many children often persuaded nomadic peoples to seek employment as laborers on the land, or – and this is frequently attested in the cuneiform tablets – as hired mercenaries.

Other immigrants appear deliberately to have chosen the mercenary role because their pay included grants of land as well as loot from the campaigns on which they served.

By such means, groups of pastoralists, indeed sometimes whole tribes, came in time to acquire not only the settled ways of their hosts but their language and culture as well.

And like the Mexicans in modern day America, or the Muslims in modern day Europe, they were an undermining and subversive element to society who were brought in by the merchant-moneylenders as both cannon fodder and dispossessors of the People through grants of citizenship in exchange for military service.

In modern times, this placement of foreigners into the military is Secret Fraud #11 and Secret Fraud #20 in action where-by the bankers use foreigners to create poverty among the citizens. 

There is certainly no direct route from the role of true Bedouin to that of head of state.

The groups that became true city-dwellers had passed some time in the intermediate stage of dependence upon their settled agricultural neighbors.

As can be seen in modern societies, within one single generation of children such immigrants as:

• Mexicans
• Pakistanis
• Chinese

can become fully functional in a European or American country, learning to read and write and speak the language without inflection.

When we are dealing with the ancient countries of the ancient Near East such cultural progress was actually faster since the many scribes reduced the need for anyone to read and write.

And in the time frames of one or two hundred years, the social climbing from goat-rustlers to city governor became increasingly common.

Just as in modern America or England where such an oddity as a turban wearing, English-speaking Sikh in the space of one generation becomes elected to city councils, it was no different than in the ancient times. [145]

Amorites became the rulers of many Mesopotamian cities.

Most prominent among these rulers was Shamshi-Adad I (1830-1776 BC), who created a state encompassing nearly all of upper Mesopotamia and whose ancestors were described as those:

“who lived in tents.”

His famous Amorite contemporary in the south, Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) of Babylon, also derived his lineage from the same tent-dwelling ancestors.

And though they became kings of walled cities, they could still trace their ancestry back along patriarchal tribal lines.

The Semitic Amorites sometimes split into “Sons of the North” and “Sons of the South,” but the two groups were basically the same people.

In a letter, Zimri Lim (1782-1759 BC) was portrayed as governing both the sedentary Akkadian population of Mari and the tribes of his own Amorite origins.

The Amorites who occupied the cities were very familiar with the methods where-by goat-rustlers could take over city dwellers.

So, the well-fed Amorites behind the walls of Mari kept careful watch on the movements of the roaming Amorites nomads and even tried to control their migratory patterns.

Mari frequently employed tribal members in corvée labor and military service.

Such nomads were also economically dependent upon the agrarian population, particularly for grain. [146]

Because the irrigated lands of Mesopotamia were the breadbasket of the ancient Near East, the surrounding peoples depended upon its fertile soil and either traded their raw materials for Mesopotamian grain or sent raiding parties to steal it.

The Mari archives fill out this historical framework with a remarkably detailed picture of public administration, political intrigue, and the work of officialdom during that period.

We frequently read of the dispatch of ambassadors, while the correspondence between the various Amorite rulers which we find in the Mari letters is full of references to troop movements, the units concerned being numbered in thousands rather than hundreds.

Ration lists for officers and troops enable an estimate to be given of the forces present in Mari, which amounted to a minimum of ten thousand in the state, of which four thousand were in garrison at the capital.

The duties of such troops were largely concerned with protection of the settled populations against the marauding Amorite tribes.

Mari on the Upper Euphrates was famous for its copper and bronze tool and weapons production.

Raw materials were shipped down the trade routes along the river and finished products were shipped in both the up-river and down-river trade.

These goods from Mari included objects such as:

• swords
• ploughshares
• parts for chariots
• copper pots and pans
• bangles
• fishhooks
• needles
• mirrors
• braziers
• tweezers

and knives.

Gold and silver ornaments were produced for the kings and temples and for the very wealthy. 

And, reflecting the huge petroleum reserves that would cause so much warfare and chaos in modern times, Mari made extensive use of bitumen from the famous bitumen lake near Hit to the south of Mari.

This bitumen was used as both a tar and a pitch to waterproof floors, as mortar between bricks, as a caulking for boats and as a flooring pavement mixed with ground limestone.

And everywhere, along the river towns and cities, pottery was produced, and bricks were made. 

Farming and irrigation were everywhere the main occupation of the People.

The irrigated area extended to a depth of three or four miles along the right (south) bank of the Euphrates for most of the two-hundred-mile extent of the kingdom of Mari.

There was a huge network of canals with special officials to supervise them.

In time of necessity, all the able-bodied men of a district, townsmen as well as villagers, could be called out to work on them, either to clear them of rushes and waterweeds or to dig out sections where silt had accumulated or to build up and consolidate the banks against floods. [147]

It should be noted that even though the simple minded Yasmah-Adad of Mari and his father and brother were Amorites, it was against the roaming tribes of Amorite bandits and goat rustlers that they had to be on guard.

Writing to Ishme-Dagan, his brother and his senior, he explained that of a thousand troops, five hundred guarded the town and the other half guarded the cattle.

Economic as well as military and political co-operation was practiced by the Amorite rulers.

For example, the sub-king of Mari, when pasture was scarce in his own territory, sought from the sub-king of Qatna permission to have his flocks pastured with the flocks of Qatna, a request to which the sub-king of Qatna acceded. [148]

Besides the food and manufactured goods that it produced, the control of Mari was important as a stage on the trade route up the Euphrates between the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean. [149]

So, whoever controlled Mari also controlled this vital trade route.

From the earliest times the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] as well as the kings understood the value of Secret Fraud #21 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke points and kill the body.”

The Old Babylonian archives from Mari reveal a number of West Semitic tribes pursuing their migratory role as fully fledged pastoralists or in the service of local rulers.

That the genealogical relationships between the Semitic tribes took precedence over all other loyalties, is stated in a letter from a palace official to Zimri-Lim of Mari (1782-1759 BC).

Even though he is a king of a great city like Mari on the Euphrates, the letter reminds him that he is also king of the Hanu, a tribal federation from whom many mercenaries were drawn. 

Therefore, this Amorite official states that Zimri-Lim is:

“in the second place, king of the Akkadians.”

Thus, this Amorite palace official was reminding Zimri-Lim that his relatives and his genealogical bloodlines took precedence over his city-dwelling job as a king and over his loyalty to the city people who trusted him as their leader.

This same tribal attitude is found today among the Jews who swarm into the positions of authority in Western governments with both dual citizenships and secondary loyalties to the countries that they betray.

Another tribal federation of this period were the Binu-Yamina, a name meaning “Sons of the South” which is linguistically related to the Old Testament tribal name of Benjamin.

Patterns of tribal migration, and indeed tribal structure correspond closely with those that are known among modern Bedouin.

The Amorite sheikh was called “father” in Akkadian, and as in modern tribal society it was he who bore full responsibility for the activities of his followers.

These desert sheikhs (or “fathers”) were treated with respect and considerable diplomacy though occasionally with some impatience by the rulers of Mari, and a variety of letters make clear the complicated relationships between the two. [150]

Once again, for future reference, special note should be taken that the Semitic tribe known as Binu-Yamina (Benjamin) was present in Mesopotamia long before they were known in Palestine.

There is a reason for this as you shall see.

These Amorite sheikhs were not the camel riding nomads of modern myth.

Camels were first domesticated in the third millennium BC in Arabia and would not be common in Mesopotamia for another five hundred years after the rise of Hammurabi’s Babylonia.

It would not be until the end of the second millennium BC that camel-riding nomads from Arabia would begin a thriving trade in incense and spices from southern Arabia to the markets of the Levant and Mesopotamia. [151]

No, these wandering Semites of Mesopotamia did not ride majestic camels, they herded their goats and roamed about riding on donkeys.

As the Semitic city-states such as Babylon began to gain power, these increasingly sophisticated and urbanized tribesmen took over the entire Sumerian heritage – 

• cuneiform script
• literature
• astronomy
• laws

and mathematics, merely adapting these as required.

Their only innovation (appropriately, for a vast trading empire) seems to have been the standardization of the system of weights and measures, which were to remain standard in the Middle East for the next two thousand years. [152]

As the Semites gained control of society, they accepted the Sumerian social order mostly as they had found it.

After more than two thousand years, Mesopotamian society was still composed of two main groups, the awilum [the Haves], and those dependent upon them, the muskenum [the Have-Nots].

Money lending had had its deleterious effects but was still accepted as something normal because that is:

“how it had always been.”

The Semitic Amorites controlling Mesopotamian culture and politics didn’t see any reason to make any changes in an ancient society that was superior to their own shiftless tribal roots. 

What changes that the Amorites made were strictly for their own benefit.

With Semitic cruelty, they gave the two social strata a more rigorous definition.

As they became rulers of the Sumerian civilization, the essential legal position of the muskenum [the Have-Nots] was that he was singled out for protection as a dependant of the state or crown.

Such royal dependants were supported with rations in exchange for services to the palace. 

Because they did not own land and were in debt to the moneylenders, the basic implication of inferiority had led, at the beginning of the Old Babylonian period, to the connotation of pauperism which later became the primary meaning of the word.

Under the Semitic Amorite moneylenders, social strata shifted downward as the poor became very poor and the very poor became slaves.

Below the muskenum [the Have-Nots] were the wardum [the slaves].

Most Mesopotamian slaves originated from the native population.

Defaulting debtors and penniless men and women often sold themselves or their children into slavery or were seized by creditors.

The merchants also dealt in foreign slaves, Subarians from the north being the most in demand while war captives normally became the property of the king and slaves of the state.

Together with the corvée gangs and some hired labor, they:

• constructed roads
• dug canals
• erected military fortifications
• built temples
• tilled the crown lands

and worked in temple factories.

State slaves were housed in special barracks, their:

• names
• ages
• lands

of origin recorded in special registers.

Temple slaves were recruited both from prisoners of war and from dedications made by private individuals.

You Readers who are of African descent, make note of this: the slaves of the ancient Near East were not Negroes.

They were:

• Indo-Europeans
• Caucasians
• Middle Easterners

captured in war or indebted to the moneylenders.

It would be another 3000 years before Negro slaves would become the primary victims of the merchants and moneylenders.

RELIGION: Jews Have Cursed the Black Race – Library of Rickandria

The Negro slave trade, beginning sometime around 1500 AD and lasting until the American Civil War of the 1860s AD, was a brutal business lasting nearly 400 years.

Miles Williams Mathis: Lincoln’s Assassination was a Manufactured Event – Meaning it NEVER Happened – Library of Rickandria

But it is short-sighted to imagine those 400 years to be more significant than the nearly 5000 years that white people were slaves to the merchants and moneylenders.

Private slaves were relatively uncommon and were employed largely in domestic service.

Private slaves were uncommon among the ordinary people because they were expensive to own.

But at no time since the beginnings of Sumerian civilization around 3100 BC to 2000 BC, was slave ownership uncommon for the moneylenders and rich merchants.

The awilum [the Haves] owned slaves. And the muskenum [Have-Nots] worked for pitiful wages that were carefully calculated to be just enough to make them grateful that they were better off than the slaves.

Indeed, slavery was not only one of the inevitable results of moneylending, but it was also, for the perverted lusts of the moneylenders and merchants, one of the perquisites of the moneylending profession.

From the earliest times, the moneylenders were sex fiends and perverts as well as being ruthless usurers and parasites of Mankind.

They did not work but merely directed those who worked for them. 

With plenty of leisure time, they invoked their authority and indulged their lusts among their slaves.

The Sumerians were more ruthlessly betrayed by the Akkadian moneylenders and disenfranchised by the Semitic Amorites than they had been when Sumerian moneylenders stood behind the kings.

The average price for a slave in the Old Babylonian period was approximately 20 shekels of silver, sometimes rising to as high as 90 shekels.

The average wage paid for hired labor was some 10 shekels a year.

That is, 10 shekels would be the yearly wage of a laborer if he was fully employed.

But part-time help and the payment of wages in measures of grain could reduce the costs of labor dramatically for the landowner.

Thus, it was far cheaper for a landowner to employ seasonal labor than to own a slave who was tasked specifically for agricultural work.

Seasonal workers who were on the edge of starvation worked cheaper than a slave who had to be well-fed to protect the investment of his purchase cost.

By far the most common system of working the land at this period was one of tenant farming. 

The tenant received:

• seed
• animals
• implements

in the form of non-interest-bearing loans, for which the tenant returned a set percentage of the harvest. [153]

The percentage of the harvest that was given to the landlord was the actual interest on the loan and that percentage was not small.

Like all moneylenders, the Semitic moneylenders demanded as much as they could get for their investments.

For the loan of silver for a trade investment, a one hundred percent return on their investment was common.

This high return on investment was not only an indication of the high profits found in trade but also the monopolies over the wholesale trade controlled by the guilds, the temples and the king.

So, the rich merchants became richer as they squeezed out the competition and strictly extracted maximum profits from their retail shops and from the traveling peddlers to the outlying villages.

A poor man would not dare to default on any loans because the only alternative was slavery for himself or his family members.

A modern credit card debt-slave who finds himself struggling to repay the compounded 15% or 30% interest on his credit cards perhaps can understand in a small way the anxiety and panic that a Babylonian debtor must have felt when the impossible amounts of 100% percent interest were accelerated into the stratosphere by the scribes calculating upon tablets of wet clay in cuneiform script.

Under such usury, the moneylenders seized the people for their debts and terrorized those who were still free men.

So, in addition to wealth, they gained a certain kind of prestige based upon fear.

It was a prestige that they enjoyed from debtors who bowed at their feet out of a fearful respect for what they could do if the loan was not repaid or out of supplication and a begging for mercy.

But mercy was something that the moneylenders and merchants demanded and reserved only for themselves.

In Babylonia, farmland was valued according to the anticipated annual yield.

Rent tablets show the owner receiving one-third to one-half of the crop.

Private land leases frequently indicated who was expected to furnish the:

• tools
• animals
• seed

and who paid the taxes.

If the landlord paid these costs, he reduced the laborers’ share to one-third or one-quarter of the crop, thus, keeping them as indentured servants.

The merchants, moneylenders and landlords, all members of the awilum class [the Haves], could get away with such high profits because by the time of Hammurabi, the Sumerian Swindle had concentrated so much wealth into the hands of the awilum [Haves] that the muskenum [Have-Nots] had the choice only of working for near-starvation wages or actually starving to death.

That is, the wages were low, and the work was hard, but accept them or die.

As the moneylenders grew in wealth during the next thousand years, banking firms, such as the House of Egibi in Babylon during the later Neo-Babylonian and Persian periods, acted as real estate managers by renting fields for the super-wealthy absentee landlords.

The House of Murashu of Babylon, in the banking business in the last half of the fifth century BC, rented royal lands to tenant farmers and acted as agents in converting agricultural profits into silver.

Big business required extended families, every member dedicated to perpetuating the Sumerian Swindle.

Throughout Mesopotamia, in the earliest days, there was far more fertile land available than there were workers to cultivate it because the population of Mankind was still relatively small. 

The riverine lands of Mesopotamia only needed the labor necessary to build irrigation systems in order to turn the dry earth into green fields.

But land development did not produce an immediate return.

And the landowners did not appreciate lazy tenants who only grew enough food for themselves without the excess production necessary as the interest payments demanded by the landowners.

So, law codes and leases emphasized the duty of the tenant to keep the soil and fieldwork in good order.

The individual farmer profited from intensive cultivation of less land.

Intensive cultivation is more efficient, is less work and produces a higher yield per measure of land, just as it does today.

However, the owner profited most by cultivating the largest possible area. [154]

The moneylenders and landlords preferred to pay minimum wages in grain to large numbers of workers who cultivated large fields just as they do today on the corporate farms using immigrant labor.

From Babylonian times, the life of the People became increasingly tied to the profits of the moneylenders.

And the moneylenders wanted to keep it that way.

Once again you should understand that the most striking organizational characteristic of Mesopotamian society in all periods was its economic division into the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have-Nots] – that is, those who held land and wealth and those dependent upon the wealthy landholders.

This was a feature of this first civilization from its earliest Ubaidian beginnings but it became more ruthlessly established once the Semites –

• Akkadians
• Amorites
• Aramaeans

began to take over the reins of power.

• Private
• literary
• legal

documents (including Hammurabi’s Law Code) portray a society in which individual rights again became an issue.

A considerable portion of the populace was legally free, attached to neither palace nor temple and owning their own fields outright.

But if they did not own their own fields, they were free to either starve to death or work for the awilum [the Haves] at low wages.

The private sector of the economy flourished in Amorite-dominated Babylonia, similar to the situation under the Amorites’ Semitic predecessors, the Akkadians under Sargon. [155]

Under Semitic rule, Mesopotamian society constantly became less spiritually centered and more materially centered as the muskenum [the Have-Nots] and the wardum [the slaves] found themselves no longer working in service to God but rather they found themselves working in bondage to the moneylenders, landlords and kings – the Ruling Elite.

Who were these Ruling Elite moneylenders who held themselves aloof and superior to those whom they had defrauded?

They were:

• swindlers
• thieves
• sex fiends
• homosexual perverts
• betrayers
• pimps

and murderers using the Sumerian Swindle to rob their people and their country while satisfying their own material desires.

And yet, they were at the very top of society simply because as awilum [Haves] they and their extended families had acquired wealth and power  so gradually over the centuries that no one noticed that they were criminals.

This division of society into the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have-Nots] was a result of the early use of the Sumerian Swindle and then of acquiescing to that Swindle simply because it:

“had always been here.”

But there was another invention that began to influence Society and to assume a power that was greater than its sum.

And that was a respect for a rule of laws that had been put into writing.

Writing was a useful invention but once laws began to be written, they tended to give a validity to themselves that was far beyond either the goodness or the falseness of the law.

Regardless of whether such laws were good or bad laws, once they began to be written down, they gained a power of God and of Eternity and of the King, simply because they were written in stone.

Laws were originally decreed by the mouth of the king.

But writing these decrees onto the clay tablets gave those laws an unchanging and eternal character.

Written laws became a contract between the king and his people written on clay.

When the clay tablets were baked, they became a contract written in stone.

And when the king proclaimed himself to be a servant of the gods, then these laws became a contract between the People and the gods with the king acting as the middleman and the enforcer of these laws.

And so, written laws became a powerful invention for controlling and structuring society especially since the clay tablets lasted hundreds and thousands of years longer than did the kings who decreed them.

The kings became dust while the laws written on the stone tablets became eternal decrees of the kings and the gods who stood behind them.

There are three basic concepts to keep in mind as you study Hammurabi’s Babylon.

First, both civil and criminal laws are usually made to address problems as they arise.

They do not merely come into being for no reason.

Second, laws are written by the rich and the powerful to protect their wealth and their power.

This is true today just as it was in ancient times.

In addition, laws can also be written by the social administrators (kings, in this case) as a way to regulate and control society in a commonly accepted manner.

And third, “justice” and “law” are not necessarily synonymous terms.

There can be laws that are “just” and there can be laws that are “unjust”.

Both are enforceable laws.

Whether they are laws that promote “justice” or laws that promote “injustice”, both are backed by the enforcement power of the State.

As the Amorites gained control over the peoples of Mesopotamia, they began to replace the human centered and god-centered laws and traditions of the Sumerians with their own harsher, wealth-centered laws of the Semites.

Even as these unjust laws were put into place, they still had the aura of respect given to them by the People because they were laws that allegedly came from the king, the one whom the gods had chosen to lead and protect the People.

These laws were written down for all to see who could read.

Though the numbers of those who could read during Hammurabi’s time were still relatively small, the laws actually had more power over those who could not read simply because in their innocent ignorance, they respected and revered the kings, priests, and the swindling moneylenders who stood above them, reading the words that were as mysterious to them as any other act of the gods.

Sumerian respect for the rule of written law and its divine source via the king, was carried over into Babylonian society by the Amorites because it served their purposes.

By this time, the moneylenders had found that “justice” belonged to those who wrote the laws.

Although they were members of the Ruling Elite and had the power to influence the king, only the king could write the laws.

Once again remember, writing was not invented to compose great poems or novels or hymns to God; it was invented to keep track of inventory and manage business agreements.

This was true in the very beginning of civilization around 3100 BC, and it was increasingly true during the formation of the Babylonian empire some 1,350 years later.

What a society values most can be seen in the types of writings that they produce.

A very large proportion of the cuneiform documents so far recovered – put as high as 95 per cent in the case of those in the Sumerian language, and probably not far short of that in the case of Akkadian – consists of the type of records sometimes referred to loosely as “contracts”, although they are mainly:

• receipts
• accounts
• records

of transactions of various other kinds concerning property.

These contracts, taking up 95% of all Sumerian and Babylonian writings, were a vital and necessary part of the legal, social and religious life of all of these people throughout Mesopotamia.

Keep this high percentage in mind because the subject of contracts will be brought up in later chapters although in a unique way.

It was generally recognized that a property transaction without written record was not valid, and to alter such a document was a heinous offense. [156]

Thus, the main concern for the writers of contracts was business, interest-bearing loans, inheritance, and the exchange of goods and services, etc.

Contracts became even more important to those who operated the Babylonia empire because the more humane character of the Sumerians was completely replaced with the more ruthless nature of the Semitic Amorites.

