DOCSLIB.ORG

Adec Preview Generated PDF File

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adec Preview Generated PDF File The University of Sydney Copyright in relation to this thesis· Under the Copyright Act 1968 (seve,..1 provision of which are referred to below), this thesis must be used only under the normal conditions 0( scholarly falr dealing for the purposes of research, criticism or review, In particular no results or conclusions should be extracted from it, nor should it be copied or closely paraphrased in whole or In part without the written consent 0(the author. Proper written acknowledgement should be made for any assistance obtained from this thesis. Under Section 35(2) 0( the CopyrightAct 1968 'the author of a literary, dramatic. musical or artistic work Is the owner of any copyrlghtsubsisting in the work'. By virtue of Section 32(I) copyright 'subsists in an original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work that is unpublished' and of which the author was anAusualian citizen.anAusmJian protected person or a person resident in Ausmlia. The Aet, by Section 36(I) provides: 'Subject to this Aet, the copyright in a literary. dramatic, musical or artistic work. is infringed by a person who. not being the owner ofthe copyright and without the licence of the owner of the copyright, does in Australia. or authorises the doing in Australia of, any act comprised in the copyright'. Section 31 (I Ha)(i) provides that copyright includes the exclusive right to'reproduce the work. in a material form',Thus. copyright is infringed by a person who, not being the owner of the copyright, reproduces or authorises the reproduction ofa work. or of more than a reasonable part of the work. in a material form. unless the reproduction is a 'fair dealing' with the work 'for the purpose of research or sOJdy' as further defined in Sections 040 and ~ I of theAet. Section 5I (2) provides that ""Where a manuscript. or a copy, of a thesis or other similar literary work that has not been published is kept in a library of a university or other similar institution or in an archives,the copyright In the thesis orother work Is not infringed by the making of a copy of the thesis or other work by or on behatf of the officer In charge of the library or archives if the copy is supplied to a person who satisfies an authorized officer of the library or archives that he requires the copy for the purpose of research or study', *'Thesis' includes 'treatise', disserution' and other similar productions. Who Wrote the Assyrian King List? Joseph Azize A thesis submitted in fulfilment ofthe requirements for the degree of Master ofPhilosophy School ofArchaeology, Classics and Ancient History University ofSydney © Joseph John Azize, 12 September 1997 This thesis, particularly the work which has gone into it, is humbly dedicated to my parents. Statements in accordance with the University of Sydney's Resolutions 21(5) and as to Higher Degree Theses Throughout this thesis I note in the text itself, or in the footnotes, the sources from which my research was derived. My indebtedness to some earlier work upon the Amorites is duly noted. In this way, the text and the footnotes indicate the extent to which the work ofothers has been used in research. The thesis as stated in the synopsis and worked out in the text of the thesis itselfis entirely original. While some other historians have questioned the attribution of the Assyrian King List to Samsi-Adad I, none have, to the best of my knowledge, attributed it to Assur-nasir-pal I or his father Samsi-Adad IV. I, Joseph Azize, understand that ifI am awarded a higher degree for my thesis entitled "Who Wrote the Assyrian King List" being lodged herewith for examination, the thesis will be lodged in the University Library and be available immediately for use. I agree that the University Librarian (or in the case ofa department, the Head ofDepartment) may supply a photocopy or microform ofthe thesis to an individual for research or study or to a library. Dated: 12 September 1997 .j. p,. ...... ~ Joseph Azize Who was Responsible for the Assyrian King List? Synopsis I argue that the Assyrian King List ("the AKL") was written in Middle Assyrian times, most probably by ASsur-nasir-pal I, or else by his father