AKITU
Is It Exclusively the Chaldean-Babylonian New Year,
and Why?
Dr. Amer
Hanna Fatuhi
To begin with, I emphasize that the purpose of this article is not to delve into the technical details of the AKITU festival—the Chaldean-Babylonian New Year—nor into its ceremonies and rituals, which I have previously explained in my book Chaldeans Since the Early Beginning of Time (U.S. edition 2004; Iraqi edition 2008). For details about the AKITU festival, see pages 208–211 and 266–269, available for free at the following link: http://kaldaya.me/2016/06/27/2579
It is also worth noting that I discussed AKITU in detail in English in my 2012 book The Untold Story of Native Iraqis – Chaldeans (pp. 274–278 and 353–355), as well as Babylonian religious festivals and rituals in my book Chaldean Legacy (pp. 55–92 and 191–216).
www.NativeIraqis-Story.com | www.ChaldeanLegacy.com
More than two decades ago, the Chaldean Nestorians—who were imported in 1918 from mountainous regions in present-day Turkey and Iran and later “Assyrianized” themselves in 1976—began celebrating AKITU as an Assyrian holiday exclusive to them, under the illusion that they are ethnically Assyrian. Even though, in reality, there was never an “Assyrian” ethnicity or language throughout Mesopotamian history.
Furthermore,
the region of Assyria, culturally subordinate to Babylonia since its
establishment in 1318 BC, had a population that was predominantly Chaldean
(ethnically).
They celebrated a New Year festival called šattu eššutu (shortened to eššutu), written in cuneiform as “Gibil” or “Gibil4.” This celebration was a local festival known among the Chaldeans of Assyria since the time of Shalmaneser I, the father of Tukulti-Ninurta I, who stole the statue of Marduḫ/Marduk, aka Asalluhi, from Babylon.
Naturally, the New Year festival šattu eššutu in the early time of establishing the Assyrian kingdom differed in detail from the Babylonian AKITU, especially in its modest rituals and ceremonies, which reflected the limited size and status of that early kingdom—initially no more than a narrow strip of land roughly 100 miles long and 50 miles wide.
Therefore,
the claim by those who adopted the 1976 Assyrian identity (Chaldean Nestorians)
that AKITU is an Assyrian holiday—meaning that it was invented and officially
celebrated in Assyria by a supposed Assyrian nation—is false and a blatant
distortion.
Scientifically and historically, such a misconception is entirely incorrect—comparable to claiming that the Pope of the Vatican is not Catholic or that the sun rises in the west.
It
is also ironic that some modern Syrian writers, influenced by these claims,
have begun promoting the idea that AKITU is a Syrian holiday. In reality, the
concept of ancient Syria as a national identity does not go back more than 123
BC, and its borders at the time did not extend beyond the Syrian coast. Many
well-known ancient city-states, part of today’s Syria—such as Mari, Qarana, and
Ebla—were originally Babylonian cities.
Moreover, the culture of ancient Syria, centered in Ugarit, was, like other cultures such as Elam, deeply rooted in and saturated with Mesopotamian civilization.
Unfortunately, such misleading narratives have been encouraged by the lack of courage and competence among most contemporary Chaldean leaders, who have failed to defend the rights of the Chaldeans, the indigenous people of Iraq. Their submissiveness and hesitation in preserving Chaldean heritage stem from weakness, often justified under the guise of tolerance.
As a result, many feel free to encroach upon our rights and ancient Mesopotamian heritage, even appropriating our Chaldean-Babylonian traditions and attributing them to their own cultures—some of which emerged more than 5,000 years after our Proto-Chaldean ancestors laid the foundations of human civilization. Among the most significant of these appropriated traditions is the Chaldean-Babylonian New Year (AKITU).
The Persians began celebrating AKITU under the name Nowruz from the 5th century BC after conquering Babylon. The Kurds later adopted and celebrated it as well under the same Persian name, Nowruz, which is Persian and means “New Day.”
Despite
the Persian origin of Nowruz, some radical Kurds, due to their political
influence and demographic presence in an Islamic environment, have gone so far
as to claim that their celebration predates the Persians—dating it to around
701 BC, a time when there was no Kurdish people in existence!
Even more striking, they link it to the story of Shahnameh and the folk hero Kawa the Blacksmith—a tale written in 1010 AD, which directly contradicts their claims of antiquity. Notably, the Shahnameh was written not in Kurdish (a mixed language) but in Modern Dari Persian, which followed Pahlavi Persian. Dari remains widely spoken today in Iran and Afghanistan, particularly among the Hazara and Tajik populations.