Under the Semites, laws justifying financial transactions became more important than laws justifying relations between Men.

In Sumerian society, the overwhelming reason for the very existence of Mankind was for service to the gods.

All of Sumerian society worked toward that goal.

This God-conscious lifestyle had given the Sumerians the:

• tranquility
• peaceful nature
• leisure

to create most of the inventions that had produced a vibrant Sumerian civilization.

These great inventions, many of them over 9,000 years old, are still in use by modern Man today.

And since all of the Sumerian people were mutually involved in this work of service to God and social maintenance, no Sumerian ever went hungry, without clothes or without a place to call home.

There was always work to be done that paid in rations of grain or measures of oil or wool. 

These could be consumed or bartered.

Although sometimes at war over land or water rights, Sumerian society was composed of cities and villages that worked in harmony for the common good and which provided for even the poorest of its citizens in a humane way.

Even the poorest widow could gather a bundle of sticks to trade for a fish from the vendor or a handful of grain from a neighbor.

Everybody made a living.

But as the moneylenders began replacing their own people with foreign labor, the competition for basic necessities became more severe.

The cost of labor went down, much to the satisfaction of the landlords and moneylenders, because people who were desperate for something to eat began to work for less and less in wages as the numbers of foreigners increased to take their jobs.

During the Sumerian revival of the Third Dynasty of Ur, wages were calculated on a daily basis, and rations on a monthly basis.

From this Ur III period on, the daily wage of a worker was 10 liters (about 2.5 gallons) of barley. 

This was a huge amount of food, far more than one man could eat by himself, enough to feed an extended family including grandparents and leaving enough left over for storage against the off season or for re-sale or for savings to buy some land.

This standard wage appeared in schoolbooks and continued to be an ideal for two thousand years.

However, regardless of this ideal wage, as the moneylenders foreclosed on more and more swindled properties and imported more immigrants, the actual hiring contracts showed that most people earned much less than ten liters per day.

The Semitic landlords and merchants (Akkadians, Amorites, Aramaeans) could negotiate for lower wages if they could cause the workers to become desperate enough.

And with a surplus of foreign workers, daily rations for male workers went as low as two liters of bread and two liters of beer – bare subsistence level for one man and not enough if a family was supported from these rations.

Workers also received two kilograms of wool per year, barely enough to make one garment. 

On special occasions, such as the New Year, workers might receive extra rations of:

• barley
• meat
• oil

Middle or higher officials had for their private use a subsistence field of approximately six to thirty-six hectares (15 to 90 acres).

The disappearance or running away of workers was not uncommon when they realized the huge amount of work expected of them for starvation wages.

Once in debt, people easily became impoverished due to the usurious rates of interest which had to be limited by decree of the king to 20 percent for silver and 12 percent for grain.

As in modern times, the moneylenders tacked on additional amounts as penalties for late payments and then charged interest on those penalties.

When the borrower could no longer pay these usurious rates made even more impossible through compound interest, he had to repay his debt by working for his creditor.

At all times during Mesopotamian history, the hopes and fears of all levels of the People were reflected in the omen texts:

the poor hoping to become rich, the rich fearing poverty, and both rich and poor worried about interference from the palace.

As early as the Third Dynasty of Ur, a system of balanced accounts grew from the elaborate procedures of:

• receipts
• debits
• redistribution

Each account tablet provided a balance sheet and was part of an elaborate series of successive statements, incomes, and expenses. Bookkeeping became an account of daily life. [157]

As the Semitic Amorites began to supersede Sumerian society, both the importance of accounting tablets and written contracts was literally, in the case of baked clay tablets, written in stone.

No business could be done without a written agreement or a contract.

No agreement was valid without a written contract.

A few of the Sumerian kings, upon their ascension to office, had tried to ameliorate some of the social destruction caused by the moneylenders with decrees which forgave the debt-slaves and released them from bondage.

These kings gave back to the widows and orphans the lands and houses that the perfidious moneylenders had seized for the debts of deceased fathers.

The kings took the swindled properties away from the moneylenders and returned them to their rightful owners.

Of course, the kings were very popular with the people whom they wanted to protect, and these manumissions seof debt became a general policy of many kings when they first took power.

However, none of these kings understood the basic, root problem caused by the Sumerian Swindle because it:

“had always been here.”

They accepted it as an ordinary part of civilization while trying to solve the on-going problems that the Sumerian Swindle had caused society with their temporary fixes of forgiving debts.

In the Sumerian system, as lord and owner of everything, the temple took steps by the issue of rations from the temple granaries to tide over the community during times of:

• flood
• drought
• blight

or sickness.

But as the Semitic Babylonian system took precedence, the independent land-owning peasant now had to borrow from the temples or from the moneylenders and merchants to stay alive – and borrow at interest.

Over the years, this resulted in the greater part of the peasantry becoming the victims to a crippling load of debt and the situation could only be cleared by drastic measures, namely by a general remission of debts and a fresh start.

And yet for all of this, the Amorite King Hammurabi is famous for his Code of Laws and for his concern for justice.

The word used for “justice” meant literally “the straight thing”.

Hammurabi made the establishment of justice one of his first concerns at his accession; and the formula by which his second regal year was known was:

“the year in which he set forth justice in the land”

a formula also employed by certain other rulers.

The “justice” referred to meant, primarily, economic justice.

Hammurabi explained his rise to kingship in the prologue to his laws:

“At that time, the gods Anu and Enlil, for the enhancement of the well-being of the people, named me by name:

Hammurabi, the pious prince, who venerates the gods, to make justice prevail in the land, to abolish the wicked and the evil, to prevent the strong from oppressing the weak, to rise like the sun-god Shamash, over all humankind, to illuminate the land.” [158]

One of the concerns of the king, to prevent exploitation of the population by the holders of large estates with consequent economic distress and political instability, involved the issue of decrees fixing prices and wages. [159]

Price caps had to be attempted because by Hammurabi’s time, the tamkarum [merchant moneylender] guilds had such a monopoly of transportation and of the markets that “supply and demand” economics did not exist.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] controlled both the supply and the transportation so they could demand whatever they wanted.

As a result of the monopoly ownership of farms, river transportation and markets by the merchants and moneylenders, prices rose, and wages were lowered to satisfy their insatiable greed.
While controlling supplies, these voraciously greedy merchants squeezed the People for whatever the market would bear.

Like the moneylenders, the merchants could acquire an inordinate amount of the wealth from the entire nation simply by raising prices while controlling the wholesale sources and transportation costs.

With the moneylenders squeezing the people before they could make a living and the merchants squeezing the people while they were trying to make a living and then controlling the markets for their goods after the harvest – just like in modern times – the rich got richer and the poor got poorer with neither the People nor the king understanding the basic cause of their problems.

As the Amorites took over Sumerian culture, the secrets of the Sumerian Swindle were still tightly held by the conspiring tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

These secrets were only passed along through family alliances.

After all, it was a swindle so even the kings must never know.

As an indication of what the kings considered to be the most important issues of their times, they naturally listed the most important topics first and the less important last.

Hammurabi’s Law Code contains sections dealing with rates of hire and wages at the very end of the laws immediately before the epilogue.

So, wages for the People were the last thing that concerned Hammurabi.

The laws of the Amorite state of Eshnunna, ante-dating Hammurabi by at least a century, begins with a list of controlled prices of most of the commodities basic to the economy such as: 

• barley
• oil of various kinds
• lard
• wool
• salt
• spice

and copper.

These are followed by clauses fixing the rate of hire of wagons and boats and the wages of various agricultural workers. [160]

So, inflation of prices was first in importance in Eshnunna and wages were second in importance.

But try as the kings might to give justice to their people, the subterranean forces of the merchants and the moneylenders were a perpetual source of subterfuge and corruption.

A good king working to make his people happy and prosperous was consistently being undermined by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who were working to make themselves prosperous at the expense of everybody else.

Before looking deeper into those famous Laws of Hammurabi to further identify the roots of our modern-day problems, it is profitable to have a peek at the kinds of people whom these laws attempted to regulate.

The Semitic merchants and moneylenders of Babylon were an unscrupulous lot, and their evil designs are felt even into our modern times today, over 4,000 years later.

Standardizing the weights and measures was one of Hammurabi’s earliest acts for:

“bringing justice to the land.”

Since Udaidian times before writing was invented, and throughout the entire ancient Near East, the various regions had used a variety of weights and measurements.

Even when they called these weights and measures by the same name, they were not identical.

Within a region or within the boundaries of an individual city-state, the People could deal with one another fairly since they all used the same weights.

But a shekel weight of silver (~8 grams) or a sila measure of grain (~ 1 liter) in Nippur would not be the same as a shekel or sila in Ashur.

The wily merchants could take advantage of this by first switching to heavier weights and bigger measuring baskets when they bought goods and then switching back to lighter weights and smaller baskets when they sold – and all while calling the different measures “shekels” and “silas”.

Hammurabi put a stop to this by standardizing all weights and measures throughout his empire.

Of course, this did not stop the merchants from continuing to switch the measures when they could get away with it any more than laws in modern days can stop the butcher from putting his thumb on the scale.

The Babylonian tamkarum [merchant moneylender] was the central figure in Old Babylonian trade, although at times he appears to have been more of a banker than a merchant.

But he was also a broker, a merchant baler, a moneylender, and even a government agent. [161]

Everything connected with increasing his wealth was of interest to the tamkarum.

Sometimes he traveled with his merchandise, but often he dispatched agents acting in his stead.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] was essentially a private capitalist.

However, under Hammurabi there was extensive trade in mass production items conducted by the government and directed by official “overseers” known as wakil tamkari.

As an accessory task, these officials collected and administered the taxes owed by merchant-moneylenders.

So, there was a very tight regulation of the merchant-moneylenders simply because the government wanted taxes.

The merchant moneylender was free to make money in any way that he pleased as long as he paid the government the taxes due on his profits.

At times the activities of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were limited by a system of permits regulating trade.

One clay tablet reads:

“We interrogated the tamkarum as to whether he carried a royal permit and then allowed him to pass.

The tamkarum who does not carry a royal permit, we send back to Babylon.” [162] 

Thus, the very close connection between the government and the businessman can be seen in that without government permits, they could not venture outside of the checkpoints and boundary waystations.

The trade routes by river, sea and land were carefully guarded.

Once again remember, it was not just for making a profit that the trade routes were so vital to Mesopotamia, everything that they needed had to be imported.

Food, they had in abundance.

• Water
• sunshine
• mud

and fertile soil gave them the basic necessities of Life.

But all other raw materials had to be brought in from other countries.

From the earliest times, the merchants and moneylenders had an importance to sustaining Mespotamian civilization far out of proportion to their actual worth as citizens.

Rather than working along with their fellow men as equal cogs in the wheels that turn civilization, the merchants and moneylenders insinuated themselves into a controlling position in society.

Unlike the controls exerted by the kings who theoretically were in power for the benefit of the People, and unlike the controls exerted by the priests who theoretically were in power as servants of the gods and the People, the merchants and moneylenders exerted control over kings, temples and people strictly for their own acquisitive and selfish benefit. 

Any bowing to the kings or genuflecting to the gods by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] basically had but one goal – hiding their treason to both kings and People behind an outer show of loyalty.

And yet, even the merchant-moneylenders believed in the gods.

It was not enough simply to have silver and want to be a merchant or a moneylender, it also required family connections and the permission of the king in the form of a royal permit. 

Because the greatest profits are derived from restricted and monopoly arrangements, not everyone who wanted one, could get a permit.

Only if one had silver and had the family connections to a tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guild could one enter into business – and a very ruthless and deadly business it was.

As was previously shown, money lending inevitably produced debt-slaves as a side-product.

If the moneylender did not want to deal with such slaves as he had acquired through foreclosure, he could sell them to those merchants who specialized in slave-trading.

But it was not good for business to keep the debt-slaves around as a reminder to the slave’s loving relatives of the ruthless nature of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

So, the debt slaves of Babylon became an international commodity as the moneylenders sold their own people as slaves to foreign nations.

As slavery became an international trade, the advantages to the merchant-moneylenders to ship the dispossessed people out of the country and to immigrate foreign land buyers into the country became clear.

Land was vacated for new buyers while removing the victims from the scene so they could not tell any warning tales to the new buyers (and future debt-slaves) of how they had fallen into slavery. 

Thus, international trade in slaves created profits for the local tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families as well as for their relatives in the surrounding countries.

Slavery was a family business.

Slaves in those days were not Negroes; they were Semites and Indo-Europeans.

Besides dealing in slaves, the tamkarum also organized trade in such commodities as: 

• foodstuffs
• wool
• timber
• garments

and

• textiles
• grain
• wine

and ale, metals, building materials such as reeds and bricks, cattle and donkeys.

Anything and everything that could be bought and sold was grist for the moneymaking mill of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

Many letters of the Old Babylonian period refer to internal trade in such commodities, and show that this trade was then, as at all periods in Babylonia, largely river borne.[163]

The merchant-moneylender was not only a merchant himself, but also a merchant banker, providing money for others to go on trading journeys for him.

Here again the laws of Hammurabi take notice of the situation, laying down regulations for the relations between the merchant-moneylender and his agents.

On the normal type of loan made by a merchant-moneylender to an agent for a trading journey, the merchant-moneylender could reckon on a minimum profit of 100%. [164]

This minimum profit was paid to him if his agent did not make a profit on the business for which the loan was made.

Thus, if the agent did poorly, the moneylender still made a 100% profit.

This agreement encouraged the second-tier agents to be as ruthless as possible in business dealings so as to make enough to pay the merchant moneylender 100% (or whatever rates were agreed upon) and still have enough left over for his own profit. [165]

There were also loans called tadmiqtum in which, if the agent made a loss on the enterprise, he simply returned the full capital sum to the merchant moneylender.

In this type of loan, it is likely that any profit was shared in a fixed proportion between the agent and the moneylender. [166]

So, you see, not only were the Babylonian merchants and moneylenders routinely and traditionally as well as legally, gathering in profits of 100% and greater but they were also guaranteed to at least get their money back on a bad deal.

Either the agent returned the loaned money or else the agent, himself, could be enslaved. 

Without a doubt, once the Semitic Amorites became the masters of Mesopotamia, business in Babylonia became exceedingly sharp.

One of the aspects of Babylonian business practices that seems to have been overlooked by the archeologists is how these kinds of interest rates could have endured for so long.

The Laws of Hammurabi were not declared by him simply to right wrongs or to protect the People or to prohibit excesses or to fix commercial rates or to set limits on the price of goods – although they did all of these things – but also to protect the monopoly of the tamkarum [merchant moneylender].

And why?

Because it is impossible in a free enterprise system for moneylenders to make a profit of 100% or more on a loan!

In a free enterprise system, where anyone can loan money at interest, the best way to make a profit on loans is to offer loans at a rate of interest below that of the other moneylenders and thus attract more borrowers.

In a free enterprise system, the biggest moneylenders can actually afford to offer loans below those of the less wealthy moneylenders.

And the less wealthy moneylenders can increase their profits by undercutting the competition from the richer moneylenders.

Both situations arise in a free enterprise system.

But as was earlier shown, this did not happen.

It did not happen because throughout Mesopotamia, money lending rates were standardized by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds.

Money lending was a cartel monopoly that extended beyond the borders of any one state. 

Also, the Laws of Hammurabi show that Babylonia did not have a free-enterprise system because it was a system that was regulated so that the merchants could not take total control of prices and thus drive the People completely into poverty.

And it was a system where the interest rates were officially fixed so that such high moneylender rates were legitimatized by the king, himself.

This was Secret Fraud #17 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed.”

The king, who was representative of the gods, legitimatized the swindles of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] by writing a law declaring their frauds to be “legal”.

But simultaneously, the laws put a limit on their voraciousness.

Even more than this, Hammurabi’s Laws show that this merchant-moneylender class, over the centuries, through their guilds and cartels and through their financial bribery of the various kings and dynasties, had ingratiated themselves so much into this early society of Mankind that there were actual laws that protected their businesses from competition.

By Babylonian times, business could not be practiced either on a local or an international scale without the permission of the kings and his tax collectors or without official warrants.

Thus, in Babylonian times, although the merchant-moneylenders had a huge opportunity for enormous profits, they were still limited in their greed by the laws of the kings on the one side and the censure of the priests on the other.

Between these two ameliorating forces of palace and temple, they did their best to suck the wealth out of the People.

Though they could not receive much support from the temple priests whose main objective was serving God, they did receive much support from the palace whose main objective was maintaining power in the increasingly hostile political environment of the ancient Near East. 

Excessive rates of interest were frowned upon, and the laws of Hammurabi provide that a tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] who charged more than the legal rate would forfeit his capital.

Still, these legal rates were extremely high and guaranteed huge profits as well as much power over the People who fell into the moneylender’s snare.

Hammurabi did, however, prohibit the ancient Sumerian Swindle of stealing a man’s property or enslaving him if he didn’t have silver but did have trade goods to repay the loan.

Secret Fraud #4 of the Sumerian Swindle is:

“Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral.”

But under Hammurabi, this part of the Sumerian Swindle was recognized as a swindle and declared illegal.

But neither Hammurabi nor any other king nor anyone who was not a merchant moneylender, recognized the entire Sumerian Swindle for what it was, simply because it:

“had always been here.”

Hammurabi’s Laws decreed that:

“If a man who has acquired a debt has no silver to return but has grain, then the tamkarum [merchant moneylender] shall take the interest on it in grain, but if the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] raises the interest on it above 100 qa of grain per gur (33 percent) he has delivered (on loan), he shall forfeit whatever loan that he made.”

Thus, the moneylenders could be assured of high profits but a limit of 33% was the law.

And with their interest rates being written into law, they could claim to an illiterate peasant that such high rates were not only “routine” but were also decreed by the king.

The people could thus be swindled legally.

This was very important to the moneylenders to legitimatize their frauds under protections of the king and his soldiers but woe to the king who did not know Secret Fraud #17 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed.”

The kings did not know the Sumerian Swindle otherwise they would have executed the moneylenders for treason.

The rates of interest payable on loans varied according to the period of Babylonian history and the commodity involved.

In the Old Babylonian period it was commonly 33 per cent on barley and 20 per cent on silver. 

It is often not very clear in the documents of the Old Babylonian period what the term of the loan was, nor is it explicitly stated whether payment of interest was monthly or annual. 

Generally, the loan would be until after the coming harvest-time or until the conclusion of the trading journey in connection with which it had been made.

But one thing is clear:

the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] had devised a variety of ways of scamming people out of their wealth through the loaning of both silver and commodities.

And all of these swindles relied upon a written contract as a means of binding their victims to an agreement that was witnessed by both man and gods.

Every bargain necessitated the calling in of a public scribe.

The bill, drawn up before witnesses on a clay tablet, enumerated the sums paid out, the names of the parties, the rate percent, the date of repayment, and sometimes a penal clause in the event of insolvency.

The tablet remained in the possession of the creditor until the debt had been completely discharged.

It was the creditor who kept the tablet as proof that the borrower owed him a debt.

The borrower often gave as a pledge either slaves, a field, or a house, or certain of his friends would pledge on his behalf their own personal fortune; at times he would pay with his own labor the interest which he would otherwise have been unable to meet.

And the stipulation was previously made in the contract of the number of days of corvée which he should periodically fulfill for his creditor.

If, in spite of all this, the debtor was unable to procure the necessary funds to meet his engagements, the principal became augmented by a fixed sum – for instance, one third – and continued to increase at this rate until the total value of the phantom interest reached that of the security.

It is easy to see, from the contracts of the Assyrian or Babylonian Empires, how in this manner the original sum lent became doubled or trebled in phantom amounts.

Generally, the interest accumulated till it was quadrupled.

The small tradesman or free workman, who by some accident had become involved in debt, seldom escaped this progressive impoverishment except by strenuous efforts and incessant labor. [167]

Does this sound familiar to you modern people, who have fallen victim to the Sumerian Swindle through the modern bankers’ frauds of mortgage loans and credit card debt?

If you wonder why, you work so much and yet still owe so much to the moneylenders, then you are a modern-day victim of the Sumerian Swindle.

As those farmers and workers sweated under the hot sun, working to pay off the loans-at-interest to the fat moneylenders who sat in the shade sipping iced drinks, their hatred for the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] grew.

Ice was carted down from the mountains in the winter and kept in ice houses insulated with straw so that the awilum [the Haves] could enjoy cold drinks in the summer even as the tenant farmers and debt-slaves sweated in the 120-degree heat.

Again remember, these ancient people were not less intelligent than we are in modern times. 

And when it came to turning a profit, most of the swindles being perpetuated by modern bankers and financiers today were invented in Mesopotamia over 5,000 years ago.

Every single modern financial scam today is based upon two baskets of grain producing three. 

The formula, I=Prt, Interest equals Principle times Rate times Time, was just as big a swindle in the ancient days as it is today.

And the merchant-moneylenders of ancient times were just as clever at stealing money as the bankers are today.

And upon a foundation laid by those ancient swindlers, is based our entire modern banking and financial systems of fraud and grand larceny.

For example, one very common type of loan, known as a hubuttatu loan, has often been assumed to mean an interest-free loan.

