From Freedom to Slavery

Abstract This article presents some reflections on slavery in the Ancient Near East during the Old Babylonian period. Particular attention is paid to an analysis of the sources for prisoners of war originating from Uruk in which the bīt asīrī, “the house of prisoners of war” is mentioned. These texts from the bīt asīrī date to the short reign of Rīm-Anum, who held power in Uruk for about eighteen months, between 1742 and 1740 BC. The use of war prisoners as labor force and slaves is examined in detail. It is suggested that the bīt asīrī was an institutional entity, managed by the state, and moreover that it was connected with the production of flour. This investigation also makes comparisons with other references to prisons in the Ancient Near East and especially in the Bible. Lastly, the ways in which war captives could be freed are discussed.

Download Full-text

The Public Management of War Prisoners Within and Outside the bīt asīrī

Archiv orientální ◽

10.47979/aror.j.88.2.193-219 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 88 (2) ◽

pp. 193-219

Author(s):

Annunziata Rositani

Keyword(s):

Labor Force ◽

Public Management ◽

Slave Trade ◽

Prisoners Of War ◽

The State ◽

The Public ◽

Specific Study ◽

Old Babylonian ◽

Temporary Labor ◽

The Way

This paper presents some reflections on the management of war prisoners in South Mesopotamia during the Old Babylonian period. In particular, it analyses data from texts in which “the house of prisoners of war,” the bīt asīrī, is mentioned. The majority of these texts date back to the reign of Rīm-Anum, who held power in Uruk for about two years during the rebellion of South Mesopotamia against Samsu-iluna of Babylon (1742‒1740 BC). This archive provides unparalleled evidence for the study of war prisoner management during the Old Babylonian period, which seems to have been exclusively administrated by the State. A specific study will be carried out on the usage of war prisoners as forced workers: in fact, many texts indicate that they were given to individuals or houses as a temporary labor force under a designated person’s authority. Nevertheless, the prisoners remained under the superior authority of the bīt asīrī, where they returned after they had finished working, without being included in the slave trade. The paper also analyses the way in which the prisoners’ geographic provenance affected the treatment they received and, finally, the release of prisoners upon payment of a ransom or following a royal action.

Download Full-text