Esarhaddon, King of Assyria 9781957454979, 9781957454955, 9781957454948

Citation preview

本书版权归ISD Global所有

ESARHADDON, King of Assyria Josette Elayi

ESARHADDON, KING OF ASSYRIA

Stela of Esarhaddon from Zincirli-Sam’al. Pergamon Museum Dosseman, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons.

ESARHADDON, KING OF ASSYRIA

Josette Elayi

LOCKWOOD PRESS Columbus, Georgia 2023

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria Copyright © 2023 by Lockwood Press All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to Lockwood Press, PO Box 1080, Columbus, GA 31901 USA. ISBN: 978-1-957454-97-9 Cover design by Susanne Wilhelm. Cover image: Victory stele of Assyrian king Esarhaddon, Zincirli, ca. 670 BCE; Pergamon Museum, Berlin. Photograph by Richard Mortel from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Elayi, Josette, author. Title: Esarhaddon, King of Assyria / Josette Elayi. Description: Columbus, Georgia : Lockwood Press, 2023. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2022046388 (print) | LCCN 2022046389 (ebook) | ISBN 9781957454979 (paperback) | ISBN 9781957454955 (pdf) | ISBN 9781957454948 (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Esarhaddon, King of Assyria, -669 B.C. | Assyria–History. Classification: LCC DS73.85 .E43 2022 (print) | LCC DS73.85 (ebook) | DDC 935/.03–dc23/eng/20220930 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022046388 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022046389

Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper.

Contents Abbreviations and Keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii The Chronology of Esarhaddon’s Reign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. A Portrait of Esarhaddon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.1. His Physical Portrait . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.2. His Name and Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.3. His Childhood. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1.4. His Personality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.5. Propaganda. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2. Esarhaddon, the Crown Prince . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.1. His Designation as Crown Prince . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.2. The Opposition against Esarhaddon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.3. The Departure of Esarhaddon from Nineveh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 3. Esarhaddon’s Accession to the Throne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.1. The Conquest of Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.2. The Investiture of the King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 3.3. The King’s Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4. Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.1. Their Role in the Assyrian Empire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.2. Their Influence on the King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.3. The Most Influential Scholars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.4. Esarhaddon’s Relationship with Them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 4.5. The Relationship of Naqiʾa with Them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5. The Rebuilding of Babylon and Other Building Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 5.1. The Decision to Rebuild Babylon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 5.2. The Falsification of Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 5.3. The Financing and Organization of the Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.4. The Question of Statues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 5.5. Riots in Babylon and Other Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 5.6. Building Activities outside Babylon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6. The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 6.1. The Strategy of the Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 6.2. The Campaign against the Sealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 v

vi

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

6.3. The Campaign against Arzâ and the Brook of Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 6.4. The Campaign against Cilicia and the Cimmerians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 6.5. The Campaign against Bît-Dakkûri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 6.6. The Revolts of Abdi-Milkûti and Sanda-uarri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 6.7. The Treaty with Baʾalu of Tyre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 6.8. The Campaign against Bâzu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 6.9. Problems with Nippur, Bît-Dakkûri, and Melid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 6.10. Undated Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 7. The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 7.1. Esarhaddon’s Objective: The Conquest of Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 7.2. The First Campaign against Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 7.3. The Campaign against Shubria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 7.4. The Ninth Year (672) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 7.5. The Campaign against Tyre on the Way to Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 7.6. The Conquest of Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 8. The Problem of Succession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 8.1. A Recurring Problem of the Dynasty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 8.2. The Designation of Esarhaddon’s Two Sons as Crown Princes . . . . 98 8.3. The Consequences of the Double Kingship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 9. The End of Esarhaddon’s Reign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 9.1. The Twenty-Two Kings of Hatti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 9.2. Undated Events of the Last Period of His Reign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 9.3. Conspiracies against Esarhaddon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 9.4. The Purge of High Dignitaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 9.5. Troubles in Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 9.6. The Third Campaign against Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 10. An Assessment of Esarhaddon’s Reign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Selected Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

Abbreviations and Keys AAE ÄAT ABL

ABS AfO AfO.B AMIT ANES AnOr AnSt AOAT AoF AOS AOTU ARAB 2 ArOr AS AW BACA BaM BARIS BAR BeO Bib BiOr BM BN CAD CAH

Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy Ägypten und Altes Testament Leroy Waterman, Royal Correspondence of the Assyrian Empire, Vols I–III. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1930–1936 Archaeology and Biblical Studies Archiv für Orientforschung Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran Ancient Near Eastern Studies Analecta Orientalia Anatolian Studies Alter Orient und Altes Testament Altorientalische Forschungen American Oriental Series Altorientalische Texte und Untersuchungen Daniel David Luckenbill, Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Vol. II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1927 Archiv Orientalni Assyriological Studies Antike Welt Bahrain Authority for Cultures & Antiquities Baghdader Mitteilungen British Archaeological Reports International Series Biblical Archaeology Review Bibbia e Oriente Biblica Bibliotheca Orientalis British Museum Biblische Notizen Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1964– Cambridge Ancient History vii

viii CAM CANE

CdÉ CHANE CIPOA CM CNI CRRAI CT CWA ERC HANEM HdO HIMA HUCA HSS IEJ IrAnt JA  JAOS JCS JCSMS JEOL JJS JNES JSSEA LAS

MC MDAIK MKNAW NABU

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria Cuadernos de Arqueología Mediterránea Sasson, Jack M., ed. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. 4 vols. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1995. Repr. in 2 vols. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000 Chronique d’Égypte Culture and History of the Ancient Near East Cahiers de l’Institut du Proche-Orient ancien du Collège de France Cuneiform Monographs Carsten Niebuhr Institute Comptes Rendus des Rencontres Assyriologiques internationales Cuneiform Texts Current World Archaeology Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations History of the Ancient Near East, Monographs Handbuch der Orientalistik Revue Internationale d’Histoire Militaire Ancienne Hebrew Union College Annual Harvard Semitic Studies Israel Exploration Journal Iranica Antiqua Journal Asiatique Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of Cuneiform Studies Journal of the Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschap Ex oriente lux Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Near Eastern Studies Journal de la Société d’étude des antiquités égyptiennes Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. Part 1-2, AOAT 5/2. Kevalaer: Butzon and Bercker; and Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1970 and 1983 Mesopotamian Civilizations Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo Medelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie der Weten­­­­schappen Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires



NEAEHL

OBO OIP OLA OPSNKF Or OrAnt PEQ PIHANS PIPOAC PNA

RA RAI REG RGRW RGTC RINAP 3.1

RINAP 3.2

RINAP 4 RlA RMA RSF SAA 2 SAA 4

Abbreviations

ix

Ephraim Stern et al. ed., The New Encyclopedia of Archaeo­ logical Excavations in the Holy Land, 5 volumes. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society; New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993–2008 Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Oriental Institute Publications Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund Orientalia NS Oriens Antiquus Palestine Exploration Quarterly Publications de l’Institut Historique-Archéologique néerlandais de Stamboul Publications de l’Institut du Proche-Orient Ancien du Collège de France Heather D. Baker and Karen Radner ed., The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, I–III. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1998–2011 Revue d’Assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale Rencontres Assyriologiques Internationales Revue des Études Grecques Religions of the Greco-Roman World Répertoire géographique des textes cunéiformes Albert Kirk Grayson and Jamie Novotny, The Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib, King of Assyria (704-681 BC), Part 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012 A. K. Grayson and J. Novotny, The Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib, King of Assyria (704-681 BC), Part 2. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2014 Erle Leichty, The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria (680-669 BC). Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2011 Reallexikon der Assyriologie. Edited by Erich Ebeling et al. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1928– R. Campbell Thompson, The Reports of the Magicians and Astrologers of Nineveh and Babylon I–II. London: Luzac, 1900 Rivista di Studi Fenici Simo Parpola and Kazuko Watanabe, Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty Oaths. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1998 Ivan Starr, Queries to the Sungod. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1990

x SAA 6/1

SAA 7

SAA 8 SAA 9 SAA 10 SAA 12

SAA 13

SAA 16

SAA 18

SAAB SAACT 4

SAAS SAAS 2

SAAS 7

SAAS 9

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria Theodore Kwasman and Simo Parpola, Legal Transactions of the Royal Court of Nineveh. Part I: Tiglath-pileser III through Esarhaddon. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1991 Frederick Mario Fales and John Nicholas Postgate, Imperial Administrative Records, Part I. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992 Hermann Hunger, Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992 Sarah C. Melville, The Role of Naqia/Zakutu in Sargonid Politics. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1999 Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993 Laura Kataja and Robert M. Whiting, Grants, Decrees and Gifts of the Neo-Assyrian Period. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1995 Steven W. Cole and Peter Machinist, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Priests to Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1998 Mikko Luukko and Gretta Van Buylaere, The Political Correspondence of Esarhaddon. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2002 Frances Reynolds and Simo Parpola, The Babylonian Correspondence of Esarhaddon, and Letters to Assurbanipal and Sin-Šarru-Iškun from Northern and Central Babylonia. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2003 State Archives of Assyria Bulletin Philippe Talon, The Standard Babylonian Creation Myth. State Archives of Assyria Cuneiform Texts. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2005 State Archives of Assyria Studies Alan Millard, The Eponyms of the Assyrian Empire (910-612 BC). State Archives of Assyria Studies 2. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1994 Martti Nissinen, References to Prophecy in Neo-Assyrian Sources. State Archives of Assyria Studies 7. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1998 Sarah C. Melville, The Role of Naqia/Zakutu in Sargonid Politics. State Archives of Assyria Studies 9. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1999



SAAS 11

SAAS 12

SAAS 17

SAAS 19

SAAS 23

SAAS 28

SAK SANTAG SBL ScrHier TCS TMO Trans VAT VT WA WAW WAWSup WVDOG ZA ZDPV

Abbreviations

Raija Mattila, The King’s Magnates: A Study of the Highest Officials in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. State Archives of Assyria Studies 11. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2000 Matthew William Waters, A Survey of Neo-Elamite History. State Archives of Assyria Studies 12. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2000 Cynthia Jean, La magie néo-assyrienne en Contexte : recherches sur le métier d’exorciste et le concept d’āšipūtu. State Archives of Assyria Studies 17. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2006 Alan Lenzi, Secrecy and the Gods: The Umman-manda and Its Significance in the First Millennium BC. State Archives of Assyria Studies 19. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2011 Saana Svärd, Women and Power in the Neo-Assyrian Palaces State Archives of Assyria Studies 23. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2015 Shigeo Yamada, Neo-Assyrian Sources in Context.State Archives of Assyria Studies 23. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2018 Studien zur altägyptischen Kultur Arbeiten und Untersuchungen zur Keilschriftkunde Society of Biblical Literature Scripta Hierosolymitana Texts from Cuneiform Sources Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient Transeuphratène Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin Vetus Testamentum World Archaeology Writings from the Ancient World Writings from the Ancient World Supplement Series Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft Zeitschrift für Assyriologie Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins

Key to Transliterated Words kibrāt DINGIR

xi

Akkadian words are indicated by italics Sumerian word signs are indicated by capital letters

xii

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Explanation of Symbols Single brackets [ ] enclose restorations Parentheses ( ) enclose additions in the English translation A row of dots … indicates gaps in the text or untranslatable words

The Chronology of Esarhaddon’s Reign Dates Year of (BCE) Reign Campaigns and Activities ————————————————————————————————————————————————–– 681 Accession Accession to the throne on the 28th/18th day of year Addaru (March). 680 Year 1 False date of the start of the reconstruction of Babylon. Campaign against Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir of the Sealand (by Esarhaddon’s officer). His brother Naʼid-Marduk replaced him. 679 Year 2 Rebuilding of Esharra in Assur. Campaign against Asuhili, king of Arzâ at the Brook of Egypt. Campaign against the Cimmerians and Cilicia (by Esarhaddon’s officer). 678 Year 3 Campaign against Shamash-ibni of Bît-Dakkûri, executed with the governor of Nippur. 677 Year 4 Campaign against Abdi-Milkûti, king of Sidon. Sidon became an Assyrian province. Campaign against Sanda-uarri, king of Kundu and Sissû. 676 Year 5 Parade in Nineveh with the cut heads of the two kings. Treaty of vassality with Baʼalu, king of Tyre. Campaign against Bâzu in Arabia. Tribute of Qanâ, king of Dilmun. 675 Year 6 Campaign against Mugallu of Melid. 678–675 Undated campaigns against Mannea, Scythians, Medes, Ellipi, Elam, Til-Ashuri, Gambulu, and Arabs. 674 Year 7 First campaign against Egypt. 673 Year 8 Campaign against Ik-Teshub, king of Shubria. Death of Esharra-hammat, Esarhaddon’s wife. 672 Year 9 Succession treaty: Ashurbanipal and Shamashshumu-ukîn crown princes. 671 Year 10 Second campaign against Egypt. Against Baʼalu of Tyre on the way to Egypt. Conquest of Lower Egypt. Conspiracies against Esarhaddon.

xiii

xiv

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

670

Year 11

669

Year 12

Conspiracies against Esarhaddon (continued). Purge of high dignitaries. Troubles in Egypt. Third campaign against Egypt. Death of Esarhaddon on the 10th day of Arahsamna (November).

ris

Jerwan

R.

Tarbisu

Gr

Tig

ea

ab ter Z

Khorsabad Nineveh

Arbela Nimrud

Assur Le

e ss

r

Za

b

Wa

har di T tha

r

N

0

The Assur-Nineveh-Arbela triangle. Map by Tina Ross.

6 0 km

PR

US

Arwad Tripoli

E

Memphis

E G YPT

Ashdod Ashkelon Raphia Gaza

E DAM

M OAB

Dead Sea

R.

s

N

0

P UQU

Dêr

AN

EL

200 k m

LI

AN

PI

M

Lake Urmia

DU -D Nippur G B ÎT AM BÎT-AMUKÂNI BU LU Uruk ÎN K A Larsa T-Y Î B AK

KÛ

RI

Lahiru

B ÎT-H A M B

ZA M UA

PA RSUA

M ount Ni p ur

Hubus h ki a

Arbela

Sippar Babylon Borsippa

Assur

Nimrud

Nineveh

Sh ub r i a UK K U

Lake Van

The Assyrian Empire ca. 699 BCE. Map by Tina Ross.

S y ro -A r ab ia n D e s e rt

A RA B S

A M M ON

Carchemish Harrân Til Barsip

Tigris R .

UR A RT U

S

Samaria Jerusalem

Megiddo

Sidon Tyre Akko

Homs

Hamat

LID

U MUH

Alep

A m am us

S A M ’AL

Zinjirli

K UM

UM URG

ME

te

Mediterrnean Byblos Sea

CY

Ta u r u s

QU

G

TA B A L

R.

on

an

ra

RO

Jordan R.