However, the moneylenders only gave interest-free loans to one another or to those whom they intended to manipulate and betray.

An hubuttatu loan denoted a loan in which the amount received by the borrower was less than the amount entered in the contract, the difference representing the interest payable.

If such a loan was not repaid within the time period originally agreed upon, then interest on the amount stated in the contract became due in the normal way.

The following contract provides an example of such a transaction:

“Shamash-Nasir the governor, son of Sin-Iqisham, has received from Ilushu-Nasir and Nanna-Ibni, 133 gur, 1 pi, 4 sutu of grain as a hubuttatu loan.

For two years there shall accrue no interest.

If he has not returned the grain by the third year, then he shall add interest.”

The names of witnesses follow, together with the date.

This odd amount of grain mentioned represents a real loan of 100 gur plus interest of exactly 33 and one-third per cent over two years, since 1 gur = 5 pi = 30 sutu.

At first, it may not seem relevant to the theme of this book to discuss these kinds of business practices, but it will all tie together as you begin to notice how these business transactions were guaranteed and adhered to.

These agreements and payment schedules were fixed in dried or in fired clay tablets as business contracts.

You already know this but think about it more carefully as the notion of:

• contracts
• agreements
• decrees

and laws are later used to brainwash and enslave entire nations.

Remember, the Mesopotamians used written contracts as a means of guaranteeing adherence to an agreement.

The primary condition for the validity of most commercial transactions (including loans) was the presence of witnesses and a written record in the form of a contract.

It is specified in the laws of Hammurabi that loans made without a contract and witnesses could not be recovered.

Thus, a contract was required by law.

An apparent exception to this general principal occurs at about this time in the Assyrian merchant colony in Cappadocia where a type of loan called ebuttu was known.

This could be transacted without either witnesses or a contract and which carried no interest. 

This, however, was a very specialized situation, as these loans were made between members of the same merchant colony, all of whom knew and trusted each other’s credit.

And these loans were made within the same tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guild.

In other words, from the very earliest times, the merchant-moneylenders would, within their own guilds, provide interest free financing to one another.

Guild members protected one another from falling into poverty from the variety of bad luck or political storms that could wipe out a man’s:

• investments
• silver
• goods

Such interest-free loans gave guild members the access to ready cash to take advantage of investment opportunities as they arose.

These tamkarum guilds had reached such a level of commercial sophistication and guild-member loyalty by 1750 BC, as to provide interest-free loans to their members without a contract and backed by their verbal assurances alone.

Make note of this for future reference.

Tablets recording commercial contracts were usually sealed with the cylinder seals of those concerned, or in the later period with the mark of a fingernail.

This clay contract was often then enclosed in a clay envelope containing a duplicate text whereby falsification was rendered impossible since the envelope would not be broken unless a dispute arose.

At such a time, the protected text within the clay envelope would be taken as the official version of the contract. [168]

Again, it was the written contract which kept business dealings intact just as written contracts do 143 in modern times.

However, unlike modern times where everybody can read and write, in the ancient days, reading and writing was accomplished by an elite few.

Most of the kings could not read or write and those few kings who could do so, bragged about it with inscriptions on their palace walls. 

The vast majority of the People delegated this task as well as any complicated arithmetic problems to the professional scribes who had learned the complicated cuneiform script through many years of intense study.

Even 1,500 years after its invention, for the common people writing was still as mysterious as the clouds in the sky or the rising of the sun.

To the common people, if something was written on the clay tablets, tablets that could last thousands of years after the writer and all of the witnesses had turned into dust, then there was something both eternal and true about such writing.

The clay tablets could record agreements that transcended time.

Indeed, these clay tablets did transcend time – even if the writing on some of them was not true.

Falsification or forgery of tablets was on occasions attempted but was a serious crime.

Even though the tablets were normally of unbaked clay, it was difficult to moisten the clay at the appropriate point only, obliterate the old inscription without damage to the remainder, and then superimpose the new text.

Forgery of a complete tablet was sometimes attempted, but this required the collusion of a competent scribe. [169]

Such cases are of interest not just for insight into the ancient mentality but as indications of the criminal nature of some of our ancient ancestors.

In matters of crime or legal disputes, the Sumerians and Babylonians were quick to resort to the judges for a settlement.

For them, the law was something decreed by the king and since the king was given his kingship by the gods, then there was a sanctity attached to the law that gave it a religious tinge.

In fact, this godly aspect of the law was a permanent part of Mesopotamia culture from the most ancient times.

Oaths were taken swearing upon the wrath of the gods.

And it is often recorded in the tablets how various parties would often refuse to take the oath:

“for fear of the gods.”

Or when a decision could not be reached by the judges or by the king, the intervention of the gods was resorted to, and the litigants were given the “River Ordeal” as a proof from the gods as to which had the righteous cause.

Truth was “determined” by which one of the two parties drowned and which one survived immersion into the river.

Both were given an equal amount of time underwater through the use of a water clock.

But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had the advantage of being immersed second, since they were the ones being sued in court.

It was a simple matter to bribe a judge to make the hole in the water clock smaller so that the poor litigant would be submerged for a fatal length of time.

The cuneiform tablets show many times how the poor people refused to accept the river ordeal, knowing that they would be killed, thus, conceding their case to the moneylenders.

With all of the petty squabbles and major cases of personal and pecuniary injury that the People brought for a decision, it was impossible for the king to handle it all and still maintain administrative control over the kingdom.

It was just too much work for one man.

So, from the earliest Sumerian times and throughout Babylonian and Assyrian times, the kings appointed judges to make determinations regarding the laws and litigation before the law.

Since the laws were relatively few in number, the judges had a lot of leeway in interpretation of those laws.

As you will see in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon, regarding the judges of the Jews, this office had a special power and reason for its existence.

And this office of judge has really not changed very much in the past 5,000 years.

The ancient judges, just as our modern judges, were not representatives of some ideal like “Truth” or “Justice” or “Fairness Among Men”, although this was part of what their office claimed to uphold.

The ancient judges, like our modern ones, were arms of the law and functionaries of the regime.

Their job was, and is, not to dispense “justice” in its purest sense but rather to weigh the claims of the litigants against the existing laws of the state.

As creatures of the state, a judge determines the validity of a litigant’s claims in relation to the decrees of the state.

A judge does not weigh a litigant’s claims on their own merits since this would give the judge the right to make law.

A judge does not make law but rather enforces existing law.

In such a position, he is merely acting as a petty king, doing what the king, himself, would approve.

There were no lawyers in the ancient times nor juries standing between the People and the law. 

So, the People had to deal directly with the judges and with no one else.

A judge in those ancient days had the power to interpret the law and to make decisions on cases.

The judge’s decision was final, although difficult cases could be deferred to the king and appeals could be made directly to the king.

The people of Mesopotamia were a very litigious people and very protective of their rights and possessions.

Arguments over:

• land boundaries
• inheritances
• loan agreements

and the countless reasons that modern people everywhere find for disagreeing with one another, were just as liable to provide them with plenty of reasons to squabble.

When two or more people could not agree over some property or personal problem, they would take their fight to the judges for a decision.

The clay tablets are filled with the records of these ancient legal decisions recorded by the court scribes.

However, there was no Akkadian word for “court,” that is, there was no special “court building” used exclusively for that purpose like in modern times.

The case was brought before a judge or benches of judges who sat at the gate or in the temple courtyard.

These judges were appointed by the king from among his trusted followers.

Or they could be appointed from among the elders of the city.

They received a regular ration of food and garments as payment for their services.

Some of them, known as “judges of the king,” also were responsible for administrative duties.

By the beginning of Hammurabi’s Old Babylonian period, some men were given the professional title of “judge.”

Judges were expected to display high standards of professional conduct, as noted in the Code of Hammurabi:

“If a judge tried a case and made a decision and had a sealed document executed, but later changed his judgment, they will convict that judge of changing his judgment.

He will pay twelve times the claim involved in that case, and they will remove him in the Assembly from his judgment seat, and he will not sit in judgment with the judges again.”

Thus, Hammurabi limited the power of the judges from having the power of a king to change his mind or of being bribed.

A good deal is known about the administration of justice in Babylonia.

There were court officials who ensured that the court’s decision was executed.

The Old Babylonian courts had a sheriff (literally, “soldier”) whose duties included such things as recovering property or bringing a baby to court to record its birth.

Another official attached to the court was a barber.

One might find it peculiar to have a barber attached to a court of law until you realize that when a moneylender brought a debtor into court or a debtor denied the validity of the debt by demanding a court determination, if the debtor lost the case he could be enslaved.

Upon the judge ruling in the moneylender’s favor, it was the barber who gave to the newly decreed slave the hair cut characteristic of their status.

The barber also performed the task of destroying tablets nullified by a royal edict.

It was the custom in Mesopotamia to thoroughly destroy nullified tablets by pounding and stomping them back into the dust from which they came, leaving no trace.

Destruction of legal documents was as ancient an act as writing them in the first place.

And the advantages to themselves of destroying evidence and of leaving no trace of a document was not lost on the merchant moneylenders.

A herald also was an official at the court; his duties involved announcing official information.

It was the herald who publicized the loss of a cylinder seal and its dates, so any documents sealed after that date would be deemed invalid.

He also advertised a runaway slave, announced government conscriptions, and along with the sheriff (a soldier) presided over foreclosed house sales.

The herald needed the sheriff (soldier) to accompany him since the foreclosed homeowners often resorted to violence against the moneylenders who were stealing their houses.

Murder trials traditionally were the king’s domain.

Innumerable:

• Sumerian
• Babylonian
• Assyrian

legal documents have been excavated.

All major business transactions and agreements required a contract.

Legal documents recorded purchases, employment, and exchange of goods and property.

In addition, there were:

• partnership deeds
• gifts
• deposits

and debt certificates, marriage and adoption contracts as well as inheritance documents. [170]

Only the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds used verbal promises between their guild members without resorting to written contracts.

Writing was held in such high esteem that the existence of a written document was accepted as proof that an agreement had been made between two parties.

This narrow and rather superstitious view of what writing is and what writing does, was to be fraudulently exploited by the moneylenders of Babylon in the following centuries.

This theme is more fully explained in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon.

By the time of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC), the practice of paying palace dependants by the distribution of rations had been largely replaced by the allotment of grants of land, generally held by virtue of the performance of certain military or civil duties.

This system of labor service became vital to the Old Babylonian economy, providing reserves of ready labor and military personnel, ensuring the performance of services essential to the state, and as a very efficient means of farming the land.

This system, known as ilkum [military land grant], is found in both the Old Babylonian and the ensuing Kassite periods.

Although “fief” is a convenient English term for rendering the Babylonian word, which signifies both service and grant, no idea of a feudal relationship between the king and his tenants should be read into the Babylonian institution.

Such a grant might be made to an individual or a group and several ilkum might be held by one person.

The “fief” [ilkum] was reckoned in days of service, and in some cases, it was possible to provide a substitute to carry out some or all of the relevant duties.

The length of time required in service to the king is uncertain, but there are indications that relatively short periods may have been involved.

The possession of an ilkum, despite the burdens attached to it, was highly valued.

As farmland, it not only provided food and wealth to the owner, but such ownership elevated that owner to the social level of awilum [the Haves].

Many of Hammurabi’s letters deal with complaints received from tenants saying they had been wrongly kept out of or evicted from their ilkum.

Other letters are concerned with the granting of ilkum, fixing of boundaries, neglect of land, etc.

They mention numerous craftsmen and professional men who are holders of ilkum:

• archers
• shepherds
• bakers
• smiths
• jewelers
• cobblers
• singers

and soothsayers. [171]

But as explained below, the ilkum [military land grant] was a sort of official swindle.

Although Hammurabi’s fame is securely ensured by the numerous records of his just administration, by the histories recorded on the clay tablets found in his library and by his Law Code, he was not the only king with administrative skills.

To the north in Assyria, Shamshi-Adad’s administration was also highly organized with governors appointed over the various districts under his control.

Permanent garrisons were stationed in the towns throughout Mesopotamia and additional troops were levied for each campaign, both from the settled population and from the nomads.

The letters of Hammurabi provide much insight into other branches of administration and the functioning of the community in general.

Most striking is the time and labor devoted to public works, especially the maintenance of canals which served both to provide water and as a major means of transport.

The wealth of the king and the temples, which was considerable, included land and flocks and herds.

The letters show that the governors of the larger cities were responsible for the animals pastured in their districts, and that both royal and temple herds were placed under the same chief shepherd.

Accounts were rendered to Hammurabi himself, showing that at least in some instances the king controlled the collection of the temple revenues as well as his own.

Tax collectors unable to exact their full dues were forced to make up the deficit themselves.

So, these tax collectors were by necessity a ruthless group.

The king kept a close eye on his officials, and there are letters in which the latter defend themselves to him against charges of negligence. [172]

Going to war with a neighboring village or city or state, required soldiers.

From its earliest existence as a tribal society to the grander scale of dynasties that ruled large sections of countryside, these warriors were drawn from the general populace as they were needed.

Throughout the Sumerian period, the required warriors were either volunteers who had been excited into a battle fever by the harangues of the kings and priests or volunteers who had leaped to the defenses by the emergency of foreign attack.

Otherwise, they were conscripts who had been drafted under duress from among the farmers and townspeople.

When the emergency was over, the survivors returned to their occupations of tilling the fields and attending to their trades.

Warfare was a seasonal occupation and whenever possible was avoided during the times of sowing and harvest or during the nastier weather patterns of rain or heat.

These ordinary farmers were only part time warriors as needed.

It was not until the Semitic Dynasty of Sargon the Great (2374-2239 BC) that a regular profession was developed for a full-time warrior on duty as part of a standing army.

His payment of rations was taken from the taxes levied on the farmers and merchants and so it was a continuing expenditure from the king’s treasury.

During Hammurabi’s Dynasty (1792-1750 BC), with the swindling moneylenders and their relatives in the slave trade even more firmly in control of the wealth of the state, a new method of “paying” the soldiers was developed by giving them their own parcels of farmland.

A soldier could still expect rations and loot during a campaign, but afterwards, instead of merely being dismissed and sent back into society to make a living as best he could, this new method of conscription was devised to keep him 146 in a state of perpetual service. [173] 

During times of peace, this exchange of land ownership in return for military service kept the soldier permanently ready to assume military duties as required.

Although soldiers were allocated plots of land in return for military service throughout all of Mesopotamian history, the Babylonian ilkum [military land grant], had a unique twist.

The ilkum [military land grant] was actually a very clever trick.

Of course, no one can live without food.

By giving the soldier his own plot of land to farm, he could grow his own food during times of peace while land ownership gave him a vested interest in defending the state and his own property in times of war.

Also, as a landowner, he was automatically counted as among the awilum [the Haves].

So, his social status as well as his personal prosperity were enhanced in ratio to his hard work at producing a crop.

Also, as a landowner, he paid taxes to the state, thus bringing profits to the king.

And because the land did not cost the king anything, the soldier was induced to perform a vital function at no cost to the state other than whatever was required by the state to arm and feed him during actual war.

It was a better deal for the king than for the soldier, but because Mesopotamian society was divided into the awilum [the Haves] and muskenum [the Have-Nots], all social prestige revolved around wealth and the ownership of property and the avoidance of indebtedness. 

Being able to grow your own food without working on someone else’s farm for starvation wages, was the only other alternative besides slavery.

As the Semitic moneylenders squeezed society, the well-fed and God-conscious times of Sumerian Culture became a distant and forgotten memory as the low wages and poverty became normal for the average citizen.

So, these ilkum [military land grants] were much sought after and highly prized because they were the only way for the muskenum [Have-Nots] to quickly raise their social status and become awilum [Haves].

But the Babylonian Dynasty did not depend just on professional soldiers.

Conscripts could be drafted from among the populace as required.

If a citizen was conscripted for the royal campaign and failed to appear, he would be executed. 

So, by this time, the nasty and ruthless exigencies of war were well developed and enforced. For 1,500 years, the scheming moneylenders and landlords had been able to inveigle their neighbors into war – so profitable to themselves – while avoiding military service and combat, themselves. 

They could save their own lives by hiring a substitute from among the unemployed and starving poor whom they had defrauded.

Hammurabi put a stop to this.

In his Code, he forbade hiring substitutes to perform military duties.

But even so, some cuneiform contracts have survived that prove that the wiley tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were still able to hire a substitute or barter commercial debts and credits to designate a substitute.

The deceit, perfidy and cowardice of the moneylenders is proven in these ancient contracts. 

With their wealth and influence and criminal nature, they were above the law of the king, as long as they could devise some sort of subterfuge for evading the law.

The military lists distinguished between:

• soldiers
• substitutes
• reserves

There were parallel systems of conscription for:

• nomads
• vassal states
• foreigners

so that war service spread throughout all levels of society.

But in spite of whatever laws Hammurabi and his successors decreed, during the Babylonian period and thereafter, no one but the moneylenders and priests were exempt from military service.

To further tie the soldiers permanently into the Babylonian conscription system, the ilkum [military land grant] could be inherited by his children but could not be sold.

As decreed in the code of Hammurabi:

“The field, orchard, or house of a soldier, a fisherman, or a state tenant will not be sold.

If a man purchased a field, orchard or house of a soldier, fisherman, or a state tenant, his deed will be invalidated (literally, ‘his tablet will be broken’), and he will forfeit his silver. 

The field, orchard or house will return to its owner.”

These laws show the importance to Babylon of keeping the soldiers and fishermen tied to a single location through land ownership.

Fish was an important source of food and fishermen were (and still are) notorious for moving to wherever the fish are.

Hammurabi did not want either of these two professionals to wander off or relocate where they couldn’t be found.

But, once again, the merchants and moneylenders had been able to inveigle an exception for themselves in the laws.

While no other citizens were allowed to sell their ilkum plots of land, the naditum [priestess-moneylender] and tamkarum [merchant moneylender] were allowed to do so. [174]

They could do this as long as the buyer agreed to take over the obligations of an ilkum [military land grant].

But it should not be assumed that there was any religious reason for an exception in the law being made for these two social classes.

The naditum [priestess-moneylender] and tamkarum [merchant moneylender] were both practitioners of the Sumerian Swindle.

Therefore, they had the silver enough to influence a king such as Hammurabi.

Although naditum is often translated as “priestess”, these women attached to the temples were involved in various kinds of business transactions and played an important role in Babylonian economic life, lending silver and grain, supplying capital for trading expeditions, and so forth.

They were one of the conduits of wealth that the Sumerian Swindle brought into the temples.

The naditum [priestess-moneylender] lived and worked in the gagum or “cloister”, a compound associated with the temple.

Like the merchant, she invested her money in houses and landed property that she rented out on lease.

The naditum [priestess moneylender], although she could marry, seems to have been under an obligation of celibacy.

Despite certain ties and duties to the cloister, the naditum [priestess-moneylender], whose background was always to have been a daughter of the awilum [the Haves], lived and functioned as a private individual.

Evidence for this unique institution, which flourished in the Old Babylonian period, comes mainly from Sippar, where the cloister was attached to the Shamash temple. [175]

Thus, the occupation of moneylender was a monopoly of the wealthy families that had penetrated as an organized and exclusive mycelium into every strata of society.

Tamkarum [merchant moneylenders], sabitum [alewife-moneylenders] and naditum [priestess-moneylenders], all practiced the same secrets of the Sumerian Swindle among their variety of social groups while offering identical loan rates.

At the various temples, the moneylenders dedicated their daughters to the service of that god as sabitum [priestess-moneylenders].

And as a show of their “piety”, they also offered their best sex slaves to the temple as holy prostitutes.

Thus, the temples became subverted and corrupted by the daughters and the gifts of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

From the earliest times, the merchants and moneylenders were a moral degradation of society.

They corrupted both palaces and temples just as they do in modern times.

It was an important profit strategy for the moneylenders to install their daughters in the temples as priestesses because of Secret Fraud #6 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will.”

By Hammurabi’s time, the tamkarum [merchant moneylender] was very much in the control of both the palace as well as the temple whose money lending was administered by the naditum [priestess moneylender].

And to cheaply protect their wealth, they tied the soldiers to the land through the ilkum [military-land-grant].

The land had cost them nothing because they had swindled it from the poor or had captured it through warfare.

Mention has been made of the important professions in Mesopotamia but there is one other ancient profession that was refined and regulated to its highest degree in Babylonia.

This profession is not more than a footnote in the cuneiform and archeological records, but it is as old as civilization, itself.

In some ways, it can be said to be one of the basic building blocks of Babylonian society and it is still a major influence in modern times as well.

The profession of tavern keeper has a long and valuable history.

But it is a history that has never been recognized for what it is until now.

Because it:

“has always been here”

we tend to take the beer bar, tavern or cocktail lounge for granted even if we do not understand it’s:

• social
• political
• economic

workings.

The basic importance of the:

• beer bar
• tavern
• cocktail lounge

may be ignored in modern times, but looking back at the origins of this ancient institution will be of importance now as well as in later chapters.

Once again, understand that the laws of any nation are written by those who have the power to write such laws; they are not written by the powerless or the poor.

Because the Laws of Hammurabi gave special treatment to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and the naditum [priestess-moneylenders], we can get an insight into the relative power and influence these social classes had in those ancient times.