Samsi-Adad IV. The most plausible motive for its compilation was to preserve information about Assyria's kings which was already becoming lost. I suggest that while the available evidence is too slim to prove my thesis beyond any doubt, the AKL was written with comments which vindicated Samsi-Adad IV's seizure ofthe throne ofASsur using Babylon as a point ofdeparture ifnot as a base. I examine also ASsur-nasir-pal I's hymns to Istar, his few inscriptions, and the White Obelisk. Accepting the attribution ofthe White Obelisk to ASSur-nasir-pal I, I provide a picture ofhis reign which is somewhat different from the standard account. I therefore dispute the standard view that the AKL was created by Samsi-Adad I to legitmize his role as an "Amorite usurper". These ideas lead one to question the \dew that the AKL is not a reliable historical document in its earlier portions. I briefly" examine the Amorites in the light offresh material from Ebla. There, I take up the theory, hitherto advanced, that the early Amorites who moved into the east may have had a military expertise which enabled them to achieve conquests ofthe scale ofSarn8i­ Adad's, with relatively few numbers. Finally, by attributing the AKL to Middle Assyria one obtains fresh insights into the royal ideology and the character of Samsi-Adad I - revealing him to be an original and visionary monarch. I argue that he created a new role for himself, as the "pacifier of the land between the two rivers", and used this role as one item in his attempt to create a royal ideology which would have currency throughout his empire. Table of Contents Who was Responsible for the Assyrian King List? Introduction This paper considers the question: who caused the writing ofthe Assyrian King List (''the AKL")? The standard view is that it was written by Samsi-Adad I as propaganda, to fuse in the general mind his Amorite dynasty to the native Assyrian one, thus legitimizing his rule. For example, van Driel, referring to the presence ofUspia (the first builder ofthe temple ofAssur) in the AKL says: "... the addition ofUspia to the kinglist, i.e. to a list ofthe traditional ancestors of Samsi-Adad I, was an attempt to join the native Assyrian tradition to that ofthe conquerors ofthe west.,,1 On the available material, I suggest that the person responsible for the AKL was Assur-nasir-pal1. In so far as any motive for its creation is discernible from the text itself, I suggest that it was to preserve data about Assyria's kings which was already becoming lost. Whatever the ultimate motivation for the creation ofthe list, it was drafted in such a way that - together with anything else it may have communicated to an Assyrian audience - it vindicated the way that Assur-nasir-pal's father, Samsi­ Adad IV, came up from Babylon to seize the throne which he claimed to be his. But it would be difficult to assert that this was the motive for the compilation of the list: rather, the compilation ofthe AKL seems to have been the occasion for the comments on Samsi-Adad I, Samsi-Adad IV, and some other monarchs associated with Babylon. It is hard to find solid evidence that the AKL was a resource for use in a mortuary cult, as has been suggested: this may be so, but I do not find the arguments for this persuasive. I G. van Drie1 The Cult ofAssur Assen 1969 p.2. 2 I suggest that the standard view (which I refer to as the "Samsi-Adad I" theory) can be subjected to some damaging examination, pace its proponents, namely: I. Ifthe AKL is propaganda for Samsi-Adad I, why would he refrain from criticizing his immediate predecessors either there or in any ofhis inscriptions? Why would he baldly state that he seized the throne from them without presenting this as an act ofpropriety or making any attempt to justifY it? 2. Most ofthe names given in the AKL have a standard form: name ofking and his father, and length ofrule. The only annotations or additions to the standard entry worth mentioning are those which refer to Babylon. These end with Samsi~Adad IV. This leads to the suggestion that all ofthese annotations were written in the one transaction ofcreation. The only other thesis can be that Samsi-Adad I incorporated such a note for himself, and then, whenever Babylon had a role in Assyrian history, later editors mindlessly added references to it, but to no other place or event. 