For the sake of fairness, Persians and Kurds do not claim precedence over the Chaldeans in celebrating the spring equinox, nor do they assert that AKITU originated with them. The Kurdistan Regional Government, in fact, tends to follow a politically cautious approach to avoid diminishing any Iraqi group or engaging in disputes created by the 1918 imported Nestorians.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jbK7k94NAI
Who Are the 20th-Century Assyrians?
Nevertheless, the Barzani family openly supports the Aghajan family and the Nestorian minority—whose origins trace back to the Hakkari region of Turkey, later moving to Russia and Iran before being brought to Iraq by the British in 1918. In contrast, the Barzani family has refrained from supporting the Chaldeans (the indigenous people of Iraq) and their mother tongue, Chaldean. Simply, because the Chaldeans are the indigenous Mesopotamians and the landlords of what is now known as the Iraqi Kurdistan region.
It
is therefore about time to set the record straight and demand that the Iraqi
government—and implicitly the Kurdish regional government—recognize us in the
constitution as the indigenous people of Iraq, and officially celebrate the
Chaldean-Babylonian AKITU festival.
Our indigenous rights, including land, self-governance, and treaty entitlements, are inherent but often must be actively claimed, asserted, and defended through legal challenges, political lobbying, and protests to be fully recognized and upheld by the state. Our rights must be claimed to be obtained, as expressed in the Chaldean saying: “A right needs a mouth to demand it.”Those who demand their rights with strength and wisdom will achieve them fully, and in Chaldean “Zudqueh Ba’aie la Pummeh.”
Before
explaining the legitimacy of AKITU as a Chaldean tradition, I would like to
point out an undeniable fact: the celebration of AKITU, the unified
Mesopotamian New Year (on April 1st), originated in Babylonia and
continued there until it ceased during the Parthian occupation.
It then faded into obscurity due to the indigenous Chaldeans' loss of their sovereignty, until it was revived by Chaldean activists in 2000.
It is also worth noting that Iraq’s fiscal year, until the late 1980s, began on April 1st based upon the Babylonian calendar, marking the start of AKITU celebrations. This tradition continued until 1988, when the Ba’ath Party abolished it and changed the fiscal year to begin on January 1st.
The assertion that AKITU belongs exclusively to the Chaldean Babylonians is supported by numerous undeniable factors, foremost among them archaeological discoveries and historical records.
Therefore,
conciliatory and compromising Chaldean leaders—both civil and
religious—especially those who underestimate the importance of this unique
heritage, must understand that before engaging in political compromises or
relinquishing our historical rights to dominant powers for personal gain, they
must fully comprehend and respect the unparalleled history of the Chaldeans.
Weak leadership leads to the loss of rights, as expressed in the well-known
Chaldean proverb: Min rabutha dAkkarie huwea haqlatha L Dthiyasha “Due to the
farmers' weakness, the fields are being lost.”
Thus, incompetent Chaldean leaders must either step aside for those who are worthy or awaken from their negligence and put an end to the violations that have been committed against our rights—including affirming that AKITU belongs to the Chaldeans, the indigenous people of Iraq.
Historical Overview
It is worth noting that the celebration of the AKITU festival did not begin, as some assume, in the city of Ur. Rather, the ancient Mesopotamians (the Proto-Chaldeans) observed two occasions marking the New Year as early as the sixth millennium BC, particularly in the cities of Eridu, Babylon, Kish, and Uruk.
It
should also be noted that the name “AKITU” is derived from the Akkadian
language, while its Sumerian designation is merely a literal translation. This
is because the Babylonians wrote in both Akkadian and Sumerian scripts, as
evidenced by the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Enuma Elish myth, and the hymns of
Enheduanna, daughter of Emperor Sargon (ethnically Chaldean), all of which
predate the Third Dynasty of Ur.
The
latter celebrated the New Year (AKITU) with rituals dedicated to the god Nannar
(Sin), the moon god and god of wisdom, in his temple E-gishnugal (“House of
Light”), while the Akkadians of the Babylonian region venerated Babylon and the
god Marduk.
See
page 137 of the important reference Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient
Mesopotamia by Jeremy Black and Anthony Green. Also see the Akkadian text "Šarru-kīn,"
the legend of the birth of Sargon.
