The Ancient Near Eastern Chronology Forum - Limu sequence post-Tukulti-Ninurta

Hi Michael

On this news it is time to reassess. Here is a possible sequence that might satisfy the data (assuming Tukulti-Ninurta was assassinated early in the limu year of Erib-Sin) - subject to further publications of the Tell Ṣabi Abyaḍ archives.

1197  Erib-Sin
----------------------
1196  Aššur-nadin-apli
1195  Ubru
1194  Urad-Kube
----------------------
1193  Aššur-nerari 3
1192  Salmanu-aḫa-iddina

Yes Tory this arrangement would indeed mean that Frahm’s Text No. 61 (= VAT 10803 + VAT 11063) does date to the reign of Aššur-naṣir-apli 1 (and not to the reign of Aššur-nadin-apli).

Regards Joe

T 93-10 — Tory Thorpe, Mon Jun 4 09:29

Hi all, Questions: First, Röllig states that the limmu Aššur-nadin-apli is attested in the document T 93-10 from Tell Sabi Abyad. If this limmu is the date of that document, or even if not, I'm... more
- T 93-10 — Joe Baker, Tue Jun 5 08:56
  
  Hi Tory Röllig states that the limmu Aššur-nadin-apli is attested in the document T 93-10 from Tell Sabi Abyad ... Jakob writes that T 93-10 from Tell Sabi Abyad is dated by the limmu of Ubru Okay... more
- - Re: T 93-10 — Tory Thorpe, Tue Jun 5 10:32
    
    Hi Joe Wiggermann does mention some content of T 93-10 in his 2000 paper “Agriculture in the Northern Balikh Valley: The Case of Middle Assyrian Tell Sabi Abyad” (available on his page at the... more
  - - Re: T 93-10 — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 6 05:14
      
      Hi Tory and Joe, Freydank, Röllig and Bloch agree that Assur-nadin-apli was eponym in the 7th Regnal year of Tukulti-Ninurta I. T 93-10 mentions the Grand Vizier Assur-iddin (Jakob, 2003, p. 201),... more
    - - Re: T 93-10 — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 6 05:24
        
        Bloch ("Solving Problems...", p. 31f, n. 21) says that limu Erib-Sin is known to belong to the reign of Assur-nadin-apli and thats why the AssurPAPapli of the mentioned inscription may be king... more
      - Re: T 93-10 — Joe Baker, Wed Jun 6 09:33
        
        Hi All On T 93-10 which Jakob dates by the “limu” year of Ubru, Michael noted T 93-10 mentions the Grand Vizier Assur-iddin (Jakob, 2003, p. 201) When discussing this text in his 2003 book,... more
        Assur-iddin — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 6 11:21
        
        Hi Joe, You have read Jakob more thoroughly than I. Notwithstanding, even if Assur-iddin is not mentioned in T 93-10: Why Jakob writes "Ilipada...Sohn des Großwesirs Assur-iddin" and not simply... more
        Assur-iddin — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 6 11:38
        
        With the assumption that T 93-10 belongs to the year of Ubru that is before the accession of Tukultininurta I., Jacob would strictly have to write "Sohn des späteren Großwesirs Assur- iddin" ("son of ... more
        T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Tory Thorpe, Thu Jun 7 00:40
        
        Hi Michael, Joe, and all The document T 93-10 from Tell Sabi Abyad is dated by the limmu of UBRU (S. Jakob, Mittelassyrische Verwaltung und Sozialstruktur: Untersuchungen [Leiden: Brill, 2003], p.... more
        Late Tukulti-Ninurta Limus — Joe Baker, Thu Jun 7 09:44
        
        Hi Tory Does MARV IV 16 state the name of the Assyrian king who took action in the limmu year of Ili-pada? MARV IV 16 (= VAT 20233) is a complete tablet but only a few lines are readable,. These... more
        Re: T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Michael Liebig, Thu Jun 7 02:23
        
        Hi Tory, Of course all depend on Wiggermann. That is implicitly clear. He informed Röllig and Jakob directly. Bloch only joined Jakob and can be neglected in this matter. If it were so, that after... more
        Re: T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Tory Thorpe, Thu Jun 7 04:18
        