O ron t e s R .

ph

Leb

Eu

Z AG ia rab n/A lf a i s Gu Per

AM

A

EL

NE

n

Caspian Sea

Introduction

E

sarhaddon reigned over Assyria from 680 to 669 BCE. He belonged to the so-called Sargonid dynasty. This term does not indicate a new dynasty, since Sargon II, as the probable son Tiglath-pileser III, continued the blood line of previous kings, but rather refers specifically to the sequence of Sargon II’s successors.1 This book is a follow-up volume to the three books devoted to his predecessors: Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, and Sennacherib.2 Esarhaddon has left behind a negative image through the centuries, unlike his father Sennacherib, who destroyed Babylon and attacked the kingdom of Judah. But contrary to this negative image, he rebuilt Babylon and was on good terms with Manasseh, king of Judah. Moreover, the discoveries of archaeological remains in Iraq during the nineteenth century revealed no representations of his cruelty, simply because his palace in Nineveh has not been discovered. Although there are some descriptions of atrocities in his inscriptions, they are much less abundant than those of some other Assyrian kings. For example, he boasted of having punished the Assyrian fugitives who had fled to the land of Shubria by cutting off their hands and removing their noses, eyes, and ears.3 Probably for these reasons, Esarhaddon is less well-known than his immediate predecessors. On the other hand, he was the king who realized the old Assyrian dream: the conquest of Egypt. This is rather surprising, though, because he displayed a weak personality, both physically and morally. The Assyrian Empire inherited by Esarhaddon was founded by his great-grandfather Tiglath-pileser III, who reigned from 745 to 727.4 He had created a truly imperialist system, a source of considerable wealth, which was characterized by the ongoing mechanism of conquest and the growing weight of the Assyrian administration, which oppressed the conquered states. The expansion of the empire was institutionalized, becoming part of the traditional values of Assyrian society. This empire was extended by Esarhaddon’s grandfather Sargon II, but little further advancement was achieved by his father Sennacherib. Sennacherib achieved only a few annexations during his reign: some cities in the Zagros, placed under the authority of the governor of Arrapha; the Ellipean district of Bît-Barrû; and an ephemeral and limited expansion in Mount Nipur and Ukku.5 However, Sennacherib had succeeded in consolidating the empire and establishing a kind of Pax Assyriaca. 1

2

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Esarhaddon is one of the best-attested Assyrian kings because the Akkadian inscriptions relating to the history of his reign are numerous, even perhaps overly abundant. Most of them are housed in museum collections, mainly in the British Museum in London (264 inscriptions) and in the Vorderasiatisches Museum in Berlin (55 inscriptions).6 Others are scattered around the world in various museums: the Iraq Museum in Baghdad (20), the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (15), the Philadelphia Museum of Art and University Museum in Philadelphia (13), the Archaeological Museum in Istanbul (10), the Yale Babylonian Collection in New Haven (9), the Metropolitan Museum in New York (5), the Musée du Louvre in Paris (4), and the Harvard Semitic Museum in Cambridge (2). Other museums house only one or two of Esarhaddon’s inscriptions: the Aleppo Museum, the Musée d’Art et d’Histoire in Geneva, the Fr. Schiller University in Jena, the Israel Museum and Israel Antiquities Authority in Jerusalem, the Peabody Museum in New Haven, the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, the École Pratique des Hautes Études, 4e section, in Paris, the Wiener Museum für Völkerkunde, and the Sulaimaniya Museum of Iraq and National Museum of Iran. A few inscriptions are housed in private collections. Some inscriptions have been left on-site, such as the one carved into a niche in the rock face at the mouth of the Nahr el-Kalb in Lebanon, or a stone slab from Nebi Yunus at Nineveh.7 All these inscriptions fall into one of two categories: royal or nonroyal. Several duplicate witnesses of Esarhaddon’s inscriptions were preserved in the royal archives of Nineveh, mainly discovered in the Southwest Palace and catalogued in the so-called Kuyunjik collection.8 The royal inscriptions were executed on stone, in clay, bronze, and silver. However, it must be borne in mind that some official documents were written on other material such as waxcovered writing boards, papyrus, and leather, and are hence now irretrievably lost.9 Other duplicate witnesses were preserved at sites other than Nineveh, such as Assur, Khorsabad, Tarbisu, and Babylon. Some royal inscriptions can be very long (five hundred lines).10 They were written on prisms, cylinders, tablets, slabs, steles, monuments, rocks, bricks, vessels, door sockets, and small objects such as amulets, bronze animal figurines, and eye stones. They are written in Assyrian, Babylonian, or a mixture of both, sometimes in an archaic script (one even in Sumerian).11 The so-called Assyrian hieroglyphs mentioned by Esarhaddon (“I depicted hieroglyphs, representing the rewriting of my name”) have been interpreted in different ways, none of them fully convincing.12 One wonders whether they were not merely symbolic drawings accompanying inscriptions as on the successive scenes represented on the wall reliefs decorating his palace.13 Text no. 115 of the corpus of inscriptions of Esarhaddon (published in RINAP 4), which concerns the rebuilding of Babylon, was accompanied by a horned



Introduction

3

headdress on a podium (symbolizing the restoration of Marduk’s kingship); an Assyrian king as worshiper (Esarhaddon praying to Marduk?); a palmette(?); a bull or lion (symbolizing the restoration of Babylonian power); a mountain (symbolizing inhabitants scattered after the flood); a plough and a palm tree (symbolizing the return of the inhabitants who cultivate the fields and palm groves); and an unidentified four-sided figure(?). Some of the royal inscriptions are similar to the royal annals, which are chronological accounts of the king’s military campaigns, while others are summaries of the annals or focus on a special event. They generally give detailed accounts of Esarhaddon’s military campaigns, of his building operations, or of his relationship with the gods.14 The royal inscriptions of his successors also make several allusions to his reign.15 The first difficulty associated with Esarhaddon’s royal inscriptions is their dating. Each ancient Mesopotamian year has been given a single Julian year even though it actually encompassed parts of two Julian years, according to the table converting Assyrian dates to Julian ones.16 Three different systems were used in parallel for dating the inscriptions, but none systematically. The first was the year of reign: “Accession year of Esarhaddon,” “In my first year (BALA).”17 Sometimes the campaign was numbered: “In my second campaign.”18 The third way of dating was the name of the eponym, for example, “Duʾûzu, nineteenth day, eponymy of Itti-Adad-anê[nu], governor of Megiddo”; or “Ayyâru, eighteenth day, eponymy of Nabû-bêlu-usur, governor of Dur-Sharrukin.”19 Some of the several copies of inscription no. 1 that were discovered were dated with two different eponyms’ dates, Atar-ili and Nabû-bêlu-usur, because they were written successively in 673 and 672 BCE.20 This third system of dating, indicating the year (eponym), the month, and the day was the most precise. Contrary to his predecessors, Esarhaddon was the first king not to become an eponym, completely disregarding the traditional order in the list of eponyms.21 As a result of this triple dating system which, it should be said, was irregular, the number of campaigns and the precise year of some of them are difficult to establish. It is also difficult to distinguish the campaigns led by the Assyrian king from those led by his officials, and to know whether there were one or several campaigns in the same year, with some possibly even being parallel events. However, by combining the different sources, it will be possible to propose a plausible chronology. The second difficulty for the historian who relies on royal inscriptions is the challenge of deciphering them through the filter of propaganda. For example, Esarhaddon insisted on repeatedly dating his inscriptions relating to the rebuilding of Babylon to the very beginning of his reign. Inscription no. 105 is dated twice, once from his first year and again, at the end, from his accession year, that is 681 or 680.22 But it is clear from the events mentioned that this