Therefore, anyone who incorrectly attributes the AKITU festival to the Sumerians should understand that the term "Sumerians" in ancient Iraq referred only to a cuneiform script and a linguistic-cultural system (eme-sal), whereas the concept of a Sumerian ethnicity is a modern invention, introduced by the French scholar Julius Oppert in 1869 and later popularized by Samuel Noah Kramer. Accordingly, those who associate AKITU with the Sumerians must first realize that there was no historically attested "Sumerian race" in ancient Iraq.
For a deeper understanding of this somewhat complex topic, along with archaeological, historical, and textual evidence explained in detail, you may consult my study titled Ur of the Chaldeans or the Sumerians at the following link: https://kaldaya.me/2026/02/25/29547.
The important question here is: if AKITU was not Sumerian but Babylonian, as explained, why do some attempt to falsely attribute it to the Assyrian region?
The answer is quite simple. While the rulers of Assyria fully acknowledged Babylonian culture and civilization—meaning the cultural achievements of central and southern Mesopotamia—the Babylonian language and script dominated both state administration and everyday life from the reign of Shamshi-Adad I (of Babylonian origin, 1813–1781 BC), founder of the Assyrian kingdom, through the reign of Ashur-dan II (935–912 BC). There were no significant changes in writing systems or language in the region, and Babylonian influence continued effectively until the 7th century BC, according to scholars such as Erica C. D. Hunter, Annie Caubet, Patrick Pouyssegur, and Michael Roaf.
In contrast, the culture of central and southern Mesopotamia surpassed that of the north, which remained less developed and bore the marks of various foreign groups such as the Subarians, Hurrians, and Hittites. As Nicholas Postgate notes in his well-known book Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History, Iraq 1991, p. 117: "The problem was not easy [with the Babylonians], for Babylon represented the civilization of Mesopotamia. This led Assyria to acknowledge Babylonian culture and the supreme god Marduk." However, attempts by Assyrian kings during their relatively short-lived imperial phase to dominate Babylon involved serious complications, including the ritual of "taking the hand of Marduk," the patron god of Babylon and the supreme deity of the Babylonian pantheon.
Thus,
while the inhabitants of northern Mesopotamia (mostly Proto-Kaldi) worshipped
the gods of the south and center from the founding of the Assyrian kingdom in
1813 BC, the Babylonians completely rejected the inclusion of the god Ashur in
their religious rituals or even in artistic representations on stelae produced
in the Babylonian region.
A clear example is the absence of any reference to the participation of the god Ashur in the AKITU (New Year) festival, which was officially celebrated in Babylon from the 1st to the 11th of the month of Nisanu (the first month of the Mesopotamian year). Other cities celebrated AKITU only after the central festivities in Babylon had concluded.
This fact is also noted by Georges Roux in Ancient Iraq: “The New Year festival was celebrated in other cities outside Babylon—such as Assur, Nineveh, Erbil, Harran, Dilbat, and Uruk—but on different dates,” meaning later dates. It would have been improper to celebrate the New Year before the first of Nisan, the official date in Babylon, and it was not feasible to celebrate it simultaneously in Assyria because the gods of the major cities were present in Babylon.
Further evidence that the Babylonian region did not recognize the divinity of Ashur—regarded as a foreign (Subarian) deity—is that Hammurabi did not mention him in the prologue to his famous law-code stele, despite thanking 25 gods from various Mesopotamian cities. Even when Hammurabi referred to his construction works in the city of Assur (then part of the Babylonian Empire), he did not mention its god.
Most
importantly, any king from the Babylonian region who sought to rule all of
Mesopotamia did not need to perform the ritual of taking the hand of Ashur to
be recognized as legitimate. In contrast, any Assyrian king who failed to
perform the ritual of taking the hand of Marduk was not considered a legitimate
ruler of Mesopotamia, but merely a local king of the northern region.
Therefore, all major kings performed the ritual of taking Marduk’s hand on the
eighth day of the AKITU festival to be recognized as legitimate rulers.
This
historical fact clearly indicates that political legitimacy in Mesopotamia
derived from Babylon, not Assyria, and that AKITU was exclusively a Babylonian
festival, as its central requirement was the presence of the legitimate god who
orders the cosmos—namely Marduk.