        Hi Michael For Röllig Assur-nadin-apli is definitely the only eponym of the document. I.e. Röllig and Jakob were informed differently or have understood the information differently. I suppose a... more
        Re: T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Michael Liebig, Thu Jun 7 05:49
        
        Hi Tory, What I mean is, that if UBRU was the eponym of the date of T 93-10 and Röllig would know him from this document, then he would have mentioned UBRU first and not only Assur-nadin-apli. With... more
        Re: T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Tory Thorpe, Thu Jun 7 08:44
        
        Hi Michael, Date-lines normally appear at the beginning or very end of a document. Line 10 of T 93-10 is neither the beginning nor the very end of the 15+ line document. Röllig's 2004 paper was only... more
        Re: T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Michael Liebig, Thu Jun 7 09:42
        
        Hi Tory, You know, that the theme of Röllig´s 2004 paper are the limus. Why should he therefore only be interested in the line 10 and not in the limu in the date of the document, if the date exist?... more
        Re: T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Joe Baker, Thu Jun 7 10:19
        
        Hi All Well some of the gentlemen under discussion here will all be together at the 57th RAI at Leiden on 16-20 July. They will present the following papers I. Y. BLOCH, Nomads and the Middle... more
        Re: T 93-10 is dated by the limmu of UBRU per Wiggerman — Michael Liebig, Thu Jun 7 10:53
        
        Hi Joe, Thank you, for the very interesting information. Is the workshop “Towards an Absolute Chronology of Mesopotamia During the Second Millennium BC” part of the 57th RAI? Please set the link to... more
        58th RAI — Joe Baker, Thu Jun 7 18:35
        
        Hi Michael http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/rencontre/RAI_Leiden_2012/Program.html Regards Joe
        Re: 58th RAI — Michael Liebig, Fri Jun 8 01:51
        
        Hi Joe and Tory, Thanks for the link. Meanwhile I received a E-mail of Wiggermann, that reveals the "secret" of T 93-10. In fact, 2 eponyms are called, A-šur-SUM-DUMU.UŠ in the text and Ubru in the... more
        Re: 58th RAI — Tory Thorpe, Fri Jun 8 09:18
        
        Hi Michael Thank you for the two mails. So, T 93-10 concerns an allocation of ointment for the horses of Ili-pada (no title). The allocation was to last: > Fascinating. Clearly Aššur-nadin-apli (a... more
        Limu sequence post-Tukulti-Ninurta — Joe Baker, Fri Jun 8 09:06
        UBRU is the date — Tory, Fri Jun 8 07:03
        
        Hi Michael, Why should he therefore only be interested in the line 10 and not in the limu in the date of the document, if the date exist? Naturally he would mentioned also UBRU, if he is mentioned... more
        T 93-10 a solution — Michael Liebig, Fri Jun 8 10:41
        
        Hi Tory an Joe, now I've read Akkermans "West of Assur....". Page 19 contains the solution for T 93-10 and its eponyms. As I noted earlier: A great time distance of T 93-10 from the reign of Ili-pada ... more
        Re: T 93-10 a solution — Michael Liebig, Fri Jun 8 11:13
        
        An addendum: According to Wiggermans "West of Assur..." the dunnu of Tell Abi Abyad was built, when Assur-iddin was Grand Vizier and viceroy. Qibi-Assur was it before the dunnu existed and also the... more
        Re: T 93-10 a solution — Tory Thorpe, Sat Jun 9 02:14
        
        Hi all, I have to agree with Röllig 2004. This Aššur-nadin-apli limmu in T 93-10:10 is presumably the son of Tukulti-Ninurta I, but he was not king at the time. There is not the expected šarru , and... more
        Re: T 93-10 a solution — Joe Baker, Sat Jun 9 05:08
        
        Hi Tory Freydank, in his 1991 book, listed all the Middle Assyrian limu dated letters that he had access to in the Berlin Vorderasiatisches Museum. Amongst the royal limus, half the time they have no ... more
        Re: T 93-10 a solution — Tory Thorpe, Sat Jun 9 09:31
        