However, in all law codes worldwide, a special exception under the law indicates a special power over the law.

And this special power was granted by the kings only to the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

The moneylenders could persuade the kings (whether through gifts or bribery or civic charity or emergency funds) to grant them special protection and special privileges and special status that no other class of people in society could enjoy.

This special exception was also extended to another social class closely allied with the moneylender and merchant guilds, known as the sabitum or “alewife”.

The sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was a tavern keeper engaged in the preparation and sale of intoxicating beverages, but it is clear that she dealt also with basic commodities in the manner of a small broker.

Indeed, in origin and etymology a “broker” denotes a retailer of wine (from “to broach” a cask).

This occupation as a brewer of beer and seller of beer and wines was another tradition handed down from the Sumerians as being a female-only job.

There are reasons why this profession was restricted to women alone.

The sabitum [alewife-moneylender] not only brewed beer but she managed one or many taverns along with all of the other side-businesses that taverns create.

Besides beer and wine sales and food service, taverns also could provide room rentals, horse and donkey stabling, and other traveler’s accommodations.

They were places of entertainment with:

• music
• dancing
• poetry
• song

and prostitution, all quickened and fueled with draughts of beer and wine.

Being the focal point not only of local farmers and towns people but also of weary and thirsty traveling merchants, the taverns were places of gossip and trade.

A drunken merchant might make a good deal on some rare trade goods to a sabitum [alewife-moneylender].

Or the drunken farmers and local merchants might trade away their day’s wages for just one more flaggon of beer.

An alcoholic Mesopotamian laborer was no different than a modern drunk who might give away the last of his silver or his best garments or his wife’s necklace of seashells or trade the last of his rations of barley for just one more drink.

Perhaps nursing a hangover, he did not remember it the next morning, but his thumbprint or the impression of his garment seam on the wet clay tablet was the sabitum’s [alewife moneylender’s] guarantee that she would be paid.

As in modern times, a man was more easily swindled out of his wealth when throwing the dice or guessing at straws when he was drunk.

Just as the moneylenders knew how to steal from people simply because they could read and write and calculate arithmetic sums, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] and her relatives knew how to calculate the best ways of winning at dice and cheating at Three-Shells-and a-Pea.

And for any customer who became unruly for whatever reason, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] always had a muscular bouncer available to throw the bum out.

 With this kind of economic power and social influence, even with women’s lower social prestige under Semitic rule, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was a well-respected and influential member of Babylonian society.

She was not a mere bargirl but was a powerful business operator.

In fact, one of the most famous of Sumerian “alewives”, Kubaba, founded one of the early dynasties at Kish. [176]

Reflecting not only her own talents but also the higher esteem that women held in Sumerian society than they were ever to enjoy in Babylonian society, Kubaba was the only woman ever to rule a Mesopotamian city.

Even so, the taverns of Babylon were places of debauchery just as most taverns are today. 

Loose morals and drunken foolishness were no different in those ancient times than can be experienced by any modern imbiber of alcoholic beverages today – except for one very important detail.

In the days of ancient Sumer and Babylon, there were far fewer laws to restrain a citizen’s selfishness, chicanery or carnal desires.

And as far as moral restraints, the religions of those times encouraged a full enjoyment of Life since what promises there were of an Afterlife were nothing but the promise of eternal gloom in the darkness of the grave.

Prostitution and sex-slavery was just one of the special relationships that the sabitum [alewife moneylender] had with the tamkarum [merchant moneylender].

She was not necessarily a prostitute, herself, but she was certainly a supplier of whores to her customers.

Archeological digs have unearthed a variety of bas-reliefs, clay sculptures and erotic advertising plaques that had adorned the entryways of the various taverns.

These depicted women in various nude poses laying enticingly on beds as well as graphic examples of the sexual services they offered to their male customers.

Because the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] always had a surplus of debt-slaves under his yoke, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was a prime market for them.

After abusing these poor, enslaved women, themselves, the moneylenders were the main providers of sex slaves to the taverns and whore houses across the entire ancient Near East. 

Thus, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] and the sabitum [alewife moneylender] made a perfect business cartel.

But it was not an equal partnership.

The sabitum [alewife moneylender] relied upon barley to brew her beer as well as upon the import merchants to supply her wine, both products were controlled by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender].

The prostitutes she owned and hired out were also provided by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender].

And when she could discover important political or economic information from drunken traders and travelers, it was the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] to whom she sold these vital tidbits.

True, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was an independent businesswoman but she was not supreme in her independence because her business was intertwined with and subservient to the machinations and power of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

And when the moneylenders wanted to spread rumors and agitate the People toward rebellion or to incite them to buy or sell their lands and crops under rumors of war, the taverns operated by the alewife was the prime origin of such propaganda and rumor mongering.

Spreading:

• news
• rumors
• lies

among the people is quickly accomplished when they are gathered around the beer pot, gossiping and at their leisure.

Thus, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] and her line of business became an integral part of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] cartel from even the very earliest Sumerian times. 

• Moneylenders
• pimps
• war mongers

and booze merchants are ancient partners who have been conspiring together since before anyone can remember.

The Mesopotamian Mafia and the Guild Wars

As I stated in the beginning of this history, the Jews are no different than any other sort of organized criminal conspiracy.

Or if there is any slight difference at all, it is simply that they have been more than usually successful at hiding their perfidious evil.

How they have managed this, will be found in the following chapters and in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon, and Volume III, The Bloodsuckers of Judah.

But for now, you and I – with 2000 years of recorded history behind us – you and I can now stand on the highest ziggurats of baked clay and temple mounds of mud bricks of the Old Babylonian Dynasty of King Hammurabi.

We can shade our eyes from the broiling sun with our protecting palms at our brows and gaze across the entire known world.

From our lofty view across time and space, we can look up the Euphrates River or down the Tigris River, peer into the distant reaches of the Persian Gulf at Bahrain, Oman and distant India, strain our eyes to see into the wiggling mirages of the Syrian Desert or west into Canaan or northwest into Anatolia or southwest into Egypt or Arabia or across the Mediterranean Sea to Crete.

But no matter where we look – now, at this point in world history, over 2000 years after civilization began – there are absolutely no Jews to be found anywhere.

No matter where we look in this time period of 1750 BC – from the reed swamps of the south where Sumerian civilization was born, to the northern plains of Assyria where much of history is soon to begin, across the deserts to the west where dwell the Canaanites and Egyptians or toward the Eastern Iranian plateau where the Elamites and Persians will soon begin their own mighty steps into the historical record – no matter where we look in the entire world, there are no Jews anywhere to be found.

None.

Zero.

Nothing.

How is this possible?

Today’s Jews hold aloft what they call their “holy scriptures” where-in they claim to be the original and the very first people to be created, even naming the original couple as Adam and Eve.

Is there some mistake here?

It is now 1750 BC.

Civilization has been thrashing around for over 2,000 years without a single Jew making an appearance.

In addition, the archeological record shows people living on the Earth during the Stone Age for millions of years previous to this.

And when the Stone Age had a respite from the Ice Age, farming and civilization began in the flood plains of Mesopotamia and followed soon thereafter in the Nile River valley with the beginnings of the Egyptian civilization.

But in all of this time, there were no Jews anywhere, under rocks, beneath trees, anywhere on the entire earth under the vast sky.

Surely, the very people who make the biggest claims of being the very most holy and ancient people on earth – and, indeed, the original and very first people on earth – would not tell lies, would they?

There were no Jews for all of those long periods of time but there were, however, some rather well connected, rich and ruthless people working in the background who were not Jews.

Rich, ruthless and well-connected they were, but they were not Jews – yet.

They were tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]; they were naditum [priestess-moneylenders]; they were sabitum [alewife-moneylenders].

And along with their relatives who helped them oversee their vast land holdings, monopoly business enterprises and myriads of slaves, they all belonged to the social class of the awilum [the Haves].

None of them were Jews because 150 Jews and Judaism had not yet been invented.

They were tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] but they were not Jews — yet.

In the ancient days, sons were expected to follow the occupation of their fathers; and daughters were expected to accept a good match and to marry into mutually beneficial families.

Families worked as family groups and there was very little room in society for individuals making their own way without help.

Our modern concepts of the “rugged individual” were unknown because such “rugged individuals” would have perished in those ancient societies.

In those days, everyone lived communally with the help of their:

• family
• friends
• neighbors

Without such a social safety net, the lone individual had little chance of survival.

So, the son of a farmer became a farmer.

The son of a tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] either became a tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] or he managed one of the family businesses.

Thus, the family enterprises prospered without interruption.

All of these tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] businesses were extended family operations. 

Large families of wealthy men who would perhaps also have a second wife and several concubines along with all of their children plus the many relatives on both sides of the family, always had many mouths to feed and many jobs to fill.

More children meant that more jobs were needed to satisfy the increasing size of the family and to perpetuate and increase family wealth.

Thus, as family sizes grew, the tamkarum [merchant moneylender] patriarchs sought greater control of existing markets and expansion into foreign markets.

They ruthlessly practiced Secret Fraud #8:

“Large crime families are more successful than lone criminals or gangs; international crime families are the most successful of all.”

A moneylender could teach his sons the secrets of the Sumerian Swindle, but by its very nature it had to remain a secret among the very few.

The Secret was simple, but it was a secret none-the-less.

The Sumerian Swindle was not something that was shared among every member of the moneylender families.

The secret of the Sumerian Swindle was shared only with the most loyal sons who were to take over the moneylending side of the business.

Not all sons were taught unless they were directly working in the racket.

Much like modern-day:

• Mafia
• Yakuza
• Triad

and Banker crime families do today, they employed numerous relatives in legal businesses while only a very few of the inner circle were entrusted with the secret, illegal side of the operations.

So, most of these relatives could work in the family business doing the necessary tasks and enjoying the excessive profits without ever learning the secrets of the Sumerian Swindle.

Lending silver and grain at interest had:

“always been here”

so why would they question it?

There were always a variety of jobs that the numerous other relatives of a tamkarum [merchant moneylender] family were required to do.

A tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] dealt in a variety of side businesses besides the money lending racket.

So, he always had a variety of positions that needed to be filled by trusted employees.

And who could be more trusted than a relative who needed a job and who wanted to share in the richness of the spoils?

A tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] could not possibly manage his great wealth, his various business deals, his large estates with their tenant farmers and indentured servants and slaves while overseeing the work of his numerous debt-slaves all by himself.

He needed help.

And his most trustworthy help was found among his own family, his own relatives, his own tribe.

From the very earliest of times, the business swindles, the property confiscations, the management operations and the slave system of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were family operations.

Like the modern-day Mafia and Gypsy crime families, the profits were shared with the entire extended family and clan leaving no one out.

All of them were not equally guilty of committing crimes, but all of them were beneficiaries of those crimes that their patriarchs and tribe members had committed.

The source of their wealth was never discussed with anyone not of their family and tribe.

Telling the secrets of the family business was taboo.

Because they all benefited in the profits, they all benefited by keeping their mouths shut, doing what they were asked to do, and protecting their clans from outsiders.

As an individual, there is more silver to be made working for a rich uncle as an overseer of his many professional shepherds who cared for his numerous flocks than could be earned merely as the hired shepherd overlooking those goats.

So, with a higher wage to be earned by working for a rich relative than by working for a stranger, the numerous family members of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] were always eager to lend a hand in the business and to enjoy membership in the social class of the awilum [the Haves].

To do otherwise, would mean banishment to the farthest fringes of the tribal family, perhaps becoming one of the muskenum [the Have-Nots] or even a wardum [a slave].

In tribal societies, the lone individual had very little chance of survival.

It was the entire family and tribe who worked together for mutual benefit that prospered.

This is how it:

“has always been.”

The Semitic goat rustlers of Mesopotamia always had very large families.

And because of their genealogical organization, everyone knew the hierarchical position of everyone else.

Order and discipline were maintained both because the father or patriarch was head of the family and head of the clan but also because the patriarch had control of the family businesses and portioned out the shares in the form of high wages to family members and low wages to the strangers who served the family members.

Silence about their dealings, was foremost.

The Sumerian Swindle was the basis of their power but how this secret money-making engine could be used to enhance all other aspects of their operations was equally under the family only need-to-know.

With the shekels of silver gained through moneylending, the loan-sharking side of their operations required that they also have under their employ a variety of enforcers to help them extract payments from those who were unable or unwilling to pay.

These strong-arm gangsters did not have to be members of the family; they only needed to do what they were told, such as dragging a screaming child away from his parents or a wailing daughter away from an indebted father who drank too much or gambled too much in the tavern of the sabitum [alewife-moneylender].

Debt-slavery was an accepted social disability in Hammurabi’s Babylonia because:

“it had always been here.”

But it could not exist without the moneylenders insisting that it exist.

They were parasites who lived and prospered under the protection of the king.

And so, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] class were not just wealthy businessmen who dealt in the usual goods of commerce and industry.

They were not just the rich and respected members of the wealthy awilum class [the Haves] whose members included the kings and court officials and the priests and priestesses of the temples, but they were also something quite worse.

Of course, they had money and property gained through their numerous commercial businesses.

But their wealth was also derived from the secret dealings of:

• loan sharking
• alcohol debauchery
• gambling
• prostitution

and slavery.

All of these were part of the Old Babylonian moneylenders’ scams of 1750 BC just as they are a part of the hidden business mix of our own modern day banking dynasties.

As criminals, all of them had their own collection agents in the person of soldiers (police) and hired goons.

But there is more.

The moneylenders first gained their wealth through the Sumerian Swindle by taking advantage of both the rich and the poor through lending-at-interest.

But their greatest victims were the poor who not only lost everything that they had, but their very freedom into slavery as well.

The moneylenders ruthlessly took advantage of the poor and they were betrayers of trust. 

Pretending to be honest businessmen, they took advantage of the People’s good faith through Secret Fraud #3:

“Loans rely on the honesty of the borrower but not the honesty of the lender.”

Those who borrowed from them believed that the stated percentages were simple interest even while the covert compound interest drove them into servitude.

The moneylenders of Babylon were also seducers of the innocent in that they debauched the girls and boys and young women whom they had wrested from their parents and husbands through debt slavery and then used them for their own perverted desires.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were rapists and pimps who prostituted those abused youths to the brothels and taverns under their control.

Since Sumerian times, the moneylenders had been homosexual perverts who raped the boys whom they had seized and seduced their male slaves under threat of death or castration.

Cruel perverters of the downtrodden were they.

And they were traitors to the gods.

As the various tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families vied with one another for profits and political leverage, they found that their gods were getting in the way.

The Sumerian-Babylonian religions were composed of many gods each of whom lived in different cities and who had their own geographical regions of power separate from all other gods.

Those ancient cities whose temples had monopolized the worship of the most powerful gods, prospered the most.

Nippur was still the holiest city in Babylonia as it had been for the previous 3,000 years of Ubaidian and Sumerian Culture.

The Sumerian gods were the same gods worshipped by both the Babylonians and Assyrians. 

But the Semitic speaking:

• Akkadians
• Babylonians
• Assyrians

changed the names of the gods as the political influence of the temples began to shift away from Sumeria and toward Babylonia and Assyria.

Inanna, the Sumerian goddess of love, became identified with the Semitic name of Ishtar, whose visible form was the planet Venus, the morning and evening star.

She absorbed many attributes which originally had belonged to a number of other Sumerian goddesses, but her major aspects were those of goddess of love and of war.

Cults of a sexual nature were practiced in her honor in many places.

Those cults required a steady supply of sex slaves to serve the goddess and to bring income to the temple from the men who came to “worship” her via the temple prostitutes.

Ishtar was also a goddess of war because war brought more slaves into the power of the merchant-moneylenders, slaves who could be used both for Ishtar, as the planet Venus, is often thought of in a group with Sin, the Moon-god, and Shamash, the Sun-god.

Because the Sun-god saw everything in his daily course above the earth, Shamash was the god of justice.

There was a strong moral element in the cult of Shamash who was an unsparing enemy of the wrongdoer and who was a friend of the just and of the oppressed.

A god often associated with Shamash was Adad, a storm-god who was originally of West Semitic origin [177] as the storm-god, Baal.

Even with the changes of the names of the gods from Sumerian to the Semitic Old Babylonian language, the gods were still, and the benevolent justice of the gods was taught within the temples.

Thus, the moneylenders were always at odds with the gods because by the very nature of the Sumerian Swindle, they could never do business and be honest both at the same time.

Over the millennia, as their methods of making profits became more intertwined with a variety of socially corrosive occupations and criminal enterprises, not only did the moneylenders fall under the restrictive laws of the kings and the religious censure of the priests, but the moneylenders became absolutely the most hated people in all of Mesopotamia.

So, to save their lives from the wrath of the People, they demanded extra protection under the laws of the king.

To repeat once again, laws do not arise in a vacuum, but they are promulgated as needed to meet the requirements of society or they are created to further the schemes of those who control society.

The laws are made by the rich and powerful and never by the poor and powerless except in cases where the poor and powerless rise up and destroy the rich and powerful.

Only then, do the poor make the laws.

Of course, the crass impulses of the People have to be regulated so that everyone in Society can understand that deeds such as:

• theft
• rape
• assault
• murder

etc., are anti-social and socially destructive.

So, such acts cannot be tolerated in society and are thus declared to be crimes.

And yet, the Sumerian Swindle, itself, was never declared to be a crime simply because:

“it has always been here.”

The laws were written by the awilum [the Haves], the very people who profited, and they had no intention of making the Sumerian Swindle illegal.

But laws also were developed to control the more subtle, but no less crass, deeds of the awilum [the Haves] so that their greed and deceit did not bring unbearable harm or suffering to the victims of their schemes and frauds.

Certainly, the awilum [the Haves] cannot be trusted to fairly create just laws because it is in their very nature as members of the awilum class not only to have wealth but greedily to desire more.

Conversely, the poor among the People cannot be trusted to fairly create laws because it is in their very nature to ignorantly not know what is best but rather to choose what fulfills their immediate and venal needs.

Thus, it was recognized by all members of the ancient societies that only the king, under tutelage of the priests and guidance of the gods, would have the best interest of all the People at heart, both for the “Haves” and for the “Have-Nots”.

After all, the king was the servant of the gods and stood between the gods and the People, so it was his responsibility to:

“bring justice to the land”

With the gods giving him authority, the king was an even more imposing figure when he was backed by his soldiers.

Among all of the kings of the ancient Near East, Hammurabi was the most famous.

Hammurabi (1792 1750 BC) was the sixth ruler of the First Dynasty of Babylon.

So, he had plenty of help from previous kings in understanding how to best rule the region around Babylon that he had inherited.

The prologue to Hammurabi’s Law Code stresses that because of his piety, the gods appointed him as ruler of the people to perform the role of guardian and protector of the weak and powerless.

The types of cases dealt with in the Laws of Hammurabi include:

• judicial procedure
• theft and robbery
• slave sales and matters affecting slaves
• agricultural and irrigation work and offences
• pledges
• debts
• deposits and loans
• real estate sales and rentals
• marriage, matrimonial property and sexual offenses
• inheritance, adoption and foster care
• assault and bodily injuries
• rates of hire for equipment
• laborers and craftsmen
• failure to complete contracted tasks
• renters’ and shepherds’ liabilities

and goring oxen. [178]

But for our present studies, I shall mainly direct the Reader to an inspection of the laws which indicate the growing menace and power of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] class as it arose in Babylonia.

As did the previous two thousand years of Mesopotamian Culture, the Laws of Hammurabi distinguished three classes of people, the awilum [the Haves], the muskenum [the Have-Nots] and the wardum [the slaves].

So, nothing had changed in the social structure of Mesopotamia in two thousand years.

The people were still accepting their ancient culture as being the same:

“as it had always been.”

However, the power and wealth of the moneylenders had increased tremendously in those two millennia while the poverty and suffering of the people had deteriorated in like ratio.

Through the centuries, successive generations of the People were so gradually impoverished that the actual methods for causing their poverty went unnoticed.

The great difference between the awilum [the Haves] and the muskenum [the Have Nots] was, of course, noticed by them.

The stupendous luxury of the “Haves” over the grinding poverty of the “Have-Nots” was obvious to everybody.

But the gradual impoverishment that had made it so, was not recognized as a growing financial cancer because it was accepted as:

“always having been here.”

Through their illiteracy, the People had no way of knowing that they were slowly being swindled and enslaved to the awilum [the Haves] as lifetime servants to the fraudulent money power of:

• debt
• usury
• controlled wages

and warfare.

This was not some accident of history and finance or the results of some uncontrollable, Darwinian natural selection process (such as the writings of Professor Kevin MacDonald allege) because the moneylenders kept the account books and knew with precise craftiness how to squeeze the People for every shekel of silver and every man hour of labor.

The awilum [the Haves] left nothing to chance; they planned and schemed with vicious avarice.

They knew how to swindle wealth.

It was no accident of mindless evolution but was a precise and willful application of intransigent greed and demonic cunning that was fueled with the astronomical profits of the Sumerian Swindle.

Dozens of duplicates and extracts of Hammurabi’s laws have been recovered from a variety of sites in Mesopotamia as well as commentaries, references to his laws in a first millennium catalog, and a bilingual Sumerian-Akkadian manuscript.

