I located this on the web:
 
SINCE THE AREA near where the Tigris and Euphrates rivers emptied into the Persian Gulf had two dominant groups, the Sumerians and Akkadians, it is often referred to as Sumer-Akkad. As part of an almost endless pattern, other people kept trying to take control of the land, mineral resources, and trade routes.

Eventually they succeeded. Semitic Amorites from the Arabian Peninsula gained control over most of Mesopotamia by about 1900 B.C. They centralized their monarchical government over the city-states just north of Sumer, in Babylon, formerly Akkad (Agade). The three centuries of their domination is known as the Old Babylonian period.

Babylonians believed the king held power because of the gods; moreover, they thought their king was a god. To maximize his power and control, a bureaucracy and centralized government were established along with the inevitable adjuncts, taxation and involuntary military service.

The Sumerians already had laws, but they were administered jointly by individuals and the state. With a divine monarch came divinely inspired laws, violation of which was an offense to the state as well as the gods. The Babylonian king (1728-1686 B.C.) Hammurabi codified the laws in which (as distinct from the Sumerian) the state could prosecute on its own behalf. The Code of Hammurabi is famous for demanding punishment to fit the crime (the lex talionis, or an eye for an eye) with different treatment for each social class. The Code is thought to be Sumerian in spirit but with a Babylonian inspired harshness.

Hammurabi also united the Assyrians to the north and the Akkadians and Sumerians to the south. Trade with Anatolia, Syria, and Palestine spread Babylonian influence further. He further consolidated his Mesopotamian empire by building a network of roads and a postal system.

In religion, there wasn't much change from Sumer / Akkad to Babylonia. Hammurabi added a Babylonian Marduk, as chief god, to the Sumerian pantheon. The Epic of Gilgamesh is a Babylonian compilation of Sumerian tales about a legendary king of the city-state of Uruk, with a flood story.

When, in the reign of Hammurabi's son, the horse-back invaders known as the Kassites, made incursions into Babylonian territory, the Babylonians thought it punishment from the gods, but they managed to recover and stayed in (limited) power until the beginning of the 16th century B.C. when the Hittites sacked Babylon, only to withdraw later because the city was too distant from their own capital. Eventually the Assyrians suppressed them, but even that was not the end of the Babylonians for they rose again in the Chaldean (or Neo-Babylonian) era from 612-539 made famous by their great king, Nebuchadnezzar.

Possibly this might offer some clarity.

Gerry

 

 
From: John
To: Nostratica@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 8:00 PM
Subject: [Nostratica] Re: basic info on nostratic

I have been reading a little on the "town planning" of Ancient
Babylon (Babel) and it appears that as was common in most ancient
cities, the city had many "quarters" where people of different ethnic
groups lived, and were, like the later Ottoman Milid, almost self-
governing (at least for internal affairs).

In Babylon of the captivity, not only did one find Jews, but also
living in the city were Ethiopians, Sabaeans, Egyptians, Nubians,
Philistines, Aramaeans, Luwian speaking people from Lycia, Phrygians,
Greeks, Scythians, Armenians, Medes, Persians, Elamites and Arabians,
as well as Akkadian speaking Babylonians.  With its spectacular
monumental architecture - it was easy for the Jews of the captivity
to believe that they had arrived the place from which all languages
arose.  Clearly this was the source of the Tower of Babel myth - an
etiological story to explain linguistic diversity.

Regards

John

--- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "madlinguistics"
<madlinguistics@...> wrote:
> Unless we choose to believe the Genesis 11(Babel) account, which
> genesis 10 (languages already split) disproves, its basic logic
that all
> languages came ffrom one, unless of course two separate groups of
> humans evolved.  Finding the original language is where theory
comes
> in, not whether it exists.  People couldn't explain it in the past
so they
> made up fairy tales about the gods being threatened by a big tower
and
> split up their divided then aparently reunited languages.  Now we a
> looking for a real answer.  These had to have come from somewhere.
> --- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "Geraldine Reinhardt"
> <waluk@...> wrote:
> >
> > Andy,
> > How long do you suspect the theory of Nostratic to remain
> theoretical?  Haven't we amassed enough information on the web to
> undergo quantitative decisions?  It seems to me that we are at the
> gateway of the beginnings of a true origins of language theory.
> >
> > Gerry
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: Andy Howey
> >   To: Nostratica@yahoogroups.com
> >   Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 2:31 PM
> >   Subject: Re: [Nostratica] Re: basic info on nostratic
> >
> >
> >   You might want to do a google search for Nostratic.  There's a
fair
> amount of information available about it on the web.  Keep in mind,
> though, that it's not a proven concept.  It's theoretical, and
somewhat
> controversial, at least among mainstream linguists.
> >
> >   Andy Howey
> >
> >   madlinguistics <madlinguistics@...> wrote:
> >     I didnt mix it up.  I just had another question about
information on
> >     Nostratic so I thought I would ask.  I am new to the idea but
it is
> similar
> >     to my own theories, so I want ot learn more about it.
> >
> >     --- In Nostratica@yahoogroups.com, "Geraldine Reinhardt"
> >     <waluk@...> wrote:
> >     > You must have me mixed up with someone else.  Or else you're
> >     > a machine.
> >     >
> >     > This is what I sent you:
> >     >
> >     > Nostratic has been a topic under discussion for a long time
and
> >     > presently is an active topic on many discussion groups.
> >     >
> >     > Your point about people who evolved in different places
speaking
> >     > a different language is as plausible as the antithesis
which
> amounts
> >     > to people evolving in one specific area (say OoA) and then
> >     > dispersing.
> >     >
> >     > I like to think of languages as different dialects whereby
the
> speaker
> >     > of a definite "down Maine" accent cannot understand someone
> >     speaking
> >     > Creole from New Orleans.  Both languages are considered to
be
> >     > indigenous to America yet both New Orleans and Maine were
> settled
> >     > by immigrants who came from the continent.
> >     >
> >     > Hope this helps.
> >     >
> >     > Gerry Reinhart-Waller
> >     > www.home.earthlink.net/~waluk
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >   ----- Original Message -----
> >     >   From: madlinguistics
> >     >   To: Nostratica@yahoogroups.com
> >     >   Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 6:36 PM
> >     >   Subject: [Nostratica] basic info on nostratic
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >   your link doesn't work.   is there any other sites or
links you
> have
> >     that
> >     >   have the basic information about nostratic for people new
to the
> >     study? 
> >     >   is there anyone here who has studied much the connections
> >     between
> >     >   the altaic and the amerindian famailes?  Im doing so, and
the
> >     grammar
> >     >   of quechua, hopi, and turkish are nearly identical.  any
info on
> that
> >     let
> >     >   me know.
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > ------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
> >     >   Yahoo! Groups Links
> >     >
> >     >     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >     >     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nostratica/
> >     >      
> >     >     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >     >     Nostratica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >     >      
> >     >     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms
> of
> >     Service.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
> >     Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >       a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >       http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nostratica/
> >        
> >       b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >       Nostratica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >        
> >       c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of
> Service.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
> >   Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nostratica/
> >      
> >     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >     Nostratica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >      
> >     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of
> Service.



Yahoo! Groups Links