        Hi Joe limmu Aššur-nadin-apli šarru/uklu ---- no question who this is. limmu Aššur-nadin-apli ----- is this the king without title? ----- is this the king before he became king? ----- is this an... more
        more problems — Tory Thorpe, Sat Jun 9 08:52
        
        Hi Joe and Michael, Creating a royal limmu date when it lacks royal title can lead to even more chaos in the documentation. Since Aššur-nadin-apli was limmu before he became king, it is probable... more
        T 98-33 solves the “mystery” — Joe Baker, Mon Jun 11 05:30
        
        Hi Tory The war and the Assyrian assistance to the governors of Harran was the PREVIOUS year Not to sure why you place the campaign in the previous year. The text is dated in the month of Qarratu so... more
        Re: T 98-33 solves the “mystery” — Tory Thorpe, Wed Jun 13 07:03
        
        Hi Joe Mystery solvable. Jakob is wrong. Check out the original Wiggermann paper, delivered in 1999 and published in 2000. Agreed and corrected. I should have read Bloch more carefully. He caught... more
        Nabum-bela-uṣur and Uṣur-namkur-šarri — Joe Baker, Thu Jun 14 08:43
        
        Hi Tory I wonder if Jakob is also wrong about Nabu-bela-usur being the mašennu at Aššur AND also limmu during the reign of Tukulti-Ninurta I Jacob is either wrong or misleading. Nabum-bela-uṣur ... more
        Uṣur-namkur-šarri — Joe Baker, Sat Jun 16 00:54
        
        Hi Tory and Michael B I am going to have to retract my statement that MARV (1) 17 = VAT 16382 concerns a decree AGAINST Uṣur-namkur-šarri. I was influenced by Jakob’s partial translation on... more
        Uṣur-namkur-šarri — michael.banyai, Sat Jun 16 03:39
        
        Thanks Joe. Nevermind that VAT 16382 is not so helpful in refuting Blochs reconstruction. I have enough evidence myself to reject it and propose an alternate one much closer by Freydank et al.... more
        a doomed official — Tory, Sun Jun 17 01:55
        
        Hi Joe and Michael B. Thanks for the Freydank paper. He sees it as a decree warning Uṣur-namkur-šarri to report any seditious news he hears both inside and outside of the palace and that if he... more
        Year of Ninu´ayu — michael.banyai, Sun Jun 17 03:15
        
        Hallo Tory, I am reluctant to accept this evidence from the year of Ninu´ayu as demonstrating it was TN I last. In fact we have an identical edict of TN I, MARV IV 116 (VAT 20233), (I would have said ... more
        Re: Year of Ninu´ayu — Tory Thorpe, Sun Jun 17 03:57
        
        Hi Michael The sources are sketchy but I'm sure the rebellion of Assur-nadin-apli was no mere afterthought. He presumably set on his course and planned at least two or even three years before... more
        Year of Ninu´ayu — michael.banyai, Sun Jun 17 04:16
        
        Hallo Tory. Could have been so as you imagine it or otherwise else. This is still no hard evidence for anything. We should never confuse probabilities with evidence. According to my reconstruction... more
        Re: Year of Ninu´ayu — Tory Thorpe, Sun Jun 17 04:42
        
        Hi Michael, Although it is nice to see someone approach the legendary material in Manetho seriously, Merenptah in Ethiopian exile because Amenmesse drove him out of Egypt might just be taking... more
        Year of Ninu´ayu — michael.banyai, Sun Jun 17 07:27
        
        Hi Tory, >>What will you do with the "sa arki/urki" Ninu'ayu limu-year? Donno... This is no more evidence for a "coup d´etat" than for a rather normal year in these limu difficulties. Regime change... more
        Usur-namkur-šarri — michael.banyai, Thu Jun 14 15:19
        
        Hi Joe, I am still giving the last polish to a large chronology paper formally accepted for the AoF. Your argument concerning Usur-namkur-šarri is very interesting and fits my reconstruction of the... more
        Re: Usur-namkur-šarri — Tory Thorpe, Thu Jun 14 23:27
        
        Hi Joe The CDLI site has a hand-copy of MARV I, 17. I will make my own translation shortly. Regards Tory
        Usur-namkur-šarri — michael.banyai, Fri Jun 15 15:46
        