4

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

inscription was composed much later, probably no earlier than the last month of 674.23 Another example is the inscription of the Til Barsip stele representing Abdi-Milkûti (Abdimilkot) king of Sidon (as written in the epigraph) standing and held by a rope with a ring through his nose; however, from other inscriptions, we know that Abdi-Milkûti was caught and decapitated.24 A third example is Esarhaddon’s main claim of having personally conquered Egypt, which was misleading as he did not head the campaign.25 Yet, by analyzing and comparing the different sources, it is possible for the historian to identify the distorted information.26 There is less difficulty in interpreting the nonroyal inscriptions because they are generally much less distorted by propaganda. The chronographic inscriptions are king lists, eponym lists, and Mesopotamian chronicles. This last includes the chronicle concerning the period from Nabû-nâsir to Shamashshumu-ukîn, the Esarhaddon Chronicle, and the Akītu Chronicle.27 Esarhaddon’s letters are much more numerous than those of his father Sennacherib.28 They are particularly numerous for the period 672–669 and were written by the doctors, diviners, and exorcists responsible for watching over him.29 Some letters belong to the period when Esarhaddon was crown prince. Other inscriptions related to this king are treaties, loyalty oaths, oracle queries, reports from diviners, prophecies, hymns and literary texts, clay sealings, land grants, and legal documents.30 There are also many economic documents on clay tablets but the attribution to Esarhaddon’s reign is often difficult, especially for the fragments.31 Those that can be identified give further insight into the economic situation under his rule. Besides royal and nonroyal inscriptions related to Esarhaddon, it is necessary to mention eight inscriptions and copies attributed to Naqiʾa (Zakûtu), Esarhaddon’s mother, and two inscriptions attributed to Esharrahammat, his wife.32 He is also mentioned as crown prince in inscriptions of his father Sennacherib.33 There are also external sources written in Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, such as the Bible, and later texts such as those of Josephus and Berossus.34 This late literature is mainly based on the biblical and classical accounts of Esarhaddon’s reign and must be used carefully by the historian, with a precise assessment of their distortions. Nonwritten documentation dating from Esarhaddon’s reign is historically important just as the information provided by the reliefs of Sennacherib’s palace in Nineveh were important for reconstructing his reign.35 Sennacherib’s reliefs complemented the texts as they were representations of the Assyrian king’s conquests, focusing on spectacular actions, sometimes accompanied by an epigraph, similar to our modern comics. Esarhaddon did the same in his palace of Nineveh: “Through the craft of the sculptor, I depicted on it (the frieze of the palace) the might of the god Ashur, my lord, (and) the deeds that



Introduction

5

I had accomplished in enemy lands.”36 Esarhaddon, just like his father, chose Nineveh as his capital, but the new palace that he built was “ninety-five large cubits long (and) thirty-one large cubits wide, something none of the kings, my ancestors, had done” and was named “The palace that administers everything.”37 Unfortunately, this palace, which is very well-known thanks to a detailed description of his building in the royal inscriptions, was not discovered by the archaeologist who excavated Nineveh.38 However, Esarhaddon’s palace and Sennacherib’s armory were recently discovered by accident at Tell Nebi Yunus, the smaller mound at Nineveh. In July 2014, the terrorist organization Daesh blew up a mosque that was located on this hill above a Nestorian church dating from the sixth century BCE and the supposed tomb of the prophet Jonah.39 Under these monuments the remains of the palace of Esarhaddon were uncovered. The terrorists dug a system of tunnels looking for archaeological remains to sell on the black market. When the Iraqi army reconquered the city in January 2017, Layla Salih, curator of antiquity at the Mosul Museum, with a team of Iraqi archaeologists, drew up a first inventory of the site. Then a team of archaeologists from Heidelberg with Peter Miglus and Stefan Maul was commissioned by the Iraqi government to explore the tunnel system. They discovered four winged bulls at the entrance of the palace, a relief representing four women facing frontward, a slab with an inscription of Esarhaddon mentioning the rebuilding of Babylon, several pottery vessels and various objects, and finally the king’s throne room, the largest in the Assyrian Empire with a length of 55 meters. Hopefully, the excavations of this site will soon be resumed, thereby enabling a comparison to be made between the remains of the palace and its description in the royal inscriptions. Esarhaddon is mentioned in numerous publications, books, and articles. Every general history of Mesopotamia or Assyria includes short studies on this king, for example those written by Albert Kirk Grayson and Eckart Frahm.40 The oldest history on this king was E. A. Wallis Budge’s book entitled The History of Esarhaddon (Son of Sennacherib) King of Assyria, B.C. 681–668, published in London in 1880.41 In fact, this book focused on the then-known royal inscriptions, based on Henry Cresswick Rawlinson’s books, which did not always indicate the sources used.42 Later, the main books were those written by R. F. Harper in 1888, Vincent Scheil in 1914, Hans Hirschberg in 1931, Riekele Borger in 1956, Donald John Wiseman in 1958, Simo Parpola and Kazuko Watanabe in 1988, Barbara Nevling Porter in 1993, and Erle Leichty in 2011.43 Some other books are devoted to a specific historical phase of Esarhaddon’s reign.44 My purpose in this book is to study, for the first time, the history of Esarhaddon’s reign in its political, military, social, economic, religious, ideo­ logical, technical, and artistic aspects. As in my three previous books on Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, and Sennacherib, the present tome is a history of

6

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Esarhaddon’s reign, including a biographical essay on this king. Just like the history surrounding Sennacherib, that of Esarhaddon’s reign is well documented as regards his family background, his childhood and youth, together with the period when he was crown prince before he ascended the throne. The abundance and variety of sources, and the numerous letters of the persons responsible for watching over him enable us to propose a comprehensive assessment of the psychological factors that shaped the king’s character and influenced his approach to politics.45 As in my previous books, my methodology consists in adapting to the specific topic of the book and to the available sources.46 It is multidisciplinary and remains closely in-line with the source documents. A partial summary is usually given at the end of each chapter. The present book is built around decisive events and determining facts, selected from a massive amount of data. I have presented both the interpretations that seemed to me the most plausible as well as alternative ones, which are either discussed in the text or presented in the notes. Sometimes, given the current state of research, I was unable to choose between various hypotheses. Esarhaddon’s period as crown prince has already been analyzed in my previous book47 and is therefore less developed here. Several issues are raised in this book and, whenever possible, answered: What were Esarhaddon’s qualities and skills? What were his shortcomings? What were the consequences of his illness on his life? What was his relationship with his father? How did he react to Sennacherib’s murder? Did he avenge him? Why did he rebuild Babylon? What were his relations with the diviners and exorcists? Was he influenced by his mother Naqiʾa? Did he have a clear plan or program at the beginning of his reign, or did he simply respond to various challenges in different areas as and when they arose? What did he attempt to achieve, and how did he go about fulfilling his objectives? When did he have the conquest of Egypt in mind? Why did he inaugurate his succession with a double kingship? What can be said of his personal evolution during his reign? In what areas can it be said that he succeeded or, conversely, failed? As is usual in a biography, chapter 1 (“The Portrait of Esarhaddon”) strives to elucidate the king’s personality through his inscriptions: his name, his physical portrait, his age, his family, his childhood, his youth, and his character. To what extent is this attractive image true or distorted by propaganda? Chapter 2 (“Esarhaddon, the Crown Prince”) investigates the period during which the king was crown prince, the date of his selection to succeed Sennacherib, his functions and his actions, and his relationship with his father. Chapter 3 (“His Accession to the Throne”) explains the basis on which Esarhaddon managed to succeed his father to the throne and the neutralization of his opponents. Chapter 4 (“Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh”) analyzes their role during his reign and their relations with the king and his mother.



