The Ancient Near Eastern Chronology Forum - “ša urki” Ninu’ayu

Hi Tory and Michael B

I have been reading the on-line publication of the N.A.B.U. journal at http://sepoa.fr/?page_id=14. (I was alerted to it by Michael Liebig and also the Agade mailing list).

Amongst the notes there is the following one by Veysel Donbaz, “The PN Aššur-rā’im-nišēšu, A Middle Assyrian Eponymy”, N.A.B.U. (2007/4) number 63 page 78. Here he notes that Freydank gives the name of the limu who dated VAT 10012 as Aššur-rim-nišešu (from the writing A-šur-ÁG-UKÙ^M[E]Š-šu). Now Donbaz points out that this name should be corrected to Aššur-raim-nišešu on the basis of tablet A.1769 where the name, which dates the table, is written phonetically as Aš-šur-ra-im-ni-še-šu (Aššur loves his people). I assume this provides another reason why this particular limu must be distinguished from the early Aššur-bal-kala limu named Aššur-rim-nišešu (Aššur is the Wild Bull of his people).

Regards Joe

“ša urki” Ninu’ayu — Joe Baker, Sun Jun 17 09:10

Hi Tory and Michael B The thread is getting too long so I have started a new thread. The reference to the limu year “after Nin’ayu” is found in VAT 10012 = Assur 21101. The tablet is dated to 5... more
- “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — Joe Baker, Mon Jun 18 08:12
- Re: “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — Tory Thorpe, Sun Jun 17 13:33
  
  Hi Michael and Joe, Tukulti-Ninurta I was first imprisoned in a house at Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta (not the palace), and then killed sometime after this. As Poebel has already explained, these two events... more
- - “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — michael.banyai, Mon Jun 18 02:16
    
    Hi Tory. Your question: >>was arresting the great king, locking him up in a room, and then killing him, just business as usual and only the normal course of royal succession at Aššur? Surely not -... more
  - - Re: “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — Tory Thorpe, Mon Jun 18 08:53
      
      Hello Michael, Of course by the time T 02-32 was written, Aššur-nadin-apli was secure on his throne, being greeted by visiting foreign kings as "the living one". But this letter says nothing about... more
    - - “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — michael.banyai, Mon Jun 18 10:07
        
        Hello Tory, you don´t address Jakobs reasoning about the last letters in Tel Chuera - he writes that the most recent parts of an archive were hold as a general custom separately from the rest in a... more
      - “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — Werner, Tue Jun 19 04:32
        
        Hello Michael and all, my preference for the TN eponyms after Assur-zera-iddina is based on the following arguments: - Abi-ili > Salmanu-šuma-usur is certain - Ina-Assur-šumi-asbat is earlier than... more
        “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — michael.banyai, Tue Jun 19 05:18
        
        Dear Werner, your question : Is there an argument to disprove this order? Answer is: yes. It is in part object of my future paper in AoF. The new limu reconstruction was discussed with Llop, who at a ... more
        Re: “ša urki” Ninu’ayu — Tory Thorpe, Tue Jun 19 07:05
        
        Hi Michael & all, The Middle Assyrian archive at Tell Huwera is very inferior compared to the extensive one at Tell Seh Hamad. Not a single limu-year should be unrepresented at Tell Seh Hamad from... more
        expedition to Tille — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 20 03:04
        
        Jaume Llop has drwan my attention to the following: Freydank has proposed in SGKAO 21, 62 that Ninuaju should placed before Abi-ili son of Katiri. In a group of texts, dated with the years of Ninuaju ... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Tory Thorpe, Wed Jun 20 09:18
        
        Hi Michael L. Freydank has proposed in SGKAO 21, 62 that Ninuaju should placed before Abi-ili son of Katiri. That was Freydank way back in 1991. In Freydank's more recent paper "Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 20 10:20
        
        Hi Tory, The sequence in "Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta als Agrarprovinz" in Altoriental. Forsch., Akademie Verlag, 36 (2009) 1, p. 76, include only eponyms from Dur-Katlimmu! (see Freydank´s explanation on p. ... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Tory, Wed Jun 20 11:30
        
        Hi Michael, On p. 76 then Freydank only noted (quite correctly) that Ninu'ayu belongs to the time after Ina-Assur-suma-asbat. I.e. Freydank does not revised his knowlwedge from 1991. Freydank has... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Michael Liebig, Thu Jun 21 01:59
        
        Hi Tory, Based on this table of Freydank You're right. But now it is clear (and I think you know it) that Ina-Assur-suma-asbat must be placed earlier. Ina-Assur-suma-asbat should be placed before... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Tory, Thu Jun 21 02:13
        
        Hi Michael But concerning the relationship between Ninu'ayu and Abi-ili my only intention was to show the reasons why Freydank put Ninu'ayu ahead - reasons, that apparently convinced other relevant... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Michael Liebig, Thu Jun 21 03:52
        
        Hi Tory, 2009 is 3 years ago and the research has proceeded. Relevant scholars (they of course familiar with the work of Freydank) have own arguments there+after and the current agreement not depend... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Tory, Thu Jun 21 05:20
        
        Hi Michael Even if you put Ina-Assur-suma-asbat before Sulmanu-suma-usur, so that the grand viziers are in the proper order (and yes I know this), that does not mean Freydank agrees to put Ninu'ayu... more
        Re: expedition to Tille — Michael Liebig, Thu Jun 21 06:41
        
        Hi Tory, Freydank wrote 3 years ago about Ina-Assur-suma-asbat as the "mutmaßlich" latest eponym of Dur-Katlimmu (p. 75) and than "Unter der Voraussetzung, daß Ina-Assur-suma-asbat tatsächlich als... more
        Freydank: actual statement — Michael Liebig, Tue Jun 26 11:21
        
        Hi Tory and All, Today I received the answer of Helmut Freydank with his actual statement on this problem. In his 2009 paper he could not yet take in consideration the observation of Jakob regarding... more
        Re: Freydank: actual statement — Tory, Tue Jun 26 12:04
        
        Hi Michael Certainly doesn't sound like Freydank is sure. I have read, re-read, and re-re-read the 1991 argument, and all points of view added since then. I still do not see the validity of the... more
        Re: Freydank: actual statement — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 27 02:21
        
        Hi Tory, The 1991 argument is secundary, but the observation of Jakob regarding the order of the Grand Viziers can not be ignored. Freydank is no more reserved than in 2009. Even then, he has not... more
        Re: Freydank: actual statement — Tory Thorpe, Wed Jun 27 06:16
        
        Hi Michael, The order of the grand viziers only proves that the limu-year of Ina-Assur-suma-asbat was not the end of the Dur-Katlimmu archive. That's all. This is apples and oranges, as it really has ... more
        Re: Freydank: actual statement — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 27 09:00
        
        Hi Tory, clearly there is no absolute security. There are only probabilities in this matter and different models are possible, more or less probalbly. Besides the order the Tille-documents should... more
        Re: Freydank: actual statement — Michael Liebig, Wed Jun 27 09:07
        
        appendix: You must certainly suppose several expeditions to Tille. (Sorry, the page is without correction function)
        Re: Freydank: actual statement — Tory, Wed Jun 27 23:53
        
        Hi Michael, I still don't get it. First, the limu Ninu'ayu is not attested at Dur-Katlimmu, and this archive is far more extensive than the one at Tell Chuera. Putting even a one-year gap into the... more

Click here to receive daily updates