3. In the time ofSamsi-Adad I, Babylon was not the important city it later became; but by the time ofSamsi-Adad IV it was certainly a great city. Mentioning it to the exclusion ofany other city would seem more appropriate at the time ofits greatness. 4. There is a linguistic point. The AKL refers to Babylon as "Kardunias", which is its Kassite name. Obviously, then, it was not known by that name in Old Assyria. It was, however, known by that name in Middle Assyria. Why would a Middle Assyrian editor rewrite place names found in the earlier material? Surely, the most likely scenario is that the passage dealing with Samsi­ Adad I was written in the Middle Assyrian period: a scenario consistent with the suggestion that it was written by Assur-nasir-pal I or his father.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mesopotamia Timeline
    Mesopotamia Timeline 5000 BC - The Sumer form the first towns and cities. They use irrigation to farm large areas of land. 4000 BC - The Sumer establish powerful city-states building large ziggurats at the center of their cities as temples to their gods. 3500 BC - Much of lower Mesopotamia is inhabited by numerous Sumer city-states such as Ur, Uruk, Eridu, Kish, Lagash, and Nippur. 3300 BC - The Sumerians invent the first writing. They use pictures for words and inscribe them on clay tablets. 3200 BC - The Sumerians begin to use the wheel on vehicles. 3000 BC - The Sumerians start to implement mathematics using a number system with the base 60. 2700 BC - The famous Sumerian King Gilgamesh rules the city-state of Ur. 2400 BC - The Sumerian language is replaced by the Akkadian language as the primary spoken language in Mesopotamia. 2330 BC - Sargon I of the Akkadians conquers most of the Sumerian city states and creates the world's first empire, the Akkadian Empire. 2250 BC - King Naram-Sin of the Akkadians expands the empire to its largest state. He will rule for 50 years. 2100 BC - After the Akkadian Empire crumbles, the Sumerians once again gain power. The city of Ur is rebuilt. 1900 BC - The Assyrians rise to power in northern Mesopotamia. 1792 BC - Hammurabi becomes king of Babylon. He establishes the Code of Hammurabi and Babylon soon takes over much of Mesopotamia. 1781 BC - King Shamshi-Adad of the Assyrians dies. The First Assyrian Empire is soon taken over by the Babylonians. 1750 BC - Hammurabi dies and the First Babylonian Empire begins to fall apart.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sumerian King List the Sumerian King List (SKL) Dates from Around 2100 BCE—Near the Time When Abram Was in Ur
    BcResources Genesis The Sumerian King List The Sumerian King List (SKL) dates from around 2100 BCE—near the time when Abram was in Ur. Most ANE scholars (following Jacobsen) attribute the original form of the SKL to Utu-hejel, king of Uruk, and his desire to legiti- mize his reign after his defeat of the Gutians. Later versions included a reference or Long Chronology), 1646 (Middle to the Great Flood and prefaced the Chronology), or 1582 (Low or Short list of postdiluvian kings with a rela- Chronology). The following chart uses tively short list of what appear to be the Middle Chronology. extremely long-reigning antediluvian Text. The SKL text for the following kings. One explanation: transcription chart was originally in a narrative form or translation errors resulting from and consisted of a composite of several confusion of the Sumerian base-60 versions (see Black, J.A., Cunningham, and the Akkadian base-10 systems G., Fluckiger-Hawker, E, Robson, E., of numbering. Dividing each ante- and Zólyomi, G., The Electronic Text diluvian figure by 60 returns reigns Corpus of Sumerian Literature (http:// in harmony with Biblical norms (the www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/), Oxford bracketed figures in the antediluvian 1998-). The text was modified by the portion of the chart). elimination of manuscript references Final versions of the SKL extended and by the addition of alternative the list to include kings up to the reign name spellings, clarifying notes, and of Damiq-ilicu, king of Isin (c. 1816- historical dates (typically in paren- 1794 BCE). thesis or brackets). The narrative was Dates.