Introduction

7

Chapter 5 (“The Rebuilding of Babylon and Other Building Activities”) explains why Esarhaddon decided to rebuild Babylon and how he financed and directed the rebuilding operation. It also examines all the building projects initiated by this king. In chapters 6 and 7, the book follows a chronological order, as far as possible, mainly based on the various texts of the annals. Chapter 6 (“The First Phase of Campaigns [680–675]”) analyzes the campaigns that he conducted to bring a military solution to the problems encountered in various parts of the empire. Chapter 7 (“The Second Phase of Campaigns [674–669]”) is mainly devoted to the conquest of Egypt and to the Assyrian conspiracies. Chapter 8 (“The Problem of Succession”) treats the difficult issue of succession and the original solution chosen by Esarhaddon. Chapter 9 (“The End of Esarhaddon’s Reign”) focuses on the last years of Esarhaddon’s reign, with the third campaign against Egypt and the king’s death. Finally, the book concludes with an assessment of his contributions to the evolution of the Assyrian Empire as compared with the state it was in 681 (“An Assessment of Esarhaddon’s Reign”). At the end of the book, readers’ aids are provided: a selected bibliography for each chapter; an index of the ancient texts mentioned; an index of the personal names cited, each of them followed by a brief comment and dates for situating them both in a diachronic and synchronic perspective; an index of modern authors cited is also listed. Two maps, pointing to the geographical terms mentioned in the text of the book, when the location is known, are also provided. A chronology of Esarhaddon’s reign is also provided.

Chapter One A Portrait of Esarhaddon 1.1. His Physical Portrait Like Sennacherib, the previous king,1 there exist very few representations of Esarhaddon. This is due to the fact that his palace of Nineveh was unknown until its discovery in 2017, unearthed by Iraqi archaeologists after the dynamiting of the mosque and the tomb of Jonah on the Tell Nebi Yunus in Mosul in 2014.2 Hopefully the situation will evolve further when the University of Heidelberg, which is in charge of the excavations, will be able to realize them, assuming of course that the palace reliefs have not been looted or destroyed by members of Daesh. Esarhaddon is represented, for example, on steles from Zincirli and Til Barsip.3 He was also possibly represented on a fragment of a bronze relief, followed by his mother Naqiʾa (label on the figure), on a cuboid monument and on clay prisms, although reduced in size.4 The clearest representation is that of the Zincirli stele, even though it is partially broken. The king is standing, holding a conical object in his raised right hand. In his left hand, he holds his scepter and the extremities of two ropes. These ropes were used for holding two prisoners, with a ring piercing their nose. The identification of the prisoners is discussed below. Esarhaddon’s costume consists of a long dress reaching down to the ankles, with the outer edge fringed and bordered by a band of rosettes. It is impossible to see whether it was embroidered, as it is covered with the inscription and hence is not visible. Over this dress he wore a mantle, with the outer edge fringed, and also bordered by a band of rosettes, which exposes his muscular forearms, ornamented with two arm bangles, one of them decorated with rosettes.5 He wears low embroidered sandals on his feet. His headdress consists of a tall, conical cap, flat at the top and surmounted by a smaller pointed tip; it is covered with five bands, three of them decorated with rosettes; one or two long ribbons, with two bands of rosettes and fringed, are pending at the rear. The features of the king’s face are modeled with precision: full lips topped with a thin mustache, a large, hooked nose, thick eyebrows, heavy eyelids, and front-facing eyes with delineated iris. The styling of his hair and beard is sophisticated, combining ringlets and curls. He wears fine jewelry: arm bangles and small earrings. To the onlooker, his tall stature, accentuated 9

10

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

by his high headdress, compared with the small stature of the two prisoners, no doubt forcefully emphasized his status. Esarhaddon’s representation is not a realistic portrait but the conventional image of an Assyrian king, similar to those of his predecessors, the result being that it was difficult to identify him. Hence, how could the Assyrians recognize each of their kings? The key to this question lies in the inscription engraved on the royal representation or the place where it was located: for example, in Esarhaddon’s palace at Nineveh. In any case, even if there were to have been numerous representations of this king, they would not provide us with sufficient information about his real physical portrait. But the representations probably show an idealized image of how he wanted to be seen and how he possibly saw himself, when in reality his skin disease (see §1.4) must have partly altered his appearance.

1.2. His Name and Family The Akkadian name of Esarhaddon was Aššūr-aḫu-īddina, which meant “Ashur has given a brother,” with a rare variant Aššūr-aḫḫē-iddina, “Ashur has given brothers.”6 An esoteric interpretation of this name has also been proposed: “Ashur is the whole of the One” or “Ashur is both All and One.”7 His name was relatively common and had nothing to do with the royal names because, at the outset, Esarhaddon was a younger son, not highly placed in the line of succession and therefore not destined to become king.8 When, unexpectedly his father overlooked his older sons and appointed Esarhaddon as heir apparent, another more appropriate name was assigned: Aššūr-etel-ilāni-mukīn-apli, “Ashur, prince of the gods, is the one who established the heir.” Although this name was more appropriate, it was cumbersome and therefore little used, both when he was crown prince and when he was king.9 The usual name of Esarhaddon was translated ʾsrḥdn in Hebrew,10 ʾsrḥʾdn in Aramaic, Ἀσαραδινος and Ἀξερδις in Greek.11 According to a document from Nineveh dated to about 670 BCE, it was forbidden to give the name of the king to a commoner because it would have been considered a taboo and a sacrilege.12 However, Esarhaddon was not his assigned name as king and therefore was sometimes used for commoners.13 Esarhaddon was the son of Sennacherib, king of Assyria (704–681) as is mentioned in several inscriptions, but he was not the legitimate heir, as he himself recognized: “I am my older brothers’ youngest brother.”14 He had six brothers whose names are known. Ashur-nâdin-shumi was Sennacherib’s eldest son but he was named king of Babylon in 700 BCE and killed by the Elamites in 694.15 His second-eldest son was Ashur-ilî-muballissu, called māru tardennu, “second son.”16 Other sons were Ashur-shumu-ushabshi, Nergalshumu-ibni (restored name), Nabû-sharru-usur (śrʾṣr in the Bible),17 and Urdu-



