CHAPTER NINETEEN
POWER, ECONOMY
AND SOCIAL ORGANISATION
IN BABYLONIA
Gebhard J. Selz
POWER AND IDEOLOGYP
ower derives from many sources: physical strength, personal charisma, economic
and social influence, or from legal or conventional traditions, such as inheritance.
In the Babylonian world view, natural causes were not clearly distinguished from
supra-natural influences and so the different sources of power remained intertwined
despite the development of a legal system based on writing, and the mythical roots
of power were never neglected. The ruler’s main task was to mediate between different
social groups as well as between deities and human beings. The proof for the divine
mandate of the ruler was the efficiency of his government, the welfare of the people
being its outward sign (Selz 2004 ). Economical and social organisations, therefore,
had to be at the centre of Babylonia’s royal ideology. No legitimate or lasting power
could permanently ignore the welfare of its subjects or of a substantial group that
supported the government. Therefore, different interests had to be taken into account
and antagonistic forces had to be restricted and controlled. Adversaries from within
society were as dangerous as enemies from the outside. Not surprisingly though,
official inscriptions deal primarily with the latter and information about conflicts
within Babylonian society remains scarce. As a result of this unbalance in the original
sources, modern historiographers often tend to reiterate the official ancient
Mesopotamian account of historical events. It focuses on the various kings and their
deeds, and often attempts to ascribe dramatic historical changes, and even the decline
of a whole dynasty, to one major outside cause. Our picture of Mesopotamian history
is formed by a number of outstanding rulers, some being examples of efficient, some
of unsuccessful governments. However, their reigns cover only a limited period of
time. There are many examples where the influence of a dynastic family or a single
ruler resulted just in a rather short-lived period of stability. Even the dynasty of the
famous Hammurabi was already in decline during the reign of his successor and son
Samsu-iluna. The stability of a government did not result from the efficient manage-
ment of the different groups of the society alone, but also depended on the rulers’ or
the ruling elite’s ability to generate support in the society by conjuring a vision of
an ideal society. Such images were not simply ‘created’ by the kings and their