Tory Thorpe
Re: “ša urki” Ninu’ayu
Tue Jun 19, 2012 07:05
112.198.82.62

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 before the beginning of Tukulti-Ninurta's reign to the end of the archive. Below I give my latest arrangement (subject to changes) which sticks closely to Freydank 2009. As you know, my regnal year assignments are based on the royal limu-year of Tukulti-Ninurta I being the first limu in KAV 21-24.

A = Limus documented at Tell Seh Hamad (Dur-Katlimmu)
B = Limus documented at Tell Huwera (here only the limus from Ellil-nadin-apli onward are listed)
C = Middle Assyrian Months

1 Ištar-eriš A
2 Lullayu A
3 Aššur-ketti-ide A
4 Ekaltayu A
5 Aššur-da'issunu A
6 Riš-Adad A
7 Nabu-bela-usur A
8 Usat-Marduk A
9 Ellil-ašared A
10 Ittabši-den-Aššur A
11 Aššur-nadin-apli A
12 Ubru A
13 TUKULTI-NINURTA I A
14 Qibi-Aššur A Qibi-Aššur, sukallu rabi'u
15 Mušallim-Adad A
16 Adad-bel-gabbe A
17 Šunu-qardu A
18 Libur-zanin-Aššur A
19 Aššur-nadin-apli A
20 Urad-ilani A
21 Adad-uma''i A
22 Abattu A
23 Abattu A
24 Aššur-da''an A
25 Etel-pi-Aššur A Aššur-iddin, sukkallu
26 Usur-namkur-šarri A Aššur-iddin, sukkallu
27 Aššur-bel-ilani A
28 Aššur-zera-iddina A Aššur-iddin, sukkallu rabi'u
29 Ellil-nadin-apli A B
30 Ina-Aššur-šuma-asbat A Aššur-iddin, sukkallu rabi'u
31 Ber-nadin-apli A
32 Ber-išmanni A B
33 Abili s. Katiri A Šalmanu-mušabši, sukkallu rabi'u
34 Salmanu-šuma-usur A Šalmanu-mušabši, sukkallu rabi'u
35 Kaštiliašu B
36 Ili-pada (sukkallu?)

C
(?) Tukulti-Ninurta's letter to the Hittite king complaining about the loss of Karduniaš (KBo 28:61-64).
(?) Hittite and other foreign dignitaries visit Aššur to discuss the Assyrian king's plans to recapture Karduniaš.
(?) Because of "evil" acts planned against Karduniaš Aššur-nadin-apli makes secret plans to depose his father (Chronicle P iv 9-12).
(8) Ša-šarate ?: Aššur-iddin s. U. told to notify Tukulti-Ninurta about word of sedition (MARV IV, 116).

37 Ninu'ayu B Šalmanu-mušabši, sukkallu rabi'u

C
(2) Qarratu 11: Provisions for the diplomat from Hatti issued by Šalmanu-mušabši.
(3) Kalmartu 20: Provisions for the diplomats of Sidon and Amurru issued by Šalmanu-mušabši.
(?) Ili-pada (in Aššur) is nominated to replace Šalmanu-mušabši as sukkallu rabi'u of Hanigalbat.
(5) Kuzallu 22: Provisions for the diplomat from Hatti issued by Sin-mušallim (mayor of Harbe).
(8) Ša-šarate 11: Usur-namkur-šarri threatened to notify Tukulti-Ninurta about word of sedition (MARV [I], 17).
(8) Ša-šarate ?: Tukulti-Ninurta dethroned and imprisoned at Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta.
(8) Ša-šarate 21: Provisions for the diplomat of (name lost) issued by Sin-mušallim (mayor of Harbe).

1 ša urki Ninu'ayu = Year 1 and/or Year 2 Aššur-nadin-apli (see below). The limu-year was eventually given its own name -- Qarrad-Aššur?

C
(?) The day of the execution of Tukulti-Ninurta I at Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta (scheduled ahead of time?).
(?) T 02-32; Ili-pada to Ubru: "Why did he (Mannu-ki-Adad) not come? Kings of other countries came here and mourned;
why did he not come, he not mourn the dead one (Tukulti-Ninurta) and meet the living one (Aššur-nadin-apli)?"

2 Urad-Kube
3 Erib-Sin
1 UDbu
2 AŠŠUR-NIRARI III
3 Šalmanu-A.PAP
4
5
6
Note that I do not place limus within the reign of Tukutli-Ninurta on the basis of merely being attested at Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta because Donbaz has explained that Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta continued to function even after the death of its founder.

As stated in Chronicle P, Tukulti-Ninurta was first arrested and imprisoned before being put to death. In most cases one would assume that the murder of a great king of Assyria would not be dared unless absolutely certain of a successful outcome. Thus I think it wise to infer, as others have in the past, that not a few days must have intervened between the arrest and the killing. This is based on the explicit statement that Aššur-nadin-apli began his reign "during the lifetime" of his father:

"During the lifetime of Tukulti-Ninurta, Aššur-nadin-apli, his son, took the throne. He reigned 3 years. Aššur-nirari, son of Aššur-nasir-apli, reigned 6 years" (Khors. List iii 21-23).

After the arrest is the most likely time Aššur-nadin-apli would have eliminated remaining loyalists of his father's government. He thus went about consolidating and legitimizing his authority, and, in my opinion, he would have received at least one foreign diplomat coming to Aššur to learn of the situation first-hand and to formally acknowledge him as the new king of Assyria. Only after Aššur-nadin-apli secured his throne with the necessary aliances in place (at home and abroad) would he have then sent executioners to Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta to have his father put to death.

The above scenario too can explain the conflicting reign length figures for Aššur-nadin-apli, i.e. 3 years when counting the terminal Year 37 as the "accession year", but 4 years total if Year 37 is counted as Year 1. Hence both figures in the Assyrian king-list tradition (3 and 4) can probably be accepted as accurate for Aššur-nadin-apli.

As always, I only offer plausible and probable hypothetical reconstructions of chronology this far back in time.

Obviously, though history only happened one way, the sources can be interpreted in a number of different ways. That is why I (and Freydank) feel it is still too early to publish any ideas as definitive, a lessoned we can all learn from the example set by Freydank.

Very unfortunate that with the discovery of so many limu dated tablets in different Middle Assyrian archives not a single canonical Middle Assyrian limu-list to guide us. Just how did those people expect future generations to have an accurate understanding of the passage of years over large spans of time if most of the limu-lists in this period were made of perishable media?

Regards Tory

  • “ša urki” Ninu’ayuJoe 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’ayuJoe Baker, Mon Jun 18 08:12
      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).... more
    • Re: “ša urki” Ninu’ayuTory 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’ayumichael.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’ayuTory 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’ayumichael.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’ayuWerner, 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’ayumichael.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
                  • expedition to TilleMichael 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 TilleTory 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 TilleMichael 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 TilleTory, 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 TilleMichael 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 TilleTory, 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 TilleMichael 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 TilleTory, 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 TilleMichael 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 statementMichael 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 statementTory, 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 statementMichael 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 statementTory 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 statementMichael 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 statementMichael 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 statementTory, 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