Chapter 1: The Portrait of Esarhaddon

11

Mullissu (possibly ʾdrmlk in the Bible), who was to be the murderer of his father and was crown prince for a time.18 Esarhaddon, whose mother was Naqiʾa, was probably her eldest surviving son or perhaps her only son, as she did everything to help him become the crown prince. Her Aramaic name meant “pure,” and her Akkadian name was Zakûtu. Her bilingual name suggests she may have come from outside Assyria proper, and was possibly of Syro-Palestinian or a Babylonian origin.19 Esarhaddon’s paternal grandparents are known. His grandfather was Sargon II, who reigned from 722 to 705 as is attested by many of his inscriptions: “I am Esarhaddon … son of Sennacherib, king of the world (and) king of Assyria, descendant of Sargon, king of the world (and) king of Assyria.”20 His paternal grandmother could have been Raimâ, “beloved.”21 Only one of Esarhaddon’s sisters is known by name: Shadditu. She is referred to as “daughter of Sennacherib and sister (or half-sister) of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria.”22 She was probably Naqiʾa’s daughter because she is the only known sister of Esarhaddon and she was clearly considered part of the royal family in 672. Protective rituals were performed on her behalf and she was probably married to the Egyptian Shoshenq.23 Esarhaddon mentions the origin of his dynasty several times in his inscriptions: “(I am) the royal descendant of the eternal line of Bêl-bâni, son of Adasi, founder of the kingship of Assyria, who[se] place of ultimate origin is Baltil (Assur).”24 These kings are mentioned in the list of Assyrian kings of the paleo-Assyrian period: Adasi (ca. 1700) and Bêl-bâni (ca. 1700–1691).25 Esarhaddon had a wife whose name, Esharra-hammat, is written on an agate eye stone and in her epitaph on a gypsum block.26 Yet he probably had several other wives because Assyrian kings practiced a tradition of polygamy and he had numerous children. He had at least nineteen sons, nine of whose names are known.27 Some of them probably suffered from fragile health like their father. His eldest son was Sîn-nâdin-apli, “Sîn has given the heir,” who normally should have succeeded him, but he probably died a short time after his designation. His second son was Shamash-shumu-ukîn, who became king of Babylon.28 His third son was possibly Shamash-mêtu-uballit, “Shamash has resurrected the dead,” this name reflecting a fragile health situation that did not predispose him to reign. His fourth son was Ashurbanipal who succeeded him as king of Assyria.29 He also had daughters, two of whose names are known: Sherua-etirat who played a role at court, and Sharrat-shamshi.30

1.3. His Childhood The approximate date for Esarhaddon’s birth is probably around 720, given what we know about the dates of his ancestors: his father Sennacherib was around forty in 705, when he ascended the throne, and therefore was born in

12

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

around 745.31 I have proposed dating his grandfather Sargon’s birth to around 770 or at least 760.32 Therefore, Esarhaddon was approximately fifteen years old when his grandfather died in 705 and forty years old when his father died in 681. Information on his childhood is scanty. Where did he spend it? Was he born in Nimrud (Kalhu) where his grandfather Sargon was living before settling in his new capital Khorsabad from 710 to 705? However, when his father Sennacherib was designated crown prince in around 721, he was obliged to reside, at least for part of the time, in Nineveh, where the “House of Succession” (bīt rēdûte) was located, just as Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal, who mentioned that this residence was devoted to crown princes,33 did subsequently. Therefore, Esarhaddon was possibly born and lived in Nineveh during his childhood. The House of Succession was situated on the site of the later south palace of Ashurbanipal, still called bīt rēdûte.34 When Sennacherib became king, he built his palace in Nineveh, on the tell of Kuyunjik.35 Therefore, Esarhaddon probably spent his childhood in Nineveh. His education was not that of a future crown prince because, being a younger son and according to protocol, he was not destined to become a king prior to 683. He was therefore educated alongside the other royal children. He probably received the usual Assyrian education, namely, that of a scribe, learning the Sumerian and Babylonian languages, and some elements of arithmetic. It is possible that he followed the “second cycle” of studies, including the art of divination because he was very interested in and knowledgeable about this subject. When he was chosen by his father to be crown prince in 683, it was probably at that moment that he started to complete his education as a future king.

1.4. His Personality The numerous inscriptions referring to this king ought normally to provide information on his personality. However, for various reasons they need to be examined with a critical eye: they were written by royal scribes, even if their inspiration began with the king; they used stereotypical formulas because they were based on the reuse of preexisting texts. In most cases they were dominated by propaganda, the objective being to present Esarhaddon as surpassing all other kings owing to his exceptional qualities. He is sometimes viewed as crazy and fanatical. His behavior can be explained in part by his personality but, primarily, by his chronic disease. This disease is difficult to identify. Esarhaddon himself asked his doctor Urdu-Nanâia about it: “Why did not you diagnose the nature of my illness and give me proper treatment?”36 From the numerous inscriptions related to this subject, it seems to be lupus erythematosus diseminatus. The symptoms described in the letters of doctors and diviners seem to correspond to this disease: fever, muscle weakness, lack



Chapter 1: The Portrait of Esarhaddon

13

of appetite, inflammation of the joints, eye disease, a rash, swelling, chills, earaches, and alternating episodes of crisis and remission. The treatments prescribed to the king were lotions and poultices to reduce fever, balms to protect the skin, rest, and an appropriate diet, not forgetting the magical cures. This disease could explain some of Esarhaddon’s bouts of irrational behavior. His health deteriorated increasingly as time went on. He suffered acutely and rashes were visible on his limbs and probably also on his face. His psyche was also affected, with depressive periods during which he isolated himself, forcing him to be inactive. His disease can explain, at least partly, his very pronounced superstitious behavior and his addiction to astrology and magic. In some letters, he appeared to be neurotic and paranoid. However, independently of his disease, he had an anxious and superstitious character and he experienced a feeling of insecurity. Because of the infamous death of his grandfather Sargon, left without burial, and the sacrilege committed by his father Sennacherib when destroying Babylon, he was weighed down by a feeling of guilt. Since the gods overwhelmed him with misfortunes, he believed that they were punishing him for the sins of his ancestors as well as his own. He was easily influenced by his father, by his mother, and by the diviners and astrologers. Esarhaddon also displayed, just as had his predecessors, excessive pride and had a high opinion of himself: “I am almighty, I am lordly, I [am] proud, […] I am [important], I am glorious, (and) [I have no] equ[al] among the kings.”37 His kingship was unrivaled; he attained everything he wanted. He detailed with pleasure the qualities associated with his intelligence given to him by the gods: “capable, able, intelligent, learned”; “of fine intellect”; “[knowledgeable], expert, and cautious.”38 He considered he had received “the great intelligence (and) the vast understanding” from the god Nudimmud, and that he had learned from all the experts.39 He was the “wise prince expert who knows every craft.”40 He was interested in the knowledge of his time and he had many tablets copied for the library of Nineveh. The cult of his image allowed him to be represented at different places throughout his empire, and on steles bearing his image as a majestic and all-powerful king during his campaigns. These steles were placed in conspicuous locations, such as along passageways: at Zincirli and Til Barsip in northern Syria, at El-Ghâb near the Orontes River, at Qaqun in central Israel, and at Nahr el-Kalb, north of Beirut.41 These stele are sometimes mentioned in his inscriptions, for example, that of Zincirli: “I had a stele written in my name made and I had inscribed upon it the renown (and) heroism of the god Ashur, my lord, (and) the might of my deeds which I had done with the help of the god Ashur.”42