    [Show full text]
  • Short Report on the UNESCO Assessment Mission to Iraq (17Th To
    REPORT ON THE UNESCO ASSESSMENT MISSION TO IRAQ (17TH TO 29TH NOVEMBER 2002) FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE MAKHOOL DAM PROJECT ON THE SITE OF ASHUR AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN THE RESERVOIR AREA January 2003 Dr Arnulf HAUSLEITER Berlin The Carsten Niebuhr Institute of Near Eastern Studies University of Copenhagen Table of content 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 General situation ....................................................................................................... 3 1.2 The UNESCO assessment mission ........................................................................... 4 1.3 Objectives of the archaeological part of the mission .............................................. 5 1.4 Working conditions ................................................................................................... 5 2 Methods and results of the mission ............................................................................. 6 2.1 State of information and methodology of the visits ................................................ 6 The reservoir area ........................................................................................................ 6 The site of Ashur ......................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Assessment of the archaeological areas affected by the reservoir ........................ 8 History of exploration ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms
    McDONALD INSTITUTE CONVERSATIONS The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms Edited by Norman Yoffee The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms McDONALD INSTITUTE CONVERSATIONS The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms Edited by Norman Yoffee with contributions from Tom D. Dillehay, Li Min, Patricia A. McAnany, Ellen Morris, Timothy R. Pauketat, Cameron A. Petrie, Peter Robertshaw, Andrea Seri, Miriam T. Stark, Steven A. Wernke & Norman Yoffee Published by: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge Downing Street Cambridge, UK CB2 3ER (0)(1223) 339327 [email protected] www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 2019 © 2019 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 (International) Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ISBN: 978-1-902937-88-5 Cover design by Dora Kemp and Ben Plumridge. Typesetting and layout by Ben Plumridge. Cover image: Ta Prohm temple, Angkor. Photo: Dr Charlotte Minh Ha Pham. Used by permission. Edited for the Institute by James Barrett (Series Editor). Contents Contributors vii Figures viii Tables ix Acknowledgements x Chapter 1 Introducing the Conference: There Are No Innocent Terms 1 Norman Yoffee Mapping the chapters 3 The challenges of fragility 6 Chapter 2 Fragility of Vulnerable Social Institutions in Andean States 9 Tom D. Dillehay & Steven A. Wernke Vulnerability and the fragile state
    [Show full text]
  • The City of Aššur and the Kingdom of Assyria: Historical Overview
    Assurlular Dicle'den Toroslar'a Tann Assur'un Kralhg1 The Assyrians .hm11.dum uf tltc (;,,._[ l ur ltm•J T1g1l '' Trmru~ Assur Kenti ve Assur Krall1g1 Tarihine Genel Baki§ The City of Assur and the Kingdom of Assyria: Historical Overview KAREN RADN ER* Assur medeniyetinin arkeolojik ke~fi MS 19. yüz}'ll ortalannda Tb.: a1< h.tcologu:al discoven ol A•sH ra brWJn m tlat mi•ll\1'1' et·tlf1H Y \0 (L1.rsen l!l\11)) >\1 rhat ume, ba~lamt~tJr (Larsen 1996). 0 zamanlarda Osmanh imparator­ frcnc h nnd Ar iri~h dip1om m ;md 1racl.- eh if•galt''i sta­ lugu topraklarmda görev yapan Franstz ve ingiliz diplomatlar uotwrl in thc Olll man Emp1re us d theu spare llme ile ticari temsilciler bo~ zamanlannda Musul kenti ~evresinde 10 c.;xplort' tht• rq~ion .mmnd Iht> < ity ot Mosul :md ke§if gczileri yaparken; inive, Kalhu ve Dur-~arrukin'de ki tlllcU\ercd the r<:mö&ins nftht' tO):&I cilie' ol ~mt wh, k.raliyet kentlerinin k.almulanm ortaya <;tkarmt§lardL Eski K.. ll•u nml Dur-~aa rukcn. Thc• cll~ro\• ry ot a lo5t civ1 Ji?~tinu wr1h .1 ~troug Bihlir .tl comwnion com­ Ahit ile gü~lü bir baglantlSt olan bu kaytp medeniyetin ke~ ­ cidcd w1th thc creation of gr ancl nun. urns in l'.urs fi, Paris ve Londra'da bir yandan halk1 egiten bir yandan ,tnd l.onrlon tlr.•I '"11~h1 to t>dtiCllll' !Iw puhlic \\lalle da imparatorluklarm dünyayt sarsan gücünü orlaya koyma­ simuh.m.. uush clemtHISII.tling 1h• impt:tl.tl p<mer s' Y' ama<;layan büyük müzelerin kurulmaslyla aynt zarnanda hold OH'r the wotld, and '\ss} aan galletrc 1\"de Cle­ ated iu holh tht Lolll~< 31111!111' lhitish l\ ln~cum .