Some of the manuscripts date to Hammurabi’s immediate successors in the first Dynasty of Babylon, while others are copies from a thousand years later.

This wide and varied evidence attests to the enduring popularity of the Laws of Hammurabi, which was both an influence on and a reflection of contemporary literary, political, as well as legal thought. [179]

And as a “great law giver”, whose laws circulated throughout the ancient Near East for so many centuries, Hammurabi was undoubtedly the model upon which the Semitic goat rustlers and Babylonian moneylenders based their own heroic myths in the fable of Moses.

But more about that, later.

Hammurabi directed the political expansion of his empire and organized a complex, sophisticated government and military bureaucracy to administer it.

He defeated powerful rival kingdoms and extended his political and diplomatic influence throughout the ancient Near East in an expansion rivaled only by that achieved by his early contemporary to the north, Shamshi-Adad of Assyria. [180] 

And, to give us a wider perspective of those people, it is from this same time frame that we have the Laws of Eshnunna to also consider.

Eshnunna was an Amorite-controlled kingdom in the Dayala River region east of Babylon which flourished for about 250 years between the fall of the Third Dynasty of Ur (about 2000 BC) and the rise of Hammurabi’s Babylonian Empire (1750 BC).

Hammurabi incorporated that kingdom into his own empire and no doubt had read their laws before writing his own.

It is the differences between the three major law codes of:

• Ur-Nammu (Sumerian)
• Eshnunna (Sumerian-Semite)
• Hammurabi (Semitic)

that will give us vital clues to the changes that were taking place among the people who wrote those laws and the People who suffered under them.

The Stele of Hammurabi, now in the Louvre, stands about seven feet six inches high.

On the top of the monument is a carved bas-relief of the Sun-god, Shamash (the God of Justice), receiving the homage of King Hammurabi.

Beneath this carving is engraved the cuneiform text of the Laws.

The laws themselves are sandwiched between a prologue and an epilogue.

The prologue begins with a claim that the gods called upon Hammurabi:

“to make justice visible in the land, to destroy the wicked person and the evil doer, that the strong might not injure the weak.”

The prologue contains a series of titles in which Hammurabi boasts of his piety toward the gods and his care for their cities and shrines.

The epilogue at the bottom of the stele speaks of the purpose of the writing down of the laws, which is:

“to set right the orphan and widow … and wronged person”

and goes on to recommend that succeeding rulers pay heed to Hammurabi’s words, on pain of incurring the curses of the gods upon whom Hammurabi calls.

The laws themselves consisted originally of about 280 sections, of which some thirty-five were erased from the stele in antiquity, presumably by the conqueror who took the monument to Susa.

Fortunately, about half of the missing text can now be restored, partly from some diorite fragments which must have come from another monument of the same kind, and partly from clay tablets of various periods containing parts of Hammurabi’s laws.

These missing parts which I shall review later, give a valuable indication of what the Elamites disliked about Hammurabi’s Laws.

The modern translation and publication of the Laws of Hammurabi in 1948 AD, stirred up a violent controversy among the Jews and the Bible-believing Christians as well as among the atheists.

The Jews were violently opposed to anything that shook their monopoly on the history of the ancient Near East.

Since the establishment of the science of Assyriology in 1812, the boasts and grandiose claims of the Jews were slowly being whittled away by the discoveries of archeology.

What the Jews were claiming in their own Old Testament as true stories of a wonderful gang of mighty Jewish kings and miracle-performing priests dwelling in their mountain fortress of Jerusalem, was, under archeological scrutiny, becoming increasingly the story of a bunch of petty tribal goat-rustlers and bandits hiding from their enemies in the rocky wilderness around Jerusalem.

New discoveries in archeology were not to the advantage of the Jews because new evidence and historical verification tended to weaken their claims to greatness and to uncover their lies. 

So, the Jews opposed new discoveries that showed them to be liars, and they welcomed new discoveries that perpetuated their deceits.

Although the modern Christians did not have the major investment in myths and historical frauds as did the Jews, they tended to oppose the new discoveries of archeology if those discoveries shook their basic beliefs in the:

“Infallibility of the word of God as found in the Bible”

But, in general, the Christians welcomed the new discoveries as leading them to a better understanding of the Bible.

The Christians tended to look to archeology as a means of proving the Biblical stories.

But the Jews tended to accuse the archeologists and their discoveries as fakes and forgeries. 

This is a very different reaction of two Bible-based religions to the same discoveries.

Why there was such a vast difference between the Christian and the Jewish reaction to archeological discoveries of the ancient Near East will become clearer in later chapters.

Without any doubt the Laws of Hammurabi had been in existence several centuries before the period in which Moses allegedly lived.

Also, without any doubt, the laws of Hammurabi frequently legislated for the same kind of circumstances, sometimes in almost identical terms, as those laws, supposedly of divine origin, that were associated with the name of Moses.

Direct borrowing is indicated. Orthodox theologians, mentally wriggling in embarrassment, sought to lie about it and to claim that, where similarities could not be denied, the Hebrew laws showed a:

“higher ethical content”

Apparently, the Orthodox theologians’ “holiness” gave them a special ability to see “a higher ethical content” that was not there in fact.

The atheists and other opponents of religion gleefully argued that the Hebrew law giver (whether Moses or some later legislator plagiarizing that name) had simply taken over, in the name of his God, as much of the existing Babylonian laws as suited him, adapting it to the more primitive sociology of the Hebrew goat-rustlers.

One such writer stated dogmatically:

“if there be any relationship between the Hebrew and the Babylonian legislations, there is only one possible conclusion, and that is that the Hebrew was borrowed from the earlier Babylonian.” [181]

But the Hebrews did a lot more than just “borrow” – the Hebrews were the foremost thieves of the entire ancient Near East, as you shall see.

Forgeries in antiquity were by no means uncommon. [182]

But a forgery is not made from documents that do not exist because it is made from previously existing documents in order to qualify as a forgery.

With each new archeological discovery, as the screaming rabbis with enraged spittle frothing around their beards were shouting, “Fake!”, they actually seemed to have been more worried about some archeological find that would prove that their own “scriptures” were the actual forgery.

Hammurabi’s Laws were written in stone and dug out of 30 meters of solid dirt that had been in place for a thousand years before the Jewish “scriptures” were written.

Laws written in stone are unchanging and survive throughout Eternity.

But the laws of Moses were written on deteriorating goat skins and survive by the designs of the scribes who edited the copies, and by the scribes who copied the copies, and by the scribes who “interpreted” and re-copied the copies.

One of the greatest points of interest in the Laws of Hammurabi is that they show that the mild Sumerian laws had been superseded by the more barbaric Semitic principle of lex talionis, or the principle of “an eye for an eye”.

This more barbaric principle, found in the laws of Hammurabi and the laws of Assyria and among the Hebrews, reflects the unmodified practice of the crueler Semites. [183]

Why these rather fair and benign laws of the Sumerians were replaced by the cruel and more repressive laws of the Semites, will become clearer as we compare them with each other.

It is unnecessary and overly tedious to compare each of the various laws of Mesopotamia item by item.

We only need to inspect the ones that show most clearly the awilum [the Haves] using these Laws to protect and to enrich themselves.

It is from this juncture in our history that most of our modern-day catastrophes and tribulations arise.

So, let’s take a look at the changes between the Sumerian and the Babylonian law codes as the treasonous moneylenders gained wealth and power.

One of the greatest problems for the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] was that they had become not just the wealthiest citizens in all of the ancient Near East but also the most hated. 

During the early days of civilization:

• when the moneylenders could take full advantage of the illiterate people through eternal debt slavery
• when the moneylenders could work their tenant farmers forever, seize the sons and daughters and wives and farms and houses of the poor men whom they had defrauded
• when the merchants could put these enslaved children and wives into prostitution or hard labor
• when too much of this had happened, eventually the boiling point of resentment and hatred would boil over.

The men who had lost their loved ones; the men who had lost their life’s work of sweating under a scorching sun to build a sustaining farm laboriously dug from the desert soil with bronze tools and stubborn oxen; the men who had seen their darling daughters torn from their hands by hired goons and turned into slutty whores in the moneylenders’ brothels and beer taverns, these men took their revenge.

From the earliest days of the Sumerian moneylenders, there were times when the moneylender’s impoverished victims would waylay them in their orchards and beat them; or accost them in the dark of night and beat them; or attack and beat them at their homes or while they were inspecting the repossessed fields of ripe grain; or approach them in the marketplace and spit in their faces and cuff their ears.

During Sumerian times, the kings and the People were all of the same Sumerian stock, and they had the same human feelings and empathies for one another.

So, the Sumerian punishments for assault and battery were mild and fair, requiring only a payment in silver.

The moneylenders could not be overly rapacious if they valued keeping all of their teeth and not having their bones broken by angry victims of the Sumerian Swindle.

But as the moneylenders gained wealth and political power and as they began to disenfranchise and replace the Sumerian people with foreigners, this social empathy began to be stripped from the laws.

Below, are some of the changes that took place between Sumerian times and the more harshly administered times of Semitic rule.

In the Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC), the principle class of persons considered was the free person, the awilum [the Haves]. [184]

This would include all members of society who were not slaves or indebted to the moneylenders.

There was no preference in those laws given to the super-rich over the rich or to the rich over the poor since under Sumerian Law all were considered equally free as long as they didn’t owe any silver to anybody.

Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC):

“If a man cuts off the foot of another man, he shall weigh and deliver 10 shekels of silver.”

“If a man shatters the bone of another man with a club, he shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of silver.”

“If a man cuts off the nose of another man, he shall weigh and deliver 40 shekels of silver.”

“If a man knocks out another man’s tooth, he shall weigh and deliver 2 shekels of silver.”

These laws stipulate a payment in silver.

Now look at the Laws of Eshnunna written more than a hundred years later.

Although Eshnunna was an Amorite kingdom, the majority of the population was Sumerian and Sumerianized Amorites.

So, these were very fair laws that reflected the Sumerian cultural mind set.

The principle class with which the laws of Eshnunna are concerned is once again the awilum [the Haves].

But the laws also mention the muskenum [Have-Nots] and the wardum [slaves].

Note how the harshness and penalties of the laws have increased under Semitic rule.

Laws of Eshnunna: (2000-1750 BC). [185]

“If a man bites the nose of another man and severs it, he shall pay 60 shekels of silver. 

For an eye he shall pay 60 shekels of silver; for a tooth 30 shekels; for an ear 30 shekels; for a slap in the face 10 shekels of silver.”

“If a man severs another man’s finger, he shall pay 20 shekels of silver.”

“If a man throws another man to the floor in an altercation and breaks his hand, he shall pay 30 shekels of silver.”

“If he breaks his foot, he shall pay 30 shekels of silver.”

“If a man strikes another man and thus breaks his collarbone, he shall weigh and deliver 20 shekels of silver.”

“If a man hits another man accidentally, he shall pay 10 shekels of silver.”

 “If a man in the course of a brawl should cause the death of another member of the awilum class, he shall weigh and deliver 40 shekels of silver.”

As you can see, the penalties have increased as have the variety of offenses.

The few laws that covered assault and battery under Sumerian rule were not enough to cover the larger variety of methods that the People used to evade the existing Laws or Ur-Nammu and to vent their rage upon the moneylenders in new ways.

So, more laws covering the increased variety of assaults – along with an increase in the amount of fines – was thought to be sufficient under existing popular sentiments.

In the kingdom of Eshnunna, the moneylenders could still be beaten and their bones broken but it would cost a lot more in fines.

In the small villages and cities of Mesopotamia, once an assault was accomplished and the fine paid, that was the end of the matter.

If a swindled citizen could beat a moneylender at night or flood his fields or chop down the trees of his orchard without being identified, all was well and good.

Even if he was named and brought before the judges, the worst that could happen to him would be a steep fine.

However, paying sixty shekels of silver for the privilege of biting off a moneylender’s nose, might have seemed to some of the swindled victims to be a pleasure well worth the expense.

And if an outraged citizen could pool the resources of his kith and kin, maybe the full treatment was not out of their price range: slapping the face followed by knocking out a couple of teeth, biting off a fat tamkarum’s [merchant-moneylenders] nose, chopping off a finger, poking out an eye, cutting off an ear, breaking his hand, breaking one foot and his collarbone, might cost somewhere in the range of 320 shekels of silver, a huge fortune in those days but perhaps in a night attack with a good chance of escaping, not out of the question.

With such monetary fines, even the poorest farmer might be able to afford to at least break the moneylender’s legs.

A man who had lost his wife and children to debt-slavery or who had been swindled out of his life’s work of building a farm, might find that turning a moneylender into a toothless cripple might be worth whatever the fine was in silver.

This is how it had been for the past two thousand years of Sumerian rule where men were servants of the gods, and the king was the pious, god-appointed shepherd of his people.

Men had learned to get along on uneasy terms, punctuated by occasional fist-fights, all modified by judicial fines in silver.

But all of this changed as the Semitic moneylenders gained control of Mesopotamia under Hammurabi’s Babylonian Empire.

With Semitic Amorites as rulers, the milder laws of the Sumerians were tossed aside.

Once Hammurabi and his Amorite financial backers had incorporated the kingdom of Eshnunna into his empire, the moneylenders took steps to protect both their swindled properties and their private persons.

Like the Laws of Eshnunna, the Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) [186] also primarily addressed the rights of the awilum [the Haves].

So, for the previous two thousand years, the awilum [the Haves] never once gave up their control over society.

But as you can see, under Hammurabi’s kingship, these laws not only increased the fines imposed on anyone harming an awilum [Haves] but also increased the severity of punishment by introducing the Semitic principle of “an eye for an eye” or lex talionis.

With this, the sporting aspect of breaking a moneylender’s nose, became less of a sport and more of a serious crime.

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) [187]

“If an awilum [Haves] should blind the eye of another awilum, they shall blind his eye.”

“If he should break the bone of another awilum [Haves], they shall break his bone.”

“If he should blind the eye of a muskenum [a Have-Not] or break the bone of a muskenum, he shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of silver.”

“If he should blind the eye of an awilum’s [Haves] slave or break the bone of an awilum’s slave, he shall weigh and deliver one-half of his value in silver.”

“If an awilum [Haves] should knock out the tooth of another awilum of his own rank, they shall knock out his tooth.”

“If he should knock out the tooth of a muskenum [Have-Not], he shall weigh and deliver 20 shekels of silver.”

“If an awilum [Haves] should strike the cheek of an awilum who is of status higher than his own, he shall be flogged in the public assembly with 60 strikes of an ox whip.” 

“If a member of the awilum [Haves] class should strike the cheek of another member of the awilum class who is his equal, he shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of silver.”

“If a muskenum [Have-Not] should strike the cheek of another muskenum, he shall weigh and deliver 10 shekels of silver.”

“If an awilum’s [Haves] slave should strike the cheek of a member of the awilum class, they shall cut off his ear.”

“If an awilum [Haves] should strike another awilum during a brawl and inflict upon him a wound, that awilum shall swear, ‘I did not strike intentionally,’ and he shall satisfy the physician by paying his fee.”

“If he should die from his beating, he shall also swear ‘I did not strike him intentionally’ if he, the victim is a member of the awilum [Haves] class, he shall weigh and deliver 30 shekels of silver.”

“If he, the victim, is a member of the muskenum [Have-Nots] class, he shall weigh and deliver 20 shekels of silver.”

In the first place, notice how the roles are reversed and a greater inequality in the laws has arisen.

Not only are the laws harsher but (as is usual with laws that are written by the rich) these laws are actually harsher for the poor than for the rich.

Breaking a bone, knocking out the teeth or poking out an eye of a fellow member of the wealthy awilum class results in their own bones being broken in following this Semitic principle of “an eye for an eye”.

The Laws also gave the very rich protection against the moderately rich since the ruthless swindles of the moneylenders were not necessarily restricted to swindling the poor because they preyed upon whomever they could, including the wealthy among them.

These same laws allowed a rich awilum [Haves] to break the bones or poke out the eyes of a poor muskenum [Have-Nots] while only being required to pay a fine in silver which would not be a burden for a rich man.

The laws were also made to prevent a rich awilum [Have] from ordering his slave to assault another awilum.

The reason for this law is found in the penalty.

By having the ear cut off that listened to the illegal order from his master, the slaves knew that they were prohibited by the king from committing such crimes even if ordered to do so by their master.

While the laws decree the penalty for the rich assaulting the rich and the rich assaulting the poor, what these laws do not state is the penalty of a poor muskenum [Have-Not] for committing mayhem on the rich.

No, their eyes were not poked out or their bones broken since that was the penalty for the rich committing such crimes against other rich people.

For a poor muskenum [Have-Nots] to assault the rich awilum, the penalty was death.

And so, you can see the great change that took place in Mesopotamian Culture once the moneylenders came into power behind the throne of the kings.

Protecting their precious and pampered persons from the retribution of their victims and debt slaves, was only one power that the moneylenders seized for themselves during the Babylonian Empire of King Hammurabi.

The thing next most precious to their personal safety was their wealth and property.

For example, compare the laws related to theft of goods.

Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC) covering THEFT:

At the time of Ur-Nammu, the one thousand year-old common laws of Sumeria were still in effect governing theft.

That is, if someone stole something, they had to replace it double or triple or six times over. 

Both the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have Nots] were equal under Sumerian Law.

Both paid the same fine for theft.

In these early times, the Sumerian People did not stray far from their home cities or villages. 

Everybody knew everybody else.

And for someone to steal something would be noticed by the entire community.

Thieves were, after all, relations and neighbors, so if they took what was not theirs, in a spirit of compassionate chastisement they were required to replace what they had stolen plus a fine. 

But life became more perilous for thieves as the acquisitive and greedy moneylenders gained control over society.

A little more than a hundred years after Ur Nammu, the Amorites ruling a mixed society of Semites and Sumerians began to exert a harsher control over their property.

Laws of Eshnunna: (2000-1750 BC) for THEFT

“A man who is caught in the field of a muskenum [Have-Not] in the crop during daytime, shall pay 10 shekels of silver.

He who is caught in the crop at night, shall die.

He shall not get away alive.”

“A man who is caught in the house of a muskenum [Have-Not] during daytime, shall pay 10 shekels of silver.

He who is caught in the house at night, shall die, he shall not get away alive.”

“If a guard is negligent in guarding a house, and a burglar breaks into the house, they shall kill the guard of the house that was broken into, and he shall be buried at the breach without a grave.”

“If a man gives property of his as a deposit … and if the property he gives disappears without that the house was burglarized, the doorway broken down or the window forced, the (depositary) will replace his (the depositor’s) property.”

“If a man buys a slave, a slave-girl, an ox or any other valuable good but cannot legally establish the seller, he is a thief.”

At a first glance of these laws, it might appear that the Amorite king of Eshnunna was protecting the poor from theft.

But it must be remembered that the muskenum [Have-Nots] did not own property.

If they were able to avoid starvation, it was only by working as tenant farmers and debt-slaves of the rich awilum [the Haves].

They were landless and powerless and only one step above slavery, so it was not a great feat to be able to steal from them.

But the laws governing theft were not written to protect the muskenum [Have-Nots] who worked in the fields, they were written to protect the awilum [the Haves] who owned both the fields and the services of the muskenum.

These laws enact the death penalty for anyone found in the tenant-farmed fields of the rich awilum [the Haves].

Thus, these laws at first glance seem to protect both the rich and the poor by metting out the death penalty for theft.

However, the laws actually protect the property of the rich who hired the poor to work on those properties.

In addition, the death penalty is decreed for any guards who fail to protect the property of the awilum [the Haves] from theft.

Furthermore, the clay tablets for proving the ownership of property were a required document. 

Remember, it was a Mesopotamian legal requirement to always have a written deed or contract for all business deals and all transfers or sales of property.

For nearly two hundred years these laws governing a mixed Sumerian and Amorite society were supreme.

But once the Semitic moneylenders had increased their wealth and power under the protection of King Hammurabi, they insisted upon and got the following collection of laws that locked their property ownership of land and slaves into the steel grip of government enforced law.

The Law Code of Hammurabi has been hailed as a great advancement of civilization by the lawyers and judges even into our modern times, but as lawyers and judges they are biased. 

Laws are not necessarily good merely because they are laws.

Good laws must also be fair and just laws.

Laws designed to enslave or oppress one class of society for the benefit of another class are not good laws.

Therefore, the Laws of Hammurabi need to be understood not only in the context of their historical times, but in relation to who benefited from his laws.

Here is what the laws for theft became under Hammurabi: Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC ) for THEFT:

“If a man steals valuables belonging to the god or to the palace, that man shall be killed, and also he who received the stolen goods from him shall be killed.”

“If a man should purchase silver, gold, a slave, a slave woman, an ox, a sheep, a donkey, or anything else whatsoever from a son of a man or from a slave of a man without witnesses or a contract – or if he accepts the goods for safekeeping – that man is a thief, he shall be killed.”

“If a man steals an ox, a sheep, a donkey, a pig, or a boat – if it belongs either to the god or to the palace, he shall give thirty-fold; if it belongs to a commoner, he shall replace it tenfold; if the thief does not have anything to give, he shall be killed.”

“If a man breaks into a house, they shall kill him and hang him in front of that very breach.”

“If a man commits a robbery and is then seized, that man shall be killed.”

