506
traditionally due the crown.^106 The narûs are our best source for infor-
mation about land tenure during the Middle Babylonian period.6.2 Inheritance
6.2.1 Male Inheritance
6.2.1.1 Primary heirs were the legitimate sons of the deceased. In
the absence of a son, both daughters and male collaterals were poten-
tial heirs. A narûdocumenting legal battles over the dispensation of
an estate illuminates these considerations.^107
According to the inscription, a priest died without heir, and the
king bestowed his estate^108 upon another priest. This recipient’s claim
to the estate was later challenged by two men claiming “brother-
hood” (a¢¢ùtu) to the deceased and a third man claiming to be “son
of a daughter of the house of the deceased” (màr màrat “a Bìt PN).
Witnesses who were questioned testified that the first two challengers
“were not close for brotherhood to the deceased” (ana a¢¢ùti ana PN
làqerbù), and as for the third challenger, witnesses testified that “his
mother was not named” (ummà“u làzukkurat). In the eyes of the law,
these conditions apparently rendered the claims of the challengers
spurious: the king dismissed their suits, literally “sent them away,”
and “afterward caused them to forfeit the estates of their fathers”
(“arruìbuk“unùtì-ma arki bìtàt abbê“unu u“edkì“unùti).^109
After the passage of some years, a man seized part of the estate
claiming that he was the brother of the deceased and that he had
been too young at the time to object to the original bestowal. Now
he wanted to assert his claim to a share of the estate that he felt
was his. The king now on the throne ordered the circumstances of
the claimant and the estate investigated. When he could not come
to a decision based on the available evidence, he sent both the(^106) Slanski, Study...
(^107) BBSt. 3.
(^108) The text is concerned with land and does not state what other property the
estate might have included.
(^109) Between the first and the third claims, a different challenge was posed to the
priest’s title. Another individual apparently had sold some lands belonging to the
estate and the priest wanted to reclaim them. The king now on the throne had
the sale investigated. After reviewing the evidence, he awarded the previously sold
land to the priest but ordered that he must compensate the sons of the now-deceased
buyer who had purchased in good faith.
WESTBROOK_f12–484-520 8/27/03 12:27 PM Page 506