    [Show full text]
  • The Neo-Babylonian Empire New Babylonia Emerged out of the Chaos That Engulfed the Assyrian Empire After the Death of the Akka
    NAME: DATE: The Neo-Babylonian Empire New Babylonia emerged out of the chaos that engulfed the Assyrian Empire after the death of the Akkadian king, Ashurbanipal. The Neo-Babylonian Empire extended across Mesopotamia. At its height, the region ruled by the Neo-Babylonian kings reached north into Anatolia, east into Persia, south into Arabia, and west into the Sinai Peninsula. It encompassed the Fertile Crescent and the Tigris and Euphrates River valleys. New Babylonia was a time of great cultural activity. Art and architecture flourished, particularly under the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, was determined to rebuild the city of Babylonia. His civil engineers built temples, processional roadways, canals, and irrigation works. Nebuchadnezzar II sought to make the city a testament not only to Babylonian greatness, but also to honor the Babylonian gods, including Marduk, chief among the gods. This cultural revival also aimed to glorify Babylonia’s ancient Mesopotamian heritage. During Assyrian rule, Akkadian language had largely been replaced by Aramaic. The Neo-Babylonians sought to revive Akkadian as well as Sumerian-Akkadian cuneiform. Though Aramaic remained common in spoken usage, Akkadian regained its status as the official language for politics and religious as well as among the arts. The Sumerian-Akkadian language, cuneiform script and artwork were resurrected, preserved, and adapted to contemporary uses. ©PBS LearningMedia, 2015 All rights reserved. Timeline of the Neo-Babylonian Empire 616 Nabopolassar unites 575 region as Neo- Ishtar Gate 561 Amel-Marduk becomes king. Babylonian Empire and Walls of 559 Nerglissar becomes king. under Babylon built. 556 Labashi-Marduk becomes king. Chaldean Dynasty.
    [Show full text]
  • Forgetting the Sumerians in Ancient Iraq Jerrold Cooper Johns Hopkins University
    “I have forgotten my burden of former days!” Forgetting the Sumerians in Ancient Iraq Jerrold Cooper Johns Hopkins University The honor and occasion of an American Oriental Society presidential address cannot but evoke memories. The annual AOS meeting is, after all, the site of many of our earliest schol- arly memories, and more recent ones as well. The memory of my immediate predecessor’s address, a very hard act to follow indeed, remains vivid. Sid Griffiths gave a lucid account of a controversial topic with appeal to a broad audience. His delivery was beautifully attuned to the occasion, and his talk was perfectly timed. At the very first AOS presidential address I attended, the speaker was a bit tipsy, and, ten minutes into his talk, he looked at his watch and said, “Oh, I’ve gone on too long!” and sat down. I also remember a quite different presi- dential address in which, after an hour had passed, the speaker declared, “I know I’ve been talking for a long time, but since this is the first and only time most of you will hear anything about my field, I’ll continue on until you’ve heard all I think you ought to know!” It is but a small move from individual memory to cultural memory, a move I would like to make with a slight twist. As my title announces, the subject of this communication will not be how the ancient Mesopotamians remembered their past, but rather how they managed to forget, or seemed to forget, an important component of their early history.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ubaid Period the Sumerian King List
    Sumer by Joshua J. Mark published on 28 April 2011 Sumer was the southernmost region of ancient Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq Map of Sumer (by P L Kessler, Copyright) and Kuwait) which is generally considered the cradle of civilization. The name comes from Akkadian, the language of the north of Mesopotamia, and means “land of the civilized kings”. The Sumerians called themselves “the black headed people” and their land, in cuneiform script, was simply “the land” or “the land of the black headed people”and, in the biblical Book of Genesis, Sumer is known as Shinar. According to the Sumerian King List, when the gods first gave human beings the gifts necessary for cultivating society, they did so by establishing the city of Eridu in the region of Sumer. While the Sumerian city of Uruk is held to be the oldest city in the world, the ancient Mesopotamians believed that it was