It should be noticed that as harsh as these laws are, they were tilted in favor of the awilum [the Haves].

The palace and the temple were protected by the death penalty for theft.

The pawnbroker was protected by a cuneiform contract against fencing stolen property.

The awilum [the Haves] could steal property and, if caught, only pay a fine.

But the muskenum [the Have Nots] who were too poor to pay a fine, were executed for theft, for breaking and entering and executed for strong-armed robbery.

And so, as the power of the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] increased, their control over the farms and goods that they had swindled also increased.

To give themselves the greatest authority and to keep for themselves the greatest wealth meant that a corresponding reduction in the freedom and wealth of everybody else, was their strategy.

In a society of unequals, those who have the greatest advantages tend to secure their wealth and power through domination and tyranny over those who have the least advantages. 

Backing the merchant-moneylenders in their greed were the judges [awilum, the Haves] who allegedly were servants of the king but in fact were also in the position of being the servants of whoever could afford to give them gifts.

The vast empire of a king cannot be managed by the king alone.

He needs:

• helpers
• aids
• ministers
• clerks
• scribes
• professional bureaucrats
• soldiers

to enforce order and, above all, judges to administer the laws and control the citizens through declarations of guilt or innocence and the imposing of penalties and punishments to transgressors of the law.

Judges were appointed by the king, and they required no special training or knowledge other than the necessary trust to become appointed by the king.

Officially, the paid officials known as “judges” had been in existence in the ancient Near East since before the times of Sargon (~2370 BC). [188]

From Sumerian times, the moneylenders knew the advantage to themselves to have judges as their friends.

It became of extreme importance to them that installed judges would pass judgments favorable to themselves because there were no juries to stand between the defendant and the law.

A judge became, by default, a sort of miniature king whose final judgment carried all of the weight of the king, himself.

The judges, alone, determined the guilt or innocence of a defendant.

The judges alone interpreted the laws and could only be overruled by the king, himself.

So, they were a power unto themselves, little sub-kings ruling over the people through the law.

The Reader should remember this powerful and official substratum of society because we will be inspecting the judges more carefully in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon.

You have seen how the laws governing the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] changed between the Sumerian and the Semitic dynasties.

These were laws protecting the rich.

What about the laws governing the very poorest victims of the Sumerian Swindle, that is, the laws governing the slaves?

Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC) governing SLAVES:

“If a slave woman curses someone acting with the authority of her mistress, they shall scour her mouth with one sila [1 liter] of salt.”

“If a slave woman strikes someone acting with the authority of her mistress….”

“If a slave ventures beyond the borders of his or her city and a man returns him or her, the slave’s master shall weight and deliver x shekels of silver to the man who returned the slave.”

Not many laws concerning slaves were necessary in those Sumerian times.

Those that have survived show a protection of the slave from having to follow the orders of a master to do some act of assault or battery.

Such laws concerning a slave “cursing” a free person were taken very seriously among god-fearing people who believed in the power of both gods and demons.

RELIGION: DEMONS: The Pagan Gods of Hell – Library of Rickandria

“Cursing” was not just swearing, it was the casting of evil spells.

Slaves were not likely to run away when the citizens were always eager to collect a payment in silver for returning them.

And where would they run?

To starve in the desert or to be killed by bandits in the mountains, was not a better alternative. 

Laws of Eshnunna: (2000-1750 BC) regarding SLAVES:

“The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] shall not receive silver, barley, wool or sesame oil from a slave or a slave-girl as an investment.”

“If a man is caught with a stolen slave or a stolen slave girl, he shall surrender slave by slave and slave-girl by slave-girl.”

“If he has no claim against him but nevertheless restrains the wife of a muskenum [Have-Not] or the child of a muskenum and causes their death, it is a capital offence.

The restrainer who restrains shall die.”

With these laws, slaves were prevented from stealing from their masters or from buying their freedom through wise investments.

But now the penalty for holding a stolen or runaway slave was to return the slave and to give an additional slave as penalty.

Even at this late date, you can see the mild Sumerian character at play within these laws.

The awilum [the Haves] were prevented from falsely seizing the wives and children of the poor muskenum [Have Nots].

But once again, life became harsher when the Semitic laws of Hammurabi ruled the land.

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning SLAVES:

“If a man should harbor a fugitive slave or slave woman of either the palace or of a commoner in his house and not bring him out at the herald’s public proclamation, that householder shall be killed.”

“If an obligation is outstanding against a man and he sells or gives into debt service his wife, his son, or his daughter, they shall perform service in the house of their buyer or of the one who holds them in debt service for three years, their release shall be secured in the fourth year.”

“If he should give a male or female slave into debt service, the merchant may extend the term beyond the three years, he may sell him, there are no grounds for a claim.”

“If a barber shaves off the slave hair lock of a slave not belonging to him without the consent of the slave’s owner, they shall cut off that barber’s hand.”

“If a man misinforms a barber so that he then shaves off the slave hair lock of a slave not belonging to him, they shall kill that man and hang him in his own doorway; the barber shall swear, ‘I did not knowingly shave it off’, and he shall be released.”

Again, property ownership as well as the death penalty for anyone taking that property, is strongly enforced in the Laws of Hammurabi.

These were laws that were written for the protection of the properties of the rich merchants and moneylenders. 

There is one other set of laws that will have a strong influence on other sections of this history. 

And that is the laws governing the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] which again demonstrate the very profitable monopoly of the beer sellers and tavern-keepers at all stages of Mesopotamian civilization.

Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC) concerning the sabitum [alewife-moneylender]. 

This is from the Sumerian Law of X which is probably the end portion of the Laws of Ur-Nammu.

“If a woman innkeeper gives one of her vats of beer on credit to a man, she shall receive 50 silas [about 50 liters] of grain at the harvest.”

If the man earned the official standard wage of ten liters of grain per day and not less, this amounted to more than five days wages.

Thus, the power of the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] to cheat the drunks by charging even greater amounts for loans of beer, was curtailed.

She could still take advantage of the drunks, but her ability to swindle the workers out of their wages was limited to an established amount.

Again, this law legitimatized a high rate of interest on a drunk’s bar tab.

However, by Hammurabi’s time, the wages were much less than the old Sumerian standard of ten liters of grain per day.

As previously mentioned, wages fell to as low as two liters of bread and two liters of beer per day.

It became a favorite trick of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to pay their workers with alcohol because it was cheaper than food and it made the starving people feel less miserable by numbing the pain of their wretched existence.

Two liters of beer could induce a drunken stupor at the end of the day but not incapacitate the worker for the next day of labor.

As in modern times, a drunken alcoholic might find that at harvest time, he had drunk up all of his wages and perhaps even pawned his personal possessions and fallen further into debt to the point of being enslaved by the sabitum [alewife-moneylender].

But by law, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was limited to a set amount of interest-on-the-loan for each vat of beer that was put “on the tab.”

And that interest on-the-loan was not small.

Fifty liters of grain can brew about sixty gallons or about two modern beer barrels.

A vat of Sumerian beer had a capacity of 30 silas (liters) or about eight gallons.

Thus, when the grain was brewed into more beer, the interest-on-the-loan was about 750%. 

These huge profit margins that can be made with a monopoly on alcohol has been a major income source for the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] throughout history, as you shall see in Volume III, The Bloodsuckers of Judah.

With only a few drunks in her debt, a clever sabitum [alewife-moneylender] could profit nicely since she could get the grain for brewing for free by charging interest on the bar bills of the Sumerian drunks.

Go to any modern-day tavern and the chances are very good of finding flush-faced, red-nosed and penniless workers who empty the garbage and sweep the floors in exchange for drinks simply because this is:

“how it has always been.”

Laws of Eshnunna (2000-1750 BC) concerning the sabitum [alewife-moneylender].

“If an ubarum [foreigner] a naptarum or a mudum [workers paid with rations of beer], want to sell his beer, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] shall sell the beer for him at the current price.”

Once again, the monopoly over booze was limited to the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] alone.

No one else in Mesopotamian society was allowed to sell beer or wine even when beer was their payment for goods or for labor or for their ordinary rations.

This monopoly over alcohol reaped greater profits to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] than did free trade in booze.

By controlling the entire market, they could control the price.

Only the king could limit that price.

Once again, this “limitation in prices” is not all that it appears to be at first glance.

Secret Fraud #17 of the Sumerian Swindle is:

“Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed.”

Thus, a king can appear to limit the ravages of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] when, in fact, he is actually legitimatizing their thefts.

Under the power and authority of a king, the moneylenders can defraud the People because the king’s decree makes their swindles “legal”.

The same tricks are played in modern times where the bankers and financiers impoverish entire nations and steal the homes from millions of people, all while hiding behind laws that makes their grand larceny “legal”.

And when the People scream their outrage, the bribed politicians pass more laws:

“to protect the consumers”

and

“to insure bank reform”

But these are actually fake laws that guarantee that the moneylenders make a profit under slightly different rules.

The modern laws may be different but the same Sumerian Swindle:

“has always been here.”

The economic power of the sabitum [alewife moneylender], should be remembered since her occupation will be a powerful arm of the moneylenders throughout history.

The tavern keeper was an important source of profits and a vital information source to the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

So, they protected their monopoly.

And when the worker brought his beer to the sabitum to sell for him, his wages could be reduced through her charging him a commission to sell his beer or offering to buy it at a reduced price.

Thus, through unjust laws, the moneylenders and merchants could “legally” defraud the people by hiding behind the permission of the king.

Under the Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning the sabitum [alewife-moneylender], the penalties became harsher: 

“If a woman innkeeper [sabitum] should refuse to accept grain for the price of beer but accepts only silver measured by the large weight, thereby reducing the value of beer in relation to the value of grain, they shall charge and convict that woman innkeeper and they shall cast her into the water.”

“If there should be a woman innkeeper [sabitum] in whose house criminals congregate, and she does not seize those criminals and lead them off to the palace authorities, that woman innkeeper shall be killed.”

“If a woman innkeeper [sabitum] gives one vat of beer as a loan, she shall take 50 silas of grain at the harvest.”

Hammurabi made sure that the People could at least get drunk by trading their farm produce for beer if they had no silver.

Remember, alcohol production and sales were a monopoly of the alewife-moneylender.

So, if she only accepted silver from farmers who had no sliver but who had grain, then they had nowhere else to buy beer.

Hammurabi’s Laws also prevented the merchant-moneylenders from sucking the silver out of society and subverting the commodity-barter mechanism.

Thus, the harshness of the law. Price controls also maintained the tamkarum [merchant moneylender] cartel’s monopoly over grain and beer prices by keeping them uniform and non-competitive.

And because of the relationship between drunkenness and crime, Hammurabi made the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] into an unofficial “sheriff” to police her own premises for thieves.

Notice that it was the alewife who was expected to:

“seize those criminals”

rather than merely calling for the assistance of soldiers or “police”.

This implies the ability of the alewife to do so through her own bouncers and strong-arm men. 

Just as in modern times, drunken brawls in the taverns of the ancient Near East were a common occurrence.

Why else would there be fines for biting off someone’s nose?

The bouncers and enforcers at the beckon-and-call of the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] are another indication of the power of this class of women in Mesopotamian society.

The sabitum [alewife-moneylender] maintained her power even while women, in general, were being reduced to servitude and prostitution by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. 

Although the merchants and moneylenders had acquired much wealth and political power, they were not immune to justice.

Some of their ancient and lucrative tricks for stealing the wealth of the People were restricted by Hammurabi’s Laws.

This did not make Hammurabi popular with many of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. 

The tamkarum had backed his rise to power in their efforts to create a larger government to rule all of Sumeria and Akkad.

A larger government could grant larger monopolies over commerce and centralize control over more wealth.

But some of his laws so much restricted their profiteering that the merchants and moneylenders began looking for ways to have him overthrown.

Secret Fraud #17 of the Sumerian Swindle reads,

“Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed.”

They could influence Hammurabi but not corrupt him.

Hammurabi became too powerful for the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to destroy in his lifetime, so they bided their time in order to attack his children.

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning DISHONEST MERCHANTS

“If a merchant should take interest and then does not deduct the payments of either grain or silver as much as he received or does not write a new tablet, or adds the interest payments to the capital sum, that merchant shall return two-fold as much grain as he received.”

“If a man borrows grain or silver from a merchant and does not have grain or silver with which to repay but does have other goods, he shall give to his merchant in the presence of witnesses whatever he has at hand, in amounts according to the exchange value; the merchant will not object; he shall accept it.”

“If a man stores grain in another man’s house, he shall give 5 silas of grain per 300 silas of grain as annual rent of the granary.”

As harsh as Hammurabi’s Laws were, they also put limits upon the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

In all societies, dishonest merchants create a lot of civil unrest, violent retribution and economic hardships among the People.

Yes, the Babylonian laws were weighted in favor of the “Haves”.

But as a true king and shepherd of his people, Hammurabi decreed that the dishonest methods of the merchants would not be tolerated.

Hammurabi gave great advantages to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to satisfy their limitless greed.

But he also put a stop to their outright thefts.

Hammurabi standardized prices expressed in silver on a large number of commodities in an effort to limit any price gouging by the merchant-moneylenders.

But these were not so much price controls as they were official exchange rates for commodities versus silver.

This allowed for the barter of goods among the people without an exchange of silver.

And this limited the profits of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

These were, after all, barter societies.

Although silver functioned in many ways like money, it was not true money.

It was a commodity money that could be traded like any other commodity.

He did not allow the limited amount of silver, which could be manipulated in availability by the moneylenders, to become monopolized to the exclusion of all other commodities.

So, he set official exchange rates with silver as a standard of exchange but not as the only means of exchange.

The understanding of what true money is, would have to wait a thousand more years until the rise of the Greek philosophers.

But for now, silver was just a commodity barter item.

It was convenient to equate all goods and services to shekel weights of silver.

But when silver was lacking, Hammurabi decreed that other barter goods of equal value were acceptable as payment of loans and for equitable trade.

Thus, in the above laws, he declared Secret Fraud #4 of the Sumerian Swindle to be illegal: 

“Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the capital.”

Merchants were no longer allowed to practice the swindle of withdrawing silver from circulation and then not accepting grain in equal value as payment for loans.

This prevented moneylenders from stealing silver from farmers.

The above laws also prevented the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] from lying to the illiterate people about how much they owed.

It had been a part of the common law of all of Mesopotamia since writing had been invented that a written contract was required for every business transaction.

But what the wily tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had done was to write out an initial contract to lock the borrower into making payments and then not writing down the payments made or reducing the amount owed by the payments made.

This chained the illiterate people to perpetual debt-slavery since there was no record of their payments but only a record of the original loan.

Hammurabi put a stop to compound interest in the above laws concerning dishonest merchants.

And he required that all tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] give written receipts for all transactions and a new tablet record of the balance of all accounts.

Also, the poorest farmers were protected from high storage fees under Hammurabi’s Laws.

No longer could the rich farmer or the grain merchant charge outrageous grain storage fees and thus steal the poor man’s livelihood.

They were restricted to 1.6% of the grain for granary rental space.

As Secret Fraud #17 was practiced by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to legalize what was actually their own criminal conduct, it was also their guide for removing honest kings.

Miles Williams Mathis: Lincoln’s Assassination was a Manufactured Event – Meaning it NEVER Happened – Library of Rickandria

“Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed.”

Miles Williams Mathis: The Assassination of Garfield was also Faked – Library of Rickandria

Hammurabi had been very useful to the moneylenders in protecting their personal safety and their swindled property, but he had also limited some of their most profitable scams of the Sumerian Swindle.

So, they schemed to have him removed.

Hammurabi was too powerful a king and too independent in his power.

Miles Williams Mathis: President William McKinley, another fake assassination – Library of Rickandria

With Secret Fraud #17, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had built him up but once he had served their purposes and had proven to be not entirely under their control, they schemed to pull him down.

But Hammurabi, the mighty king, was too powerful.

Miles Williams Mathis: THE HIDDEN KING(S) -Camelot Ruled from the Cave of Merlin – Library of Rickandria

So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] would have to wait until they could pull down his sons.

There are a couple of other areas that is of interest in this history of the bloodsucking moneylenders.

These laws give us insight into the Semitic mindset of Hammurabi and his Amorite kinsmen.

“If a child should strike his father, they shall cut off his hand.”

In this, the patriarchal nature of Amorite society is shown whereby the authority of the father over his children is unquestioned.

This mindset should be remembered since it is an element in later chapters of this history.

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning MURDER:

“If a man accuses another man and charges him with homicide, but cannot bring proof against him, his accuser shall be killed.”

Miles Williams Mathis: Serial Killers Are Fake – Library of Rickandria

This is an important law for more reasons than are at first obvious.

Out of the 275 to 300 laws of Hammurabi, this is the number one and very first law written on his stele.

So, its importance should be more carefully considered than has been the case in previous histories.

From Sumerian times, it was an accepted fact of civilization that a murderer had given up his right to life when he took the life of someone else.

SPIRITUALITY: EMPATHY: TOXICITY: Traits of a Psychopath – Library of Rickandria

The Sumerian Laws stipulate the death penalty for murderers.

Miles Williams Mathis: The Zodiac Murders & others were Faked – Library of Rickandria

But under the rule of the Amorites, the very first and number one of Hammurabi’s Laws was not decreeing a death penalty for murder, it was decreeing a death penalty for accusing someone else of murder without proof.

SPIRITUALITY: EMPATHY: TOXICITY: Is the Root of Evil the Psychopathic Mind? – Library of Rickandria

What do we have here?

Why is this deemed to be of number one importance?

Upon the establishment of the Babylonian Empire, after nearly two thousand years of:

• greed
• theft
• grand larceny
• kidnapping
• pimping
• enslavement
• rape
• sexual perversion
• debauchery

and swindling, as being among their many methods of operation, the moneylenders also practiced murder.

Miles Williams Mathis: Henry Lee Lucas – Another Fake Serial Killer – Library of Rickandria

The moneylenders had reached such a level of power in society that they could slyly commit murder in order to eliminate business rivals and terrorize muskenum [Have-Nots].

SPIRITUALITY: EMPATHY: TOXICITY: Psychopaths & Psychopathy – A Ponerological “Branch” – Library of Rickandria

Or to increase their land ownership, they could kill farmers who refused to sell and then buy the farm from the grief-stricken and impoverished widow.

Miles Williams Mathis: The Night Stalker Victims – Library of Rickandria

As long as they didn’t get caught red-handed, they could kill with impunity.

SPIRITUALITY: EMPATHY: TOXICITY: Psychopathy – Special Research Project of the Quantum Future School – Library of Rickandria

In agrarian societies where everybody knows everybody else, acts of murder or vengeance do not necessarily require many proofs as to who committed the crime, what his motives were, or who would profit from a murder.

Miles Williams Mathis: The Green River Serial Killer was Fake – Library of Rickandria

A farmer who refused to sell his prime farm and was found murdered the next day, required very little guessing as to who did the deed.

BOOKS, REPORTS & TREATISES: Psychopathy – Library of Rickandria

So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were often under suspicion.

Accusations that they had killed or had hired killers, made their lives socially besmirched and liable to the River Ordeal.

Miles Williams Mathis: Netflix is now pushing Fake Serial Killers – Library of Rickandria

As hated as they were, even with all of their wealth, a murder accusation could make them pariahs throughout society.

Miles Williams Mathis: The Candy Man Murders – Library of Rickandria

These accusations must have been numerous and common if the very first of Hammurabi’s Laws decreed the death penalty to anyone who accused another of murder without proof.

Miles Williams Mathis: The Tate Murders were a False Flag & the Greatest Unknown Success Story of Operation CHAOS – Library of Rickandria

And what proof could there be in an age where fingerprints and forensic evidence were unknown?

With only flickering fire light and dim lamp wicks to illuminate dark nights, there were plenty of deep and shifting shadows for murderers to hide in and escape.

Miles Williams Mathis: H. H. HOLMES: America’s First (Fake) Serial Killer – Library of Rickandria

Even with known motive and much opportunity but without witnesses, murder was a simple thing for the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] or for their henchmen crouching in the shadows.

Miles Williams Mathis: The Boneyard Killers Are Fake – Library of Rickandria

The moneylenders’ methods were stealth and secrecy and callousness.

The Sumerian Swindle required all three.

They profited from:

• starvation
• suffering
• warfare

They:

• tore children away from parents
• destroyed families
• enslaved and seduced youths

debauched the People with:

• drunkenness
• gambling
• prostitution

and poverty.

So, it was a small step to add murder to their many crimes.

But under the protection of the king, as long as they left no witnesses and no clues, these specially protected tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were sheltered even from accusations of murder.

NEW WORLD ORDER: Genocide IS & Always Has Been a Jewish Ideal – Library of Rickandria

The moneylenders could still murder anyone who got in their way, but small-town gossip and accusation could no longer be used to besmirch their high and mighty prestige because now their victims would have to have solid proof that these tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] had killed anyone.

Without such proof, the moneylenders could have the lone witness and accuser silenced and executed by the king, himself.

This very first of Hammurabi’s Laws protected the richest and most ruthless of the awilum [Haves] from the accusations of the muskenum [Have-Nots].

The tight grip of the awilum [the Haves] upon Babylonian society is further exemplified by the swindle that was used to keep the soldiers tied to the land.