14

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

He presented himself as a valiant warrior: “foremost of all rulers; who marched freely from the rising sun to the setting sun and has no rival (therein).”43 He was devoted to his conquests just like his predecessors, with the exception of his father Sennacherib, who was more interested in inventions than in military conquests. He boasted of his “heroic strength (and) robust force … fierceness, splendor, and terror.”44 He wanted to portray himself as a warlord who raged like a lion and swooped like an eagle: “Like a furious eagle, my wings were spread before [my army] (and) I was marching like the flood.”45 He boasted of his formidable resistance, even in winter: “I was not afraid of the snow (and) cold of Shabâtu (February), the severest cold season.”46 Such resistance is surprising, given his bad state of health; this campaign probably occurred between two crises of his disease. Esarhaddon revealed his vindictive character when he decided to avenge his father’s murder: he was a “majestic dragon … fearless in battle, [perfect] war[rior, merciless in combat] … raging lion, avenger of (his) father.47 He attributed to himself some of the traditional titles signifying that he ruled over the whole world: “king of the world”(šar kiššati), “king of the four quarters” (šar kibrat arbaʾi), emphasizing his greatness and power: “great king” (šarru rabû), “strong king” (šarru dannu).48 He was the first Assyrian king who, after 670, was to add on a new title: “king of Egypt.” However, when he boasted of having conquered “Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt, and Kush,”49 it was only propaganda as, in reality, he conquered neither Upper Egypt nor Kush, but only Lower Egypt. According to the tradition, he presented all his campaigns as being victorious because unsuccessful campaigns would have been considered by his subjects as a strong indication that he was no longer favored by the gods.50 Esarhaddon, unlike his father Sennacherib who had been crown prince for fifteen years, was not experienced in governing when he ascended the throne: he was crown prince for only three years, but as he was around forty years old, he had adequate maturity. He was a king of truth and justice because his wars, supported by Ashur, were deemed to be just. He was the king “who loves loyalty and abhors treachery.”51 That is why, for example, he aided Iaʾutâ, king of the Arabs, whom he had placed on the throne, when he was attacked by King Uabu. He also wanted to repair the harm his father had done when he destroyed Babylon. He punished his rebellious brothers by exterminating their offspring.52 Esarhaddon’s descriptions of atrocities do not appear to express acts of sadism, but he felt he was entitled to punish and mistreat his enemies and to spare those who were not guilty. He quoted what seems to be a proverb: “Before he (comes) it is a city, when he leaves it is a tell.”53 For example, in front of the city of Uppume, his troops “built towers of skulls.”54 Severed heads was a topic that had always attracted attention, and was an indispensable element in Assyrian warfare. There are only a few descriptions



Chapter 1: The Portrait of Esarhaddon

15

of atrocities in Esarhaddon’s inscriptions; furthermore, they fall far short of the complacent and sadistic descriptions of Ashurnasirpal II. Yet Esarhaddon, like his predecessors, did employ the rhetoric and tactics of intimidation, a kind of psychological warfare in the modern sense of the term, inaugurated by Tiglathpileser III.55 However, he primarily used classic warfare. He also had an efficient spy system, inherited from his predecessors. What kind of relations did he have with his troops? No such detail can be gleaned from Esarhaddon’s inscriptions, and part of the time, the Assyrian army was not led by the king anyway, but by his officials. However, as was invariably the case, the main incentive to fight must have been the share of expected war spoils.56 As the army was multiethnic, its constituent parts could not plot and form an alliance against the king but probably competed to obtain his favor. His father Sennacherib was a highly innovative ruler who was very skilled in new technical inventions—such as the so-called Archimedes screw, for example—and who was also a great builder. An Assyrian king had to do better than his predecessors, and so Esarhaddon did not want to be outdone, but in this field it was impossible to outdo Sennacherib. Nevertheless, Esarhaddon boasted of having received as a gift from the gods “[(the ability) to create, build, (and) renew,” and enumerated all his achievements in the fields of restoration and building.57 He was also “the one who makes the pasturage (and) watering places flourish.”58 When he described the building of his palace in Nineveh, he expressed a certain style of poetry: “he surrounded the palace with a frieze ‘like a wreath’ and all the gates with an arch and a vault ‘like a rainbow.’”59 It is unknown whether this poetry can be attributed to him or to his scribe. He probably inspired the poetic description of his entry into Nineveh: “The south wind, the breeze of the god Ea, the wind whose blowing is favorable for exercising kingship, blew upon me.”60 He described himself as compassionate toward his enemies when they came before him and kissed his feet. For example, he had pity on Bêl-iqîsha of Gambulu, and on Laialê, king of Iadiʾ, begging for mercy, to whom he said a-ḫu-lap.61 In this phrase, the exclamation expressed compassion, but a precise translation is not yet possible. Esarhaddon, like his father, presented himself as a wise and benevolent king, who “makes good the damages (suffered by) the weak, [holds the ha]nd of the feeble.”62 In other words, he was “the true shepherd who reorganized the confused people (and) made light shine forth for them.”63 In an Akkadian inscription duplicated on several prisms and tablets, he made a true declaration of love to his subjects: “I, Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, love the inhabitants of Baltil like my own precious life (and thus) it occurred to me and my heart prompted me to greatly increase their freedom more than before.”64 This inscription is dated to 679, that is, from the very beginning of his reign (year 2), when he was still enthusiastic about having ascended the throne

16

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

and ready to act for the good of his subjects. It is nonetheless surprising that an absolutist king wanted to offer more freedom to his subjects. In this case, Esarhaddon was innovative compared with his predecessors, but this attitude would not last until the end of his reign. A major aspect of his personality was his religious beliefs. Through all his inscriptions, he followed Assyrian tradition in extolling the role played by his gods, but he was particularly influenced by them. He described himself as pious, reverent, humble, and submissive. Almost all his inscriptions mentioned the gods: Ashur, father of the gods and lord of the lands, then Anu, Enlil, Ea, Sîn, Shamash, Adad, Marduk, Nabû, Nergal, Ishtar, and the Sebitti, and he detailed all their attributes.65 Many other gods are mentioned, such as Zarpanitu, Tashmêtu, Asalluhi, Bêlet-ilî, Kusu, Ningirima, Ningal, etc.66 Esarhaddon had a special relationship with the god Ashur. He fashioned his royal image on the dais of destiny, in which Ashur lived.67 He initiated his campaigns at the command of Ashur, who gave him power and strength, and helped and encouraged him.68 After his campaigns, Esarhaddon sent reports to Ashur— for example, the letter written in 673 after the campaign against Shubria: “I am sending the best report to the god Ashur, my lord.”69 He did not forget to pray to the gods in order to be supported efficiently, and to offer to them gifts and sacrifices. Mostly he prayed to Ashur: “Let me dwell in it (my palace) forever in good health, happiness, bright spirit(s), (and) with the satisfaction of growing old, and let me be seated with its splendor.”70 But several long prayers are also addressed to Marduk and Zarpanitu following the partial restoration of Babylon: “let (my) kingship be sustaining to the people for ever … so that I may shepherd their populace in truth and justice; (and) let me reach old age, attain extreme old age.”71 He also implored Sîn and Shamash to “discuss with one another (my) reaching extreme old age, the abundance [of] (my) offspring, the increase of my progeny.”72 From his childhood, he trusted in all the great gods, in particular Ashur, Sîn, Marduk, Nergal, and Ishtar, who allowed him to attain his desire, over whom they extended their protection, and whom they elevated to the kingship.73 He recorded all that he did for the gods, as evidenced by his commitment to bring cult centers to completion, to restore the destroyed temples of Babylon, and to refurbish and fashion images of the gods. He knew exactly how to maintain good relations with the gods because he “constantly established appropriate procedures in the great cult centers (and) has purification rites performed correctly.”74 He consulted the gods through the diviners and astrologers for every action taken in his life so as to be able to always act in a favorable month, on a propitious day, in accordance with their command.75 He showed a real addiction to diviners, partly owing to his disease, partly to his superstitious, anxious, and suspicious character.