Eridu and that it was here that order was established and civilization began. The Ubaid Period The region of Sumer was long thought to have been first inhabited around 4500 BCE. This date has been contested in recent years, however, and it now thought that human activity in the area began much earlier. The first selers were not Sumerians but a people of unknown origin whom archaeologists have termed the Ubaid people - from the excavated mound of al- Ubaid where the artifacts were uncovered which first aested to their existence - or the Proto-Euphrateans which designates them as earlier inhabitants of the region of the Euphrates River. Whoever these people were, they had already moved from a hunter- gatherer society to an agrarian one prior to 5000 BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • 2-3-1: the First Empire Builders: Objective: Students Will Trace the Development of the First Empires in Mesopotamia, Akkad and Babylon
    CHAPTER 2 Section 3: Empire of the Fertile Crescent 2-3-1: The First Empire Builders: Objective: Students will trace the development of the first empires in Mesopotamia, Akkad and Babylon. Introduction 1. Who fought for control of Mesopotamia from 3000 B.C. to 2000 B.C.? *Kings from different city-states. a. What factor allowed for such invasions? *The land was flat and easy to invade. b. What would one gain from controlling the region? *More land (more land means more wealth and power). 2. Despite the many efforts, how many rulers were able to control ALL of Mesopotamia? *None there were always some parts of Mesopotamia that were independent of the empire and could not be overtaken (its hard in ancient times to control large areaswe will see these struggles throughout the year). The Akkadian Empire: 3. Which ruler took control of Mesopotamia in 2371 B.C.? *Sargon (I) of Akkad a. What was this ruler known as? *Creator of the world’s first empire. How was he able to do this (Hint: think about the definition to # 4/5, the answer is not in your book)? *He conquered the many (12+) city-states of Sumer. 4. Define empire : *group of territories and peoples brought together under one supreme ruler (in this case the Sumerians under the rule of the Akkadians). 5. Define emperor : Person who rules an empire (Sargon I of Akkad) 6. Sargon’s empire was known as the ___ Empire. *Akkadian Empire 7. Define Fertile Crescent : *region stretching from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia to the Mediterranean Sea a.
    [Show full text]
  • MIDDLE BRONZE AGE Jesper Eidem 1. S
    INTERNATIONAL LAW INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE SECOND MILLENNIUM: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE Jesper Eidem 1. S I L Material for the early second millennium is particularly rich. Abundant evidence for international relations is provided by archives of diplo- matic correspondence and some international treaties, excavated par- ticularly in northern Syria and Iraq (at Mari, Rimah, and Leilan).1 Earlier evidence of a similar kind is much sparser but seems likely to parallel later patterns.2 2. T I S 2.1 The international horizon for early second millennium Mesopo- tamia included Palestine,3 Syria, Iraq, central and eastern Anatolia, western Iran, and areas bordering the Arabo-Persian Gulf.4 Official contacts with areas outside this horizon, most prominently Egypt, are not attested. 2.2 The political landscape within this region was characterized by complex interrelations between different levels of organization, which may be summarized as traditional, geographical, and contempora- neous variables. The political inheritance from earlier periods was a strong regionalism with individual city states as basic entities but with episodes of territorial and imperial formations, providing ready inspiration for ambitious kings. In the mountainous periphery, urban 1 For Mari, see the series Archives Royales de Mari (ARM); for Rimah, see Dalley et al., Tell al Rimah . .; for Leilan, see the publications of Eidem below. 2 Biga, “Rapporti diplomatici...” 3 See Bonechi, “Relations...” 4 Eidem and Højlund, “Assyria and Dilmun...” 746 centers were fewer and smaller than in the lowland, and political formations devolved primarily on ethno-linguistic divisions and their aristocratic elites.5 On a contemporaneous level, a peculiar situation obtained in lowland Mesopotamia and Syria, where an as yet poorly understood process of conquest had introduced Amorite dynasties in most city states.