As previously stated, the Babylonian conscription system, the ilkum [military land grant], was a cheap way for the king to get soldiers and to keep them in service by tying them to their property which they could not sell and which they were required to farm.

Starvation was the root of the swindle that the moneylenders, through their monopoly over silver and commerce, were able to gradually reduce the pay of the workers.

During the Third Dynasty of Ur onward, the daily wage of a worker was 10 liters (about 2.5 gallons) of barley per day.

This standard appeared in the cuneiform school tablets and continued to be a valid ideal for two thousand years.

However, during the Babylonian Dynasty, the actual hiring contracts showed that most people earned far less than ten liters per day.

According to the Laws of Hammurabi:

“If a man hires a hireling, he shall give 6 barleycorns of silver per day from the beginning of the year until the end of the fifth month and 5 barley corns of silver per day from the sixth month until the end of the year.” [189]

This wage control calculates out as a total of 4 shekels of silver per year.

Except for holidays, the laborer worked seven days a week for the whole day from sunup to sundown.

In those days, four shekels of silver all at one time would buy four gur (1200 liters) of barley.

But the silver was not paid all at one time, it was dribbled out in 5 or 6 barleycorn (5 or 6 grains) quantities.

Thus, the 1200 liters of grain yearly wage of a laborer during the Babylonian Empire calculates out to a daily wage of only 3.3 liters of barley per day.

This amount would feed a man and a small family on a minimum level and would allow him to put aside a subsistence amount for the winter months.

But unlike the wages paid during the Sumerian times, it was not enough for him to save and buy his own land even if he was fully employed.

And a hireling would not ordinarily be guaranteed a daily job even at this minimum wage.

This is where the full swindle of the very poorest people worked its worst.

With the only jobs available paying barely enough to support a family, with even the lowest paid jobs being given to foreign workers for their cheaper labor, then the only alternative for the poor man was to join the army.

With an ilkum [military land grant], he could own land in exchange for risking his life in war.

In this way, the rise of Babylonia marked the ascendance of the merchants’ and the moneylenders’ greatest profit source and their most ingenious swindle, the waging of war.

With control of Babylonian society firmly in the grasp of the voracious moneylenders, the well-fed and happy days of the god-conscious Sumerian civilization were a forgotten memory.

Ruthlessness and greed began to dominate society.

The days when the People all worked to serve the gods came to an end as the petty ambition of kings and the greed of the merchants and moneylenders became the major forces behind the flow of history.

Babylonia is where all wars-as a-business-strategy and most of today’s sufferings of Mankind began, the days when the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] gained control over society and over kings.

Hammurabi’s political unification of the country together with his social and economic changes associated with that period, mark an important turning point in Mesopotamian history.

In Babylonia, the balance of power now lay firmly in the north.

Although Babylonia would be ruled by a variety of kings, henceforth no other city was seriously to rival Babylon in prestige.

Babylon’s fame still is great today, nearly four thousand years later.

Hammurabi, the great king and servant of the gods, was too powerful for the schemes of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to succeed during his lifetime.

After Hammurabi died, his son, Samsu-iluna (1749-1712 BC), was initially successful in emulating his father’s policies.

But soon the south was in revolt.

The remaining Sumerians (the Southerners) had grown weary of Amorite greed and ruthlessness.

In 1738 BC the south fell to Iliman (Iluma-ilum), founder of the Sealand dynasty, who ruled the Babylonian lands as far north as Nippur.

The Sealanders had begun to move into the area shortly after Hammurabi’s death. [190]

The Sealanders were lured into the southern region by the offer of good farming land that was being sold by the Babylonian tamkarum [merchant moneylenders].

But the Sealanders were not fools.

They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Babylonian farmers.

So, their natural suspicions prompted them to ask,

“Why are you selling the land to us?

Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?”

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready answer to overcome such an objection.

“What are the Babylonians to us?” they replied.

“They are not our friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm.

We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy land and purchase property.

As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help them buy the best farms and the finest orchards.

But still they hate us for our goodness and generosity because they are full of hatred.

But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying the land.”

And so, the bargain was made.

The Sealanders had no reason to hate the Babylonian moneylenders — yet.

So, they accepted the offers of cheap land.

And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new immigrants, those Sealanders who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time at low interest rates.

Like bloodsucking fleas, the Babylonian moneylenders jumped from their old victims who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and guides and mentors.

The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around its prey.

Its bite would come later.

This new Sealand Dynasty, under the influence of the Sumerian priests, appears to have taken on the mantle of the earlier rulers of Isin as an attempt was made to bring back civilization:

“as it had always been”

where the People served the gods, and the kings protected the People.

This Sealand Dynasty provided refuge for the Sumerian priests who moved away from the Amorites of Babylon and set up their Sumerian centers of culture and learning in the south, once again at the ancient Sumerian holy city of Nippur.

Not only did the Sealanders encroach on the immediate territory of Babylon in the years after Hammurabi’s death, but in the early 16th century BC they appear to have succeeded, at least briefly, to the Babylonian throne.

This we infer from the King List which includes the Sealand Dynasty “of Urukug”, a city otherwise unknown. [191]

But the Sealanders were not Babylon’s only enemies.

Samsu-iluna’s 9th year-name mentions the Kassite army.

This is the first reference to the Kassites who, some 150 years later, would inherit the hegemony of Babylon.

Where did the Kassites come from?

The Kassites were cheap labor imported from the mountains to the east to the agricultural region of western Babylonia on the Euphrates.

The Kassites arrived as cheap labor and as buyers of the foreclosed farms that were being sold by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders].

But the Kassites were not fools.

They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Babylonian farmers.

So, their natural suspicions prompted them to ask,

“Why are you selling the land to us?

Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?”

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready answer to overcome such an objection.

“What are the Babylonians to us?” they replied.

“They are not our friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm.

We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy land and purchase property.

As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help them buy the best farms and the finest orchards. =

But still, they hate us for our goodness and generosity because they are full of hatred. 

But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying the land.”

And so, the bargain was made.

The Kassites had no reason to hate the Babylonian moneylenders — yet.

So, they accepted the offers of cheap land.

And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new immigrants, those Kassites who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time at low interest rates.

Like bloodsucking fleas, the Babylonian moneylenders jumped from their old victims who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and guides and mentors.

The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around its prey.

Its bite would come later.

Once again, the moneylenders had betrayed their own people.

Once again, their importation of foreigners as cheap labor undermined the social and ethnic integrity of the nation.

Once again, the moneylenders were able to impoverish their own people by lowering wages with foreign labor and selling foreclosed farmland to foreigners.

And once again, the aliens took over the lands where-in they previously had been guest workers.

This change in the social fabric was gradual, taking place over a century.

But repeating the pattern, once the Kassites had reached a large enough portion of the population, they took over the country.

And their “friends”, the merchant-moneylenders, helped them do it.

The period of the 17th to 16th centuries BC was a time of great political change in Western Asia, and the Kassites were but one of a number of non-Semitic peoples – the Hurrians and Hittites are others whom we shall meet shortly – who began to exert pressure from the north on the weakening kingdom of Babylonia.

The linguistic affinities of the Kassite language have yet to be established, but some features of their religion may suggest contact with Aryan-Indo European peoples.

As their numbers increased and as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] sold the foreclosed properties and farms to these foreigners, Kassite personal names began to appear with increasing frequency on Babylonian business documents.

Like all of the other foreigners who had taken over the lands into which they had been invited by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], the Kassites began their steady influx into the country peacefully as hired workers and land buyers.

By the end of the 1700’s BC, Kassite settlers had obtained holdings even within the city of Babylon itself.

Yet, it is clear that from the reign of Samsu-iluna (1749-1712 BC) onwards the Kassites were also a military threat because Kassite tradition implied the founding of an independent state at this time somewhere on the borders of Babylonia on the middle Euphrates. [192]

Once again remember, political power comes from occupation of the land.

• Not land deeds
• not national boundaries
• not ethnic majority
• not claims of ownership
• not claims of historical precedence

but occupation alone gives ownership and power, and this occupation is not necessarily achieved by military means.

Once the foreigners had been settled on the land by the treasonous moneylenders, and once their numbers had increased to a near-majority, instead of being the smiling and friendly guest workers and hired laborers who were striving to fit into the dominant society, their attitudes changed into the less friendly demeanor of landowners and usurpers.

They did not have to pretend to be friendly in order to be accepted by the Babylonians.

Once these alien laborers and petty landowners had occupied the land, they could do as they pleased to control it.

Samsu-iluna maintained some control to the northwest, but the middle Euphrates was certainly lost to Babylonia by the time of his son, Abi-Eshuh (1711-1684 BC), whose reign is notable for little more than his failure to catch the Sealand ruler Iliman by “damming the Tigris”.

Although there appears to have been no serious challenge to their authority from the other cities of Sumer and Akkad, the last kings of Babylon’s First Dynasty clearly presided over a kingdom dwindling steadily in both territory and prestige.

Literary and economic documents preserved from this period continue to reflect an apparently prosperous society in which the arts flourished. [193]

For example, the scribe who copied the only known Old Babylonian epic cycle of the Flood Legend known as “Atrahasis”, worked in Sippar at this time.

Even though there were still no Hebrews or Jews anywhere to be found on the entire planet, the early Biblical stories as found in the Old Testament — such as:

• the Flood, Noah and the Ark
• the Laws of Moses (Hammurabi)
• Sampson (Gilgamesh)
• the Garden of Eden
• Genesis
• Adam and Eve

and Job – were already being published by the Babylonians and certainly not by the lying Jews.

EXTRATERRESTRIALS: ANUNNAKI: Before the Bible – The Anunnaki Origins of Cain & Abel – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Sumerian Clues in the Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: The Holy Bible – A Book of Jewish Witchcraft – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY – PROOF That the True Purpose of the Bible is for Jewish Witchcraft – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Bible Stories You Won’t Hear in Sunday School – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Human Sacrifice in the Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: The Bloody Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Bible – A Jewish Conspiracy & Hoax on the Gentiles – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Christcucks & Edited Bible Verses – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: 11 Things the Bible Bans, But You Do Anyways! – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: Christianity, Communism, the Jews & the Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: Christianity & Communism – Parallels in the Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Piso Family & the Story of the Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Mind Control Programming & the Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Bill Donahue – Astrology in the Bible – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Exposing Spiritual Corruption – Spiritual Alchemy & the Bible – Library of Rickandria

BOOK EXCERPT: The Bible Fraud – Related Reports – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: UFOs in the Bible – Library of Rickandria

Secrets of the Bible: Genesis – Library of Rickandria

RELIGION: CHRISTIANITY: Truth About the Bible – Library of Rickandria

The national state that Hammurabi established did not long endure after his death.

But by defeating the major city-states of Babylonia and uniting the country, if only briefly under the hegemony of Babylon, he achieved a political result which was to affect the history of Mesopotamia for the next two millennia.

No longer was there a Sumeria, but the entire region from the Southern Sea (Persian Gulf) to the borders of Assyria became known as Babylonia.

Babylon became the established seat of kingship, a position she was to maintain unchallenged until the Greeks built Seleucia 1500 years later.

As a religious center for the many gods, Babylon survived until the 1st century AD, while the mystique surrounding its name remains with us today.

Much of Babylon’s religious hold over the country involved the Semitic cult of Marduk, who came to replace the Sumerian god Enlil of Nippur as the bestower of legitimate kingship.

But this religious transformation did not take place until long after the reign of Hammurabi.
Hammurabi’s son and successor, Samsu-iluna (1749-1712 BC), tried to follow his father’s policies.

But the moneylenders were not pleased with the Law Code of Hammurabi and sought to establish more of a “free market” where they could practice the Sumerian Swindle unrestricted.

Within ten years, Samsu-iluna gave up most of the new empire.

In 1738 BC the south fell to Iliman, founder of the Sealand dynasty, who ruled Babylonia as far north as Nippur.

The so-called “Dynasty of the Sealands” continued to control a region approximately the size of ancient Sumeria for more than two hundred more years, outliving, indeed, Hammurabi’s First Dynasty of Babylon.

The political history of Samsu-iluna’s successors, Abi-Eshuh (1711 1684 BC), Ammi-ditana (1683-1647 BC), and Ammi saduqa (1646-1626 BC), was largely a matter of small-scale border campaigns and work on defensive walls, perhaps indicating an awareness of the possibility of attack. [194] Amid the troubles and turmoil, the ever-scheming merchant-moneylenders were surreptitiously undermining Babylonian society with their criminality.

For example, a hundred years after Hammurabi, two decrees in the edict of Ammi-saduqa of Babylon (1646-1626 BC) concern offenses punishable by death.

These also, incidentally, show the continuing problems society was having with the never-ending greed and dishonesty of the merchant-moneylenders versus the powerlessness of the peasants:

Edict #18,

“The wholesale and retail merchants who have used a false seal (in order to certify their documents), will be put to death.”

This indicates that forgery of cylinder seals and stamps had been a problem along with tax-evasion and smuggling.

No matter the great personal advantages that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had in commerce, they were always looking for ways to increase their profits and their advantages.

By their own perverted standards, they were clever businessmen; but by any standards they were the vilest of criminals doing business.

And yet, they were counted in Mesopotamian society as being among the Ruling Elite, the awilum [the Haves].

Edict # 22.

“The representative of the king or the local governor who has forced upon the family of a worker attached to the king, grain, silver, or wool, in order to make him harvest or perform work for his own profit, will be put to death.

His victim will keep everything that was given to him.”

This indicates that coercion of the workers had been attempted by forcing them to take pay and then demanding that they do work.

The workers would not work for the low pay that the immigration of foreign labor had forced upon them, so the landowners were trying to use force to make them work for that same low pay.

Certainly, there was no hint of impending doom.

The fatal blow, when it fell, came not from the troublesome Sealanders or the Kassites but from far to the north in Asia Minor, where the Hittites, an Indo-European speaking Aryan people, had created a rapidly growing kingdom.

From its capital Hattusha, a king named Mursili (1620-1595 BC), a contemporary of Samsu-Ditana of Babylon (1626-1595 BC), attacked northwestern Syria and then swept down the Euphrates towards Babylon without opposition.

Mursili must have appeared to the apparently unsuspecting Samsu-Ditana like a bolt out of the blue.

Babylon was sacked and its gods plundered.

Thus, the famous First Dynasty of Babylon came to a sudden end in 1595 BC. [195]

Although Murshili conquered and plundered, he did not stay.

His kingdom in Hattiland was undergoing political upheavals.

So, he gathered up as much loot as he could, including the statues of the gods from the temples, and returned to his rebellious kingdom in the cool, tree-covered mountains of Anatolia while leaving a power vacuum in Babylonia.

Into this vacuum, the Kassite forces descended from the Zagros Mountains to take control of the capital and to impose their government upon North Babylonia.

The Indo-European Kassites who had been cheap immigrant labor and small landowners in Babylonia, rose up and joined their invading relatives to establish a Kassite dynasty.

This Kassite dynasty, which rapidly adopted much of the culture and institutions of Babylonia, lasted about 400 years (1595-1150 BC) and was the longest lasting of any dynasty in the history of Mesopotamia.

The Kassites united the country after recapturing the south from the Sealanders, and restored the Babylonian empire to the glory of Hammurabi’s age. [196]

They were neither Sumerians nor Semitic Amorites, but they became the rulers of Babylonia.

And once again, the actual native owners of the land became a dispossessed majority in their own country, either working at menial jobs or joining the army to fight and die.

It should be noted that from the First Dynasty of Babylon (1894 BC) to the end of Babylonian history with the Hellenistic influences brought in with the conquests of Alexander the Great (323 BC), the possibility of administering the southern half of Babylonia depended to a considerable extent upon the co-operation of a few key cities, notably Ur and Uruk. [197]

Ur was an especially important city both economically and religiously.

It should also be noted that the Biblical city from which the mythological figure known as Abraham was born and began his saga, was the city of Ur, that is, “Ur of the Chaldees”.

This designation “Ur of the Chaldees” as found in the Old Testament actually gives evidence that Genesis was not written during the time that it claims to have been written since “Ur of the Chaldees” was not under Chaldean control until much later – but more on this subject in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon.

These two cities, Ur and Uruk, were not only religious centers but also the commercial centers of tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families.

Powerful temples were safe places to deposit gold and silver under the protection of the gods.

It was to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Ur and Uruk that the Kassites obtained cheap loans and purchased cheap properties.

The tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] of Ur and Uruk did not like the steep taxes imposed by the Sealanders who were interfering with their sea trade from the Persian Gulf.

So, it was from these two cities that the financing was supplied, and the plots were hatched to overthrow the Sealands Dynasties.

You will see this as a recurring theme throughout history where armies destroy every people and all property except for that of their allies.

The conquering armies of Kassites treated these southern cities of Ur and Uruk with honor and refrained from destroying their properties.

Some of the Kassite kings undertook building operations and other works of piety there.

The actual military conquest of the Sealands was affected by Ulamburiash, during the reign of his older brother, Kashtiliash III.

After serving as viceroy or sub-king in the Sealands, Ulamburiash succeeded to the Kassite throne in about 1450 BC. [198]

In domestic policy Kassite government seems to have been, to judge by existing economic documents, mild and un-oppressive.

One of the factors which most affected the reaction of the ancient city-states to a king was his attitude to the prescriptive rights of their citizens, involving in many cases exemption from taxes or corvée duties.

Extant charters promulgated by the Kassite kings indicate that they were liberal rulers in this respect, and the apparent absence of native up risings may well have been related to this liberality.

It may also help to explain the relative ease with which the Aryan Kassites were ultimately able to displace the Semitic Sealand dynasty. [199]

They were simply a better people.

The first Kassite king of Babylon was Agum II, who was credited with recovering the statues of the god Marduk and his wife after twenty-four years of Hittite captivity.

With Marduk reinstalled in his temple in Babylon, the Kassite kings were able to:

“take the hand of Marduk”

– a symbolic gesture denoting dynastic legitimacy and respect for Babylonian traditions.

They followed the social and religious customs of the Babylonians, and they even adopted the Akkadian language. [200]

Babylon remained a prestigious and wealthy center of political and commercial power.

But, to the immediate north, a more powerful rival was growing in might.

The Semitic kingdom of Assyria was beginning to arise.

1700-1674 BC The Hyksos Take Control of Egypt

Before considering the Assyrian Empire that was growing stronger on the northern borders of Babylonia, let’s have a look to the west, across the Syrian desert at a different population of these Semitic goat rustlers.

It is not those Amorites who created the Babylonian and Assyrian empires that we shall consider, but their flea-bitten cousins and uncles who were riding their donkeys around 

• Canaan
• Northern Arabia
• Gaza

and Goshen in small tribes of bandits and sheep stealers.

Historically, they have been called the Hyksos, but they were a very different kind of people than what has been assumed of them by the historians and archeologists.

In that geographical area of Canaan and Palestine, simultaneously with the beginnings of the history of Assyria, also begins the history of a Semitic people who have never been any more than a fly speck on the tail of a donkey.

With Semitic craftiness and deceit these people have claimed to be among the most ancient – indeed, the very most ancient – of all people on Earth.

Little by little, I will weave the background of these deceivers into the present history.

But first, let’s review who these people were.

If you inspect a map of the distribution of the goat and sheep raising areas with a map of the grain growing areas of the ancient Near East, you will see that the land where goats and sheep can forage is much more rugged than the lands where grain can be grown. [Figure 14]

Goats, especially, are famous for being able to eat anything.

Whether succulent green sprouts in a field of spring greens or the spines of a cactus, goats get by on just about any plant that grows.

Sheep, too, can forage even barren areas where plants grow in mere clumps separated by barren dirt but, of course, they thrive in fields of wild grasses and hay.

However, to grow crops of grain and vegetables, you need good soil, sufficient water, sun and labor.

But even the rockiest hills can support goats.

So, the roaming bands of shepherds who ranged the arid hills and mountains of the ancient Near East did so both inside and outside of the boundaries of settled areas of farms and villages.

The wild areas where the footsteps of Man were seldom found was their abode.

As long as they could scare away the lions and jackals with their slings and arrows, then their goats and sheep provided them with milk and meat, wool and goat hair for weaving, bone and horn for implements and decorations.

Living in goat hair and woolen tents and traveling by donkey and on foot, they spent their days roaming about the ancient Near East in search of water and forage.

They did not know how to farm.

But even if they had wanted to settle into a farming life, by this time in the history of the ancient Near East of 1700 BC, the best farming areas had already been settled by other people. 

Over the previous two thousand years, robust civilizations based on agriculture had grown up within the grain growing regions.

The peoples of:

• Sumeria and Babylonia
• Assyria and Ugarit
• Hattiland
• Canaan

and Egypt had long held the territories that gave them sustenance.

Because the Fertile Crescent, the breadbasket of the ancient Near East, had for so long been inhabited by farming people, the goat herders were mainly restricted to the wilderness.

And that was okay with them since their herds provided everything that they needed.

Or if there was anything that they wanted in the villages and cities, they could trade their goats and sheep for grain and salt; trinkets and cooking pots for the wives; bronze daggers and swords for the young men.

Or they would steal what they could not afford to buy.

Relying on the hidden paths and difficult terrain of the wilderness for protection, these roaming bands of Amorite goat-rustlers, as has been previously stated, were a constant source of anxiety to the villages and cities.

