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.
Tukultī-Ninurta Qibi-Aššur Sohn von Ibašši-ilī Mušallim-Adad Adad-bēl-gabbe Šunu-qardū Libūr-zānin-Aššur Aššur-nādin-apli Urad-ilāni (?) Adad-uma’’i Abattu Sohn von Adad-Šamšī Abattu Sohn von Adad-šumu-lēšir Aššur-da’’ān Etel-pî-Aššur Sohn von Kurbānu Uṣur-namkūr-šarri Aššur-bēl-ilāni Bēr-nādin-apli Abī-ilī Sohn von Katiri Šulmānu-šuma-uṣur Enlil-nādin-apli (?) Aššur-zēra-iddina Bēr-išmânni (?) Ina-Aššur-šuma-aṣbat Kaštiliašu Ninuāiu
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
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
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