This is further supported by the following points:
First: Archaeological discoveries and cuneiform records—especially the more precise 20th-century translations "decipherment" into modern languages (German, English, French, Russian)—confirm that AKITU from 1-11 Nisanu belongs specifically to Babylon and the Chaldeans. These include the works of Woolley, Jacobsen, Lloyd, Halévy, Rawlinson, Hincks, Grotefend, Saggs, Diakonoff, Oates, Pöbel, Landsberger, Bidmead, Smith, and many other European, American, and Iraqi archaeologists and translators such as Taha Baqir, Fouad Safar, Bahija Khalil Ismail, Fawzi Rashid, and Nail Hannoon.
Second: Archaeological evidence also shows that the Proto-Chaldeans celebrated the New Year (AKITU / A-ki-ti-she-gur₁₀) in the month of Nisan—when day and night are equal, marking the seasonal turning point—as early as the pre-Sumerian-culture period (2900–2650 BC). In fact, these celebrations began even earlier, during the middle Ubaid period at Eridu (around 5300 BC), one of the oldest and most authentic phases of Mesopotamian civilization (ca. 6500–3700 BC). Eridu represents an early urban stage, with the emergence of temples, painted pottery, and early urbanization.
How
do the Chaldeans calculate their national calendar?
https://kaldaya.me/2026/01/11/29241
Eridu
is considered the twin city of Babylon and one of the two capitals of the early
Chaldeans, both bearing the sacred name "Nun-ki" (dwelling of life).
Both cities shared sacred features such as the ziggurat, the Esagila temple,
and the statue of asarluḫi/Asarluhi (Marduk).
These elements were exclusive to them and forbidden to other cities, including Nippur, the most religious city and the cultural-spiritual archive of Mesopotamia.
What made AKITU exclusively Babylonian was the unification of the two New Year festivals—AKITU and Zagmuk—during the First Babylonian Dynasty, which standardized the name “AKITU” and incorporated the rituals of Zagmuk. These rituals became officially performed in the Esagila temple, bīt akītu Akitu-Hashaul building at the akītu ṣēri in the countryside, outside the walls of the ancient city, specifically about 200 meters north of the Ishtar Gate, and became a defining feature of Babylon and the Babylonian region.
Third: The celebration of AKITU is inherently tied to the presence of the main statue of Marduk (Asarluhi) in the Esagila temple, where most of the festival rituals take place. During AKITU, the gods of major cities travel in grand processions to Babylon, where their statues reside in the Esagila. The process begins with sending a delegation to the temple of Ezida in Borsippa to invite Nabu, the son of Marduk.
These details show that it was impossible to celebrate AKITU in any city other than Babylon, since the gods of all Mesopotamian cities gathered there to honor Marduk, the core of the universe in Mesopotamian belief.
The visiting gods played a crucial role in completing the rituals. On the seventh day of AKITU, they relinquished their names (the source of their power) to Marduk, symbolizing his supremacy and his victory over chaos and death. On the eighth day, Marduk recreated and organized the world. After expressing their loyalty, the gods joined the people in celebration until the eleventh day of Nisanu, departing on the twelfth after cosmic order and prosperity had been restored.
The act of surrendering divine names reflects the belief that a name embodies essence and power. Ea/Enki (Marduk’s father), known as the god of mighty command, grants his name (power) to Marduk in the creation epic Enūma Eliš, enabling him—along with the submission of other gods—to recreate the world.
This act of creation and organization could only occur in “Nun-ki,” the dwelling of life—namely, Babylon (city of Marduk) and its twin city of Eridu (city of Ea/Enki).
See Chaldean Legacy, pp. 55–92 and 191–216. www.ChaldeanLegacy.com
Babylon's
enemies understood that the presence of Marduk in the city signified the
potential for performing the Akitu rituals, which were synonymous with divine
protection for the Chaldean capital. These annual rituals also ensured Babylon's
security, prosperity, and strength.
For this reason, Babylon’s enemies attempted to capture the statue of the god Marduk to control the Babylonians. The statue of Marduk was stolen more than once, beginning with the Hittite king Mursili I, who sacked the city of Babylon around 1595 BC. It was later returned by the Hittite king Suppiluliuma I as a gesture of goodwill. The Elamites also plundered the region of Babylon around 1150 BC during the reign of their king Shutruk-Nakhunte, who stole the statue and took it to Elam.