Chapter 1: The Portrait of Esarhaddon

17

However, despite his disease, he fathered many children, some of them still infants when he died, and despite the many flaws of his character, he managed to extend the Assyrian Empire substantially.

1.5. Propaganda Propaganda is traditionally an important element in the ideology of Assyrian kings. It was expressed through the royal inscriptions or through the representations of the king, mainly on the reliefs of the royal palace. Unfortunately, in the case of Esarhaddon, there are very few royal images because his palace has not yet been excavated. However, propaganda through images is evidenced in the steles erected by the king in conspicuous locations throughout his empire.76 In the royal inscriptions, propaganda is largely expressed in a variety of ways. First, he accumulated the titles that he obtained during his reign. In addition, after his titles, he detailed with pleasure his real or supposed qualities, some of them being quite excessive, such as “raging lion” or “flying eagle.”77 He compared himself with his predecessors in order to prove that he had no equal among all the kings. He did better and went further, in new countries unknown to them: “Who can rival me in kingship? Moreover, who among the kings, my ancestors, was there whose dominion was as great as mine? From the midst of the sea, my enemies spoke thus: ‘Where can the fox go to get away from the sun?’”78 By using this proverb, he did not lack pretension in comparing himself to the sun. He boasted of dominating the whole world by marching freely from the rising sun until the setting sun, and by making all the rulers bow down at his feet. His kingship was the most glorious and his name the greatest of all kings’ names.79 In the royal inscriptions, which are distorted by propaganda, one must identify the false information. For example, Esarhaddon boasted of having reached “the land of the distant Medes … upon the soil of whose land none of the kings, my ancestors, had walked.”80 However, his father Sennacherib had already written: “the distant Medes, whose name no one among the kings, my fathers, had (ever) heard.”81 In reality, the Medes were well attested in Assyrian sources from the late ninth century onwards—for example, during Shalmaneser III’s reign.82 When Esarhaddon boasted of having conquered Egypt himself, it was a wholly false piece of information because, as we shall see later, the Assyrian army was then led by one of his officials, probably Ashur-nasir, the chief eunuch.83 During the rebuilding of Esharra, the temple of the god Ashur in Assur, and Esagil, the temple of Marduk in Babylon, he described himself as carrying a basket of clay: “I raised a basket onto my head and carried (it) by myself.”84 However, on a clay tablet from Nineveh describing the renovation of Esagil in Babylon, this sentence does not appear. During the rebuilding of

18

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Esharra, he presented himself as laying the first stone: “For the preservation of my life and the lengthening of my days, I carried the first brick on my neck and (then) laid its foundations (and) secured its brickwork.”85 He also utilized another, traditional propagandistic motif—that of the Assyrian king felling cedars. He roofed the temple of the god Ashur “with magnificent cedar beams, grown on Mount Sir[âra], which I had cut down in the course of a campaign of mine.”86 Mount Sirâra is thought to lie south of the Anti-Lebanon range, or is perhaps Mount Hermon.87 This event could have occurred in 677, for example, during the Assyrian campaign against Sidon. However, Esarhaddon’s boast may not be authentic as large beams of cedar and cypress from Mount Sirâra and Mount Lebanon were in fact brought to Assyria by the twenty-two kings of Hatti (see §5.6 and §9.1) and from “Across the River” (that is, Transeuphratene).88 In short, Esarhaddon wanted to project an image of himself as intelligent, able, learned, expert, cautious, wise, valiant, just, compassionate, and, above all, pious. We shall now have to see whether this image corresponded to reality.

Chapter Two Esarhaddon, the Crown Prince 2.1. His Designation as Crown Prince Esarhaddon was designated as crown prince by his father Sennacherib.1 His exact title is mentioned in one of his inscriptions, a clay cylinder from Nineveh: mār šarri rabû ša bīt redûte (DUMU LUGAL GAL-u ša É ri-du-u-ti), “the eldest son of the king, who (resides in) the House of Succession.”2 In another undated inscription on a small stone lion head from Sippar or Nineveh, attributed to Sennacherib or Esarhaddon, he is called mār šarri rabû (DUMU-šú GAL).3 This gift was probably offered to him after his official nomination as heir designate. The mention “eldest son” is a falsehood as he was in fact Sennacherib’s youngest son. The title mār šarri alone literally meant “king’s son” or “prince in general,” but also “crown prince.” This last was always the meaning in letters, reports, and administrative texts.4 Conversely, the other sons of the king were usually referred to by their names only. Together with his title of crown prince in the clay cylinder inscription mentioned above, Esarhaddon bore the name Ashuretel-ilâni-mukîn-apli, “Ashur, prince of the gods, is establishing an heir.”5 This name was given to him by his father when he designated him as his heir. The procedure for appointing a crown prince was inaugurated by Tiglath-pileser III and systematized by Sargon II and Sennacherib.6 However, the designation of Sennacherib as crown prince by Sargon was easy, whereas that of Esarhaddon by Sennacherib was much more complicated. Moreover, we lack documents providing details about it. The first difficulty emanates from the fact that Sennacherib seems to have designated successively several of his sons as crown prince. Logically, the first son designated as crown prince should have been Ashur-nâdin-shumi, his eldest son. However, Andrew Knapp questions this interpretation by putting forward two arguments: first, he would have been too old to succeed his father when the time came; second, Sennacherib would not have elevated him to rule over Babylon if he was crown prince.7 Although his age is unknown, he was obviously much younger than his father. Concerning the decision to put him on the throne of Babylon, this was made years later and as an emergency solution. He could not be king of Babylon and crown prince of Assyria at the same time, 19

20

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

and after his capture and disappearance in 694, he obviously could no longer be crown prince. Sennacherib probably wanted to settle the succession issue and make a permanent arrangement after 700 or at least after 694. Six texts from the archive of the astrologer Aplâia, although partly damaged, seem to refer to Urdu-Mullissu as crown prince; these texts are dated to 698 to 692.8 The fact that he swore an oath of fealty to Esarhaddon, the new crown prince, does not mean that he was not the previous crown prince, but that he had no other choice but to swear this oath.9 Four other texts concerning royal charioteers, dated to 694 to 693, could indicate that Nergal-shumu-ibni, another son of Sennacherib, was also crown prince.10 This would imply that he was crown prince of Babylonia while Urdu-Mullissu was crown prince of Assyria.11 In support, we have a parallel situation in the appointment of Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shumuukîn by Esarhaddon as crown princes of Assyria and Babylonia respectively.12 In short, Ashur-nâdin-shumi was possibly designated as crown prince some time between 705 and 700. Then at least from 698, Urdu-Mullissu was probably appointed crown prince of Assyria. It has to be confirmed whether Nergal-shumu-ibni was appointed crown prince of Babylonia in 693. Even in the absence of information on the crown prince during the following years, we may suppose that there was no change. Therefore, when did Esarhaddon in turn become crown prince, either of Assyria or of both Assyria and Babylonia? It has been suggested that the nomination of Esarhaddon took place in Nisannu (April) 683 or in 682.13 This suggestion is based on two texts concerning Seʾmadi, who