    [Show full text]
  • “Going Native: Šamaš-Šuma-Ukīn, Assyrian King of Babylon” Iraq
    IRAQ (2019) Page 1 of 22 Doi:10.1017/irq.2019.1 1 GOING NATIVE: ŠAMAŠ-ŠUMA-UKĪN, ASSYRIAN KING OF BABYLON By SHANA ZAIA1 Šamaš-šuma-ukīn is a unique case in the Neo-Assyrian Empire: he was a member of the Assyrian royal family who was installed as king of Babylonia but never of Assyria. Previous Assyrian rulers who had control over Babylonia were recognized as kings of both polities, but Šamaš-šuma-ukīn’s father, Esarhaddon, had decided to split the empire between two of his sons, giving Ashurbanipal kingship over Assyria and Šamaš-šuma-ukīn the throne of Babylonia. As a result, Šamaš-šuma-ukīn is an intriguing case-study for how political, familial, and cultural identities were constructed in texts and interacted with each other as part of royal self- presentation. This paper shows that, despite Šamaš-šuma-ukīn’s familial and cultural identity as an Assyrian, he presents himself as a quintessentially Babylonian king to a greater extent than any of his predecessors. To do so successfully, Šamaš-šuma-ukīn uses Babylonian motifs and titles while ignoring the Assyrian tropes his brother Ashurbanipal retains even in his Babylonian royal inscriptions. Introduction Assyrian kings were recognized as rulers in Babylonia starting in the reign of Tiglath-pileser III (744– 727 BCE), who was named as such in several Babylonian sources including a king list, a chronicle, and in the Ptolemaic Canon.2 Assyrian control of the region was occasionally lost, such as from the beginning until the later years of Sargon II’s reign (721–705 BCE) and briefly towards the beginning of Sennacherib’s reign (704–681 BCE), but otherwise an Assyrian king occupying the Babylonian throne as well as the Assyrian one was no novelty by the time of Esarhaddon’s kingship (680–669 BCE).
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Transit Corridors And
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Transit Corridors and Assyrian Strategy: Case Studies from the 8th-7th Century BCE Southern Levant A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philisophy in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures by Heidi Michelle Fessler 2016 © Copyright by Heidi Michelle Fessler 2016 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Transit Corridors and Assyrian Strategy: Case Studies from the 8th-7th Century BCE Southern Levant by Heidi Michelle Fessler Doctor of Philisophy in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures University of California, Los Angeles, 2016 Professor Aaron Alexander Burke, Chair Several modern studies and the Assyrians themselves have claimed not only the extreme military measures but also substantial geo-political impact of Assyrian conquest in the southern Levant; however, examples of Assyrian violence and control are actually underrepresented in the archaeological record. The few scholars that have pointed out this dearth of corroborative data have attributed it to an apathetic attitude adopted by Assyria toward the region during both conquest and political control. I argue in this dissertation that the archaeological record reflects Assyrian military strategy rather than indifference. Data from three case studies, Megiddo, Ashdod, and the Western Negev, suggest that the small number of sites with evidence of destruction and even fewer sites with evidence of Assyrian imperial control are a product of a strategy that allowed Assyria to annex the region with less investment than their annals claim. ii Furthermore, Assyria’s network of imperial outposts monitored international highways in a manner that allowed a small local and foreign population to participate in trade and defense opportunities that ultimately benefited the Assyrian core.
    [Show full text]