The statue was successfully recovered and brought back to Babylon after the Chaldean Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar I (1125–1104 BC) launched a campaign against the Elamites, an event that remained in Mesopotamian memory until the time of Nebuchadnezzar II.
As
for the kings of Assyria (Babylonian in origin and Chaldean ethnically), from
the time of the founder of the Assyrian kingdom (Shamshi-Adad I, 1813–1781 BC),
the conflict between the kings of Assyria and Babylon was merely a power
struggle.
See the chapter titled: “The Legitimacy of Kingship in Ancient Iraq between Babylon and Assyria,” pp. 185–187, in the book titled Chaldeans Since the Early Beginning of Time.
Assyrian kings transferred the statue of the god Marduk from Babylon to Assyria several times throughout history, as a symbol of the transfer of power from Babylon to Assyria during specific eras when Babylon suffered from weak local leadership—especially during parts of the Middle and Neo-Assyrian periods. On the other hand, the kings and people of Assyria (who are Chaldeans by ethnicity) received the blessings of the god Marduk and his protection over the cities that hosted him. This was considered a glorification of Marduk and his status in the Mesopotamian pantheon, which formed the basis of Chaldean worship in both Babylonia and Assyria.
The
first attempt by an Assyrian king to steal the statue of Marduk occurred around
1243 BC, when Tukulti-Ninurta I transported it to Kalhu, the Assyrian capital.
Although the Babylonians pursued him, defeated his army, and forced him to
flee, he succeeded in taking the statue.
This act of looting the statue was repeated during the reign of Sennacherib, when the statue remained in Assyria for nearly ten years. Sennacherib attempted to exploit the presence of the statue to hold the AKITU festival for two years. However, the priests of the god Ashur became enraged, which led them to rewrite the Babylonian myth of creation (Enūma Eliš), making Ashur its protagonist hero. Since Ashur was an Asiatic-Anatolian (alien) deity without Mesopotamian genealogy, the temple priests made Marduk’s wife (Sarpanitum) his wife and made Nabu, the son of Marduk, a son of Ashur, the foreign god.
However,
events did not unfold as Sennacherib had hoped. The people of Assyria—most of
whom were Chaldeans—revolted due to this insult to Marduk, the principal god of
Mesopotamia. The matter ended with Sennacherib’s assassination by his sons
Arda-Mulissu and Nabu-shar-usur in 681 BC. This same horrible death was the
fate of all who stole the statue of the god Marduk.
See
the chapter titled “The Curse of Babylon,” pp. 86–87, Chaldeans Since the Early
Beginning of Time.
See
also the documentary film: The Hanging Gardens of Babylon in Babylon – Refuting
Dalley’s Claims: The Hanging Gardens of Babylon were in Babylon
www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW-l_NdwLEY
Sennacherib’s
limited attempt to impose the AKITU festival on Assyria for only a few years,
and his construction of bīt akītu "House of Joy", designated for the
sacred marriage, provoked strong reactions rejected by the Chaldeans of Assyria
as well as by the priests.
This led to Esarhaddon restoring the main statue of Marduk to the Esagila temple and personally participating in the ritual of "taking the hand" of the god Marduk in Babylon—not in Assyria—during the celebration of AKITU (the Chaldean-Babylonian New Year).
Sennacherib’s
brief imposition of the AKITU festival on Assyria for only a handful of years
does not make AKITU an Assyrian festival. This misconception is comparable to
the erroneous claim that the discovery of flat and cylinder seals in the Indus
Valley (such as Harappa and Mohenjo-daro), Afghanistan, and Egypt (due to trade
exchange) suggests that those regions were the origin of seal-making.
However, archaeological discoveries confirm that the invention of flat and cylinder seals in Mesopotamia dates back to the Chalcolithic period (the 7th millennium BC). This means that Mesopotamian seals precede those of the Indus Valley and Afghanistan not by a few hundred years, but by more than three thousand years. Likewise, Mesopotamian seals predate those of Tell el-Amarna in Egypt by more than 4,250 years.
In
conclusion, aside from what are described as false claims fabricated in 1976 by
Assyrianized Chaldean Nestorians regarding their alleged ethnic identity—and
their claim that AKITU belongs to the Assyrian region for political motives,
which I have refuted based on scientific standards supported by archaeological
discoveries and Mesopotamian historical records—AKITU, whether the 1976
delusional Assyrians accepted or not, was and will remain a purely
Chaldean-Babylonian festival.