Surprise raids followed by quick retreat into the trackless wastelands, or stealthy stealing into a farm or a village at night to burglarize and run away before discovery, were the favorite methods used by these Amorite shepherds.

The farming peoples were wary of them but, at the same time, wanted to be on the friendliest of terms with them so as to avoid enmity.

In times of drought where watering holes dried up and the land was too parched even for goats, these roaming Semitic shepherds would beg for a place to graze their flocks near to the well-watered farming communities.

Not just out of compassion, but also out of self-serving politics, these shepherds were usually granted permission.

This, so as to keep them as docile, peaceable and as friendly as possible but also as to not drive them, through hunger and thirst, into a desperation leading to banditry and warfare.

Between the farmers and the nomads, there was always an uneasy truce broken with sporadic banditry and sudden raids followed by punishing expeditions by the king’s troops or the local militia chasing the shepherds back into the wilderness.

Birth-control through extended nursing of the children had kept Sumerian populations within the natural bounds and the natural needs of a farming people.

The mothers of Sumeria practiced natural birth control by suckling their children for two years and thus producing families of well-spaced children while saving themselves from the exhaustions of childbearing.

The mothers of Egypt nursed their children for three years which also kept the sizes of their families small [201] and produced a slow increase in population.

But the Semitic Amorites practiced polygamy like their goats.

And through their increase in numbers from their many wives they quickly became more numerous than the city dwellers.

High birth-rates, celebrated with the exhortations from their lice-covered priests to:

“go forth and multiply like the sands of the sea”

became standard operating procedure for the goat herding nomads who wanted to displace the farmers from their land and to make it their own.

The wandering Semitic goat rustlers celebrated the mothers who produced eight or ten or twelve children just as the Orthodox Jews and Hasidics do in modern times and for the very same reasons, to out-breed and out-number the people whom they wanted to dispossess.

And of course, large tribes are stronger than small tribes.

In addition to their large families, the interpersonal and inter-tribal relations of their patriarchal genealogies gave these wandering tribes the ability to merge with other tribes into larger alliances for war and banditry with a minimum of political haggling.

When combined, these genealogically related tribes gave them sufficient numbers to usually pose a unified threat to the towns and civilized lands.

Women who married into other tribes, brought with them the stories and genealogies of their own tribes in addition to bride gifts.

Thus, the clever stratagems and thefts that were famous among their own people, became a part of the common lore of the tribes into which these women married.

Through marriage alliances, previously unrelated tribes could “inherit” each other’s asl.

In some of these patriarchal tribes, it was only the women who were believed to pass along the tribe’s asl.

This allowed the patriarch or “father” of tribe-A to arranged for his daughter to marry into tribe-B.

Then, because all of her children would “inherit” the asl of tribe-A, he could claim that all of her children were actually members of tribe-A.

Through marriage, tribe-A could claim the children of and subvert tribe-B by falsely claiming that the children of tribe-B had inherited the asl of tribe-A and were therefore members of tribe-A.

This sorcery was only true because these fly-speckled goat-thieves all believed that it was true. 

So, they parasitically increased their numbers by claiming the children of their daughters who married outside of the tribe as the children of the tribe.

And why?

Because they all had magically inherited the same asl.

This fake sorcery is still practiced by the Jews in modern times.

As the Amorites became civilized by taking over the Sumerian cities, their sheep-stealing cousins living in tents learned of the ways in which these usurpers had been able to take the wealth of other people for themselves.

Stories of these clever stratagems became common tradition as these nomads road their donkeys and herded their sheep and goats across the hot, dusty grasslands and deserts of the ancient Near East.

These stratagems were known by these roaming Amorites and, of course, they were known by the city-dwelling Amorite merchant-moneylenders who had descended from goat rustlers, themselves.

With such a background in mind, we shall leave the fall of Babylonia (1595 BC) behind for a while and go back a few centuries to around 1700 BC.

Assyria had not yet grown into its full power.

Babylonia was still thriving under Hammurabi’s Dynasty but the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had already undermined the country with the immigrant labor of the Kassites. 

So, Babylon’s days were numbered.

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] knew from vast experience that the internal weakness caused by an immigrant population would set the country on the path to destruction.

They knew this from their long and successful application of Secret Fraud #11 of the Sumerian Swindle:

“Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are impoverished.”

The moneylenders and merchants knew that their own people were destroyed and dispossessed through the Sumerian Swindle, but the allegiance of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had always been to their personal profits above their own people.

The Sumerian Swindle had placed them at the pinnacle of wealth, and they stayed at that apex only through its ruthless application.

The Sumerian Swindle allowed them to profit from treason.

But even as they armed and loaned money to the enemies of Babylon in Assyria to the north and to the Sealands in the south, they always needed a place to store their silver that would both be safe from theft and would increase in profits.

In business, they were merciless and cruel.

And in hiding their silver, they always sought the protection of the temple treasuries.

The Sumerian Swindle is an impossible fraud today just as it was then.

The Swindle demands that there must be paid back more than actually exists.

But without a fresh influx of new silver and gold into the system, the Swindle breaks down from lack of payments simply because, through interest-on-a-loan, the bankers end up with all of the wealth while the People end up with nothing at all while still owing even more.

Even if the moneylenders could put every single shekel of silver of the entire world into their vaults, by the arithmetical numbers on their books, they were still owed even more silver by the people who had borrowed from them.

So, fresh supplies of silver and gold needed to be brought in from some outside source if the swindle is to continue and not come crashing down around the bankers’ heads.

For the moneylenders to continue to thrive, the People must be induced to always work harder to obtain more than they need and then give even that to the bankers.

Such is the relentless arithmetic of the Sumerian Swindle.

The People are never allowed to rest from the incessant labor necessary to pay the interest-on the-loan.

And if they cannot be induced to work any harder to pay-the-debt, then they must be induced to go to war, steal from some other people, and then pay the “debt” with the stolen loot.

As a parasitic class, the tamkarum [merchant moneylenders] profited as the middlemen in all financial transactions, gaining a percentage every time money or goods passed through their hands.

But as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Babylonia absorbed silver as debt-payments, there was less silver in circulation and business slowed down which meant less profits.

As parasites, they could not kill their victims entirely, so something needed to be done to keep both the People and the Swindle alive.

Only by seizing a supply of bullion from a source outside of the moneylenders’ ownership could the Swindle be resuscitated with such an “economic stimulus package”.

Free silver would have to be made available to the people so that they could give it to the moneylenders as payments for their debt-slavery and so that they could further profit the merchants by buying the goods imported by the merchant moneylender cartels.

Business profits could not be allowed to diminish simply because the moneylenders had all of the silver in their strong rooms.

Once the moneylenders possessed most of the silver from the entire country, then silver belonging to somebody else’s country would have to be seized.

And the most profitable way to get what you didn’t earn, was through the thievery of war.

All of the wars between Sumer and Akkad or between Babylonia and the hill countries had reached an account book balance by merely shifting silver from one side to the other and back again among the moneylender families.

There was very little net increase in the total amount of bullion since all that the silver did was to change hands as booty.

Unless an outside source of bullion could be found, the astronomically growing numbers in the account books would force a decline in business from a lack of circulating silver.

These moneylender families were now the richest families in both Babylonia and Assyria.

Even though they were all related by marriage and by partnerships through their business guilds, competition between these families was fierce.

They, too, were driven by the fraudulent arithmetic of lending-at-interest to seek ever higher profits.

And yet, the total sum of silver in all of Mesopotamia was not increasing fast enough to pay the debt-service fees even from what could be smelted from the slave-labor mines, all of which were located in distant lands.

So, the Babylonian merchants and moneylenders needed a fresh source of gold and silver but not from mines that had to be worked with slaves and slowly extracted over time.

They needed gold and silver bullion that was already smelted and waiting to be seized.

In the ancient near East, the only huge source of such wealth was the ancient land of Egypt, a land that had never known foreign conquest and which had been accumulating gold in its temples, palaces and tombs for nearly two thousand years.

What was even more unique about Egypt was that it had reached a high level of civilization without any money.

Unlike the Mesopotamian empires, Egypt did not need, nor did it use money and neither did it have any guilds of moneylenders parasitizing the wealth and sucking it away to distant lands.

All of Egypt’s gold, silver and gemstones were still in the country and in quantities derived from over two thousand years of hoarding.

Egypt was a theocracy similar to the earliest God conscious civilization in Sumeria, basing its culture upon knowledge of and service to God.

Its public administration and theocratic structure had never been subjected to the intrigues and wars caused by a money system controlled by private financiers such as had occurred in Mesopotamia.

Modern archeologists all know that ancient Egypt was a land where nothing was more important to the Egyptian People than religion.

This is how it had originally been for Sumeria, too, before the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] betrayed the People.

The entire Egyptian culture revolved around the gods.

The People lived because the gods gave them life and they expressed their religious resolve and piety in every moment of every day with prayer and joy.

This religious consciousness was extended even to their kings who were believed to be not just a representative of god on earth, but actually a living god incarnate.

With the Pharaoh as a god whose duty it was to protect and to administer for his people, Egypt prospered, and the People enjoyed a great spiritual power.

The name, “Pharaoh”, means “Great House”.

Thus, the Pharaoh was the Great House in which his people lived. [202] When a new king arose, he made a royal procession to all of the ancient shrines and assured the various religious orders that he would respect their privileges and increase them.

As part of the ancient tradition, in the first or second year of his reign, Pharaoh set out to raid some near-by country in order to show the nations around that he was a mighty warrior as well as a god.

He fought in person and the custom demanded that he should slay a number of prisoners with his own hand.

Representatives of the vanquished peoples or tribes were made to kneel before him with their arms tied together at the elbows and behind their backs, and the pharaoh smashed in their skulls with a stone-headed or a copper-headed mace or he cut off their heads with a bronze or copper scimitar. [203]

These events were celebrated on temple walls in huge bas reliefs showing the pharaoh accomplishing these feats.

However, this was all mainly a religious ceremony and a political propaganda show-of-strength to frighten off would-be aggressors.

The history of Egypt shows clearly that the Egyptians, as a nation, were wholly lacking in military spirit and that they abhorred war.

Whenever it was necessary to do so, they were ready to fight in a primitive fashion for their fields and canals and homes.

But for the defense of their country as a whole they were by nature and by temperament more interested in their religious life and their peaceful meditations upon Eternity.

They had no national spirit at all, at least under the Old Kingdom (~2700-2200 BC) and the Middle Kingdom (~2130-1640 BC).

And even under the New Kingdom (~1550-1085 BC), the principal object of all of their raids and so-called “wars” was the acquisition of booty and prisoners and the establishment of Egyptian borders.

Such short shows of military aggression were also necessary to maintain the longer peace.

Even though the Nile River is 3,473 miles long, that portion of the Nile Valley which is Egypt and which is 600 miles long, lay open on both sides of the Nile to the attacks of the warlike bandits of the deserts.

Invasion from the north and south was always easy for a determined foe since natural geographic barriers from those directions were few.

In all of their thousands of years of history, Egypt never possessed anything that could be called a “standing army” until the beginning of the New Kingdom after the Hyksos had been expelled. [204]

From the earliest days, Egyptians lived in mud brick houses.

Once again, modern people can learn a lot from the ancient peoples even in this respect. 

Everyone who has lived for any length of time in either Egypt or Mesopotamia will admit that, provided the walls are thick enough, mud-brick houses are preferable to those built according to the European models. [205]

And they are completely eco-friendly and re-cyclable mud, unlike the synthetic trash which is the construction materials of the modern house.

The heavy rains that fall in Sudan and Abyssinia cause the Nile to rise about the middle of June and to crest sometime in October after which the planting season begins.

The principal crops were:

• wheat
• barley
• beans
• lentils
• millet
• vetches
• lupins
• clover
• flax
• cotton
• cucumbers
• melons
• leeks
• onions
• dates
• pomegranate
• carobs
• figs

and papyrus.

In all periods, the Egyptians were primarily vegetarians in diet though, of course, various large and small:

• cattle
• fish
• ducks

and geese were also eaten.[206]

The average Egyptian was by nature a cheerful, joyous person, fond of amusement and pleasure and his greatest desire was to:

“make a good day”

to eat, drink and be merry.

They loved to assemble in the “house of beer” and gossip with their friends. [207]

But unlike in Mesopotamia these were not taverns owned by the moneylenders because Egypt did not have a need for money.

As a joyous and religious people, they bartered in good faith with one another.

Workers were paid in rations such as was common in Sumeria before the moneylenders betrayed the People with the Sumerian Swindle.

But as much as they enjoyed life and as much as they liked to party and rejoice, they were, after all, a religious people whose main preoccupation in Life was to attain a happy Here-After in the immortal realm of the gods.

Their priests helped them to achieve this through the secret methods that are explained in Volume Two.

And as a religious reminder, it was the custom that even during the happiest occasions, one of the songs that was always sung at even the happiest party was a dirge, a dirge to remind them all that however much they were enjoying themselves at that moment, the day would assuredly come when they each must die.

Can modern people be so wise or so courageous in facing Life and Death as the ancient Egyptians?

Dirge to be Sung in the Middle of Parties and Celebrations:

“O beneficent Prince, it is a decree, And what has been ordained by this decree is good: That the bodies of men shall pass away and disappear, And that others shall abide in succession to them.

I have heard the words of the scribe Imhotep and Hertataf, the pyramid builder, Which, because they wrote them, are treasured beyond everything.

Consider what hath happened to their tombs; Their walls have been thrown down; Their places can no longer be seen.

It is just as if they had never existed.

And consider also, none cometh from where they are, To describe their state in the After Life.

Or to tell us of their surroundings.

Or to guide us to the place whither they have gone.

Anoint thy head with scented unguents, Array thyself in apparel made of byssus, Steep thy body in precious perfumes, Which are indeed the emanations of the gods.

Occupy thyself with thy pleasures, day by day And cease not to search out enjoyment for thyself.

Man is not permitted to carry his goods away with him.

Never hath existed the man who, once departed, Was able to return to earth again.

Follow thy heart’s desire, Search out happiness for thyself, Order thy affairs on earth so that they may Minister to the desire of thy heart.

For at length, the day of lamentation shall come, When the dead shall not hear the lamentations, And the cries of grief shall never make to beat again.

The heart of him who is in the grave.

Therefore, comfort thy heart, forget these things.

The best thing for thee to do for thyself is to seek To attain thy heart’s desire as long as thou livest.” [208]

As you can see from this Dirge, the religion of the Egyptians offers very much the same advice that the Sumerian priests offered their own people in such works as the Epic of Gilgamesh. 

After all, such religious truths are universal.

The Egyptians would sing their Dirge in the middle of their most joyous parties as a reminder of their duties to their gods and to their very souls.

Life is fleeting, enjoy it while you can and do your duty to God so that you may have everlasting life.

The moneylenders of Babylonia also shared this philosophy about enjoying Life except for the last part; they did not believe in an everlasting life.

So, whatever evils that they did in this life for their own pleasure and however so many people they destroyed for their own benefit didn’t matter to them as long as they got what they wanted.

These Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were a much different people – ruthless, materialistic Semites who envied the gold of the god-conscious Egyptians.

Throughout Egyptian history, the Egyptian was both by nature and by habit a moral and religious person.

But he was also extremely practical because the aim of all his moral and religious efforts was to secure for himself:

• ease
• comfort
• prosperity

in this world and a life of everlasting joy and happiness in the next world. [209]

Can the modern:

• Christians
• Buddhists
• Hindus

ask for any more from their own religions?

Like the beliefs of other ancient peoples throughout most of the world at that time, Egyptians believed that every locality had its own resident gods.

These gods could be:

• flattered
• cajoled
• begged

and wheedled into granting requests and bribed with offerings.

Offerings became a principal act of worship at all periods of Egyptian history. [210]

With offerings, the temples thereby became wealthy.

Offerings and donations are a reflection of the piety of the people throughout the ancient times up to the present.

They are a result of simple religious devotion common to all religions and to all people.

A material offering is a giving up of material goods and an acceptance of spiritual life.

Making offerings to God is an act of pious contrition and devoted love.

It is a necessary act of worship.

To help them understand their duties to the gods, a very large religious system had evolved in Egypt.

As one example, the employees of just one temple, the Temple of Amon in the reign of Rameses III, numbered 62,626 persons which shows that the cult was in actuality a social and family system that supported not only the temple staff but the families of the priests and all employees as well.

Usermaatre Meryamun Ramesses III was the second Pharaoh of the Twentieth Dynasty in Ancient Egypt. Some scholars date his reign from 26 March 1186 to 15 April 1155 BC, and he is considered the last pharaoh of the New Kingdom to have wielded substantial power.

A detailed list of the offerings that Rameses III made to the temples of:

• Thebes
• Abydos
• Heliopolis

and the amount of food and gifts was truly huge. [211]

The Egyptian priests were genuine devotees and not mere loafers and parasites of society.

Not only did they offer their people solace and wisdom, but the priests of Egypt had some very real mental and spiritual powers aside from the reputed magical powers for which they were famous throughout the Near East.

The Egyptian texts make it quite clear that the priests possessed spiritual, occult and psychological powers of a remarkable character.

But for the ordinary Egyptian – just as in Mesopotamia – the road to success and prosperity could only be traversed by knowing how to read and write.

Thus, extraordinary respect was paid to the profession of the scribe and to the scribe, himself. [212]

It is what the scribes wrote about their priests that unlocks the ancient myths and mysteries. 

Some of this will sound familiar to you if you have read the Old Testament.

For example, one of the priests of Egypt was supposed to have had the power:

“of dividing the water in a lake into two parts and making one part to stand on the other.” [213]

And you will also be familiar with a trick that the Egyptian sorcerers could do by changing a rod into a snake.

By pressing a part of the neck of a cobra it could be made to straighten itself like a rod, and when the pressure was removed, the creature assumed its normal form once again. [214]

This should sound familiar to those who have read the Old Testament since these were Egyptian stories that were older than the Hebrews.

But the Egyptian religion was not just a collection of conjuror’s tricks to impress the country bumpkins.

It contained a fully developed knowledge of the spiritual powers of Mankind.

The religious texts found on the walls of tombs and temples, sarcophagi and surviving papyri show that the Egyptians throughout their long history worshipped everything from stones and mountains to birds, beasts and reptiles.

These facts in the benighted blindness of the atheistic modern scientists and Jews, has led to the false assumption that the ancient Egyptians were pagan and idolatrous fools.

After all, what modern person in their right mind would worship a rock or a cat?

However, it is not wise for modern people to scoff at the Egyptian religion because the Egyptians had some special knowledge and secret powers that modern people are lacking.

The key to such knowledge is most easily understood by those modern Asian people who know their own “chi” (pronounced “chee” and also spelled “qi”).

This spiritual power is fully discussed in Volume Two, The Monsters of Babylon.

This natural energy field and mental attribute is naturally possessed by all people, but it is only recognized and controlled by those few who have been able to tap into their own spiritual powers.

Modern:

• martial artists
• tai chi chuan adepts
• qi gong practitioners

and the cultivators of meditation and acupuncture are very conversant with this energy field and spiritual power.

SPIRITUALITY: ENERGY: CONSCIOUSNESS: Consciousness & Human Energy – Library of Rickandria

That modern scientists are not, is the reason that none of the archeologists have ever been able to understand the real secrets of ancient Egypt – or of any other ancient civilization for that matter.

Modern scientists lack the fundamental, human, spiritual skills necessary.

For example, the Egyptians as well as the sacred artists of later millennia who painted and sculpted the:

• Hindu
• Buddhist
• Christian

gods, goddesses and saints very often painted them surrounded by halos, beams of light and rings of flames.

In those religious cultures, too, the holy light that radiates from a spiritually elevated person was represented in such ways – halos, auras and beams of light.

But even though the original artist could see and experience those spiritual energies, and even though he could represent it in artistic form, those representations mean nothing to modern scientists because modern people have lost their spiritual awareness and insight.

Modern scientists believe (since they do not know) that the:

• auras
• halos
• beams of light

and rings of fire in the

• Buddhist
• Hindu
• Christian

art – as well as their representation in:

• Egyptian
• Assyrian
• Sumerian

art is only an artistic “convention” for indicating a special religious status of those beings who are represented.

But the scientists don’t understand that such artistic techniques are, in fact, true representations of actual phenomenon, phenomenon that the scientists could experience for themselves if they would try.

Stories from Mesopotamia of Marduk wrapping his aura around him, was expressing an actual knowledge of auras.

It was not a poetic dream.

The:

• Buddhist
• Hindu
• Christian

painters and sculptors of later times, likewise, were representing what they could see with their own eyes, the halos radiating from their teachers and holy men.

The Egyptian artists also expressed their own spiritual abilities as well as the spiritual attainment of their people by painting and sculpting them in holy ways.

But modern scientists assume that such representations were a standardized artistic device rather than the records of an actual observation.

This misconception by modern science as well as the secrets of Egyptian spiritual power are fully discussed in Volume Two, The Monsters of Babylon.

Another special power of the Egyptians was represented in the reddish color that the Egyptian artists used in their paintings of skin tone for Egyptian wall reliefs and papyrus scrolls.

The reddish color was not used for representing any other people.