        Thanks Tory, it seems however that the text is so ruined, that it is difficult to argue with its help. It is clearly an edict of TP I concerning the conduit of Usur-namkur-šarri but it is not so... more
        Usur-namkur-šarri — michael.banyai, Fri Jun 15 15:47
        
        Sorry for the typo: meant TN I not TP I.
        Re: Nabum-bela-uṣur and Uṣur-namkur-šarri — Tory Thorpe, Thu Jun 14 10:42
        
        Hi Joe, Nabum-bela-uṣur was limu in the 26th year of Salmanu-ašared and presumably at this time he was the mašennu. I would say 5th year of Tukulti-Ninurta, but your point is well taken. For... more
        UDbu and Adad-riba — Michael Liebig, Mon Jun 11 10:42
        
        Hi Joe, you wrote, that Adad-riba was the masennu already in the limu year of Ellil-kudurri-usur. Where did you get this information? To my knowledge, Adad-riba is attested at first in the limu year... more
        UDbu and Adad-riba — Joe Baker, Tue Jun 12 07:45
        
        Hi Michael You wrote, that Adad-riba was the masennu already in the limu year of Ellil-kudurri-usur. Where did you get this information? This is what I have inferred from Helmut Freydank in his 1991... more
        Re: UDbu and Adad-riba — Michael Liebig, Tue Jun 12 08:54
        
        Hi Joe, thank you for the explanation. I would copy MARV 3,06 in the next days and then we'll see. Regards Michael
        Re: UDbu and Adad-riba — MARV III, 8, Wed Jun 13 10:36
        
        Hi Joe, It´s MARV III, 8, not 6. And the document indeed mentions the abarakku Adad-riba in the limu year of Ellil-kudurri-usur uklu. Regards Michael
        Re: UDbu and Adad-riba — Michael Liebig, Mon Jun 11 10:49
        
        ...and Enlil-kudurri-usur himself followed only after the 6 regnal years of Assur-nirari III. Regards Michael
        Re: T 98-33 solves the “mystery” — Michael Liebig, Mon Jun 11 10:12
        
        Hi Joe and Tory, I also just found out in that paper og Wiggerman, that this mystery does not exist. In addition the important information that in this text (T 98-33) Tammitte is mentioned together... more
        Re: more problems — Michael Liebig, Sat Jun 9 10:43
        
        Hi Tory, I thought a context between T 93-12 (all news, among other about Hatti) and T 98-119 (war in Hatti) is not recognizable. The reasons I have named: "In the letter T 93-12 Ili-pada requested... more
        Re: more problems — Tory Thorpe, Sat Jun 9 11:16
        
        Hi Michael That means it´s about the continuous communication and the general situation throughout the West, not to specific events. But this would precede the DIRECT involvement of Ili-pada in the... more
        Re: more problems — Michael Liebig, Sun Jun 10 02:44
        
        Hi Tory, “when Ilī-padâ and his chariots returned to the fortresses” (T93-10) is only one return of several. Sure he often returned from missions. As Grand Vizier he had duties in Assur an the... more
        Re: more problems — Michael Liebig, Sun Jun 10 03:00
        
        “when Ilī-padâ and his chariots returned to the fortresses” (T93-10) understands Akkermans as the return after his appointment as Grand Vizier. If he always stayed there and does not need... more
        Re: more problems — Tory Thorpe, Sun Jun 10 12:04
        
        Hi Michael, “when Ilī-padâ and his chariots returned to the fortresses” (T 93-10) understands Akkermans as the return after his appointment as Grand Vizier. Is Akkerman correct? A son of the... more
        Re: more problems — Michael Liebig, Sat Jun 9 10:48
        
        Thus there is no obligation to classify the limu year of UDbu under Assur-nadin-apli. (Unfortunately, there is no correction function)
        Re: T 93-10 a solution — Michael Liebig, Sat Jun 9 04:37
        
        Hi Tory, I assume for Assur-nadin-apli only 4, not 5 years. A concrete arrangement of the limu year (not the office of masennu) of Udbu is currently not possible. Jakob in his "Mittelassyrische... more
        postscript — Michael Liebig, Sat Jun 9 04:48
        
        correction: War with Hatti in letter 98-119!

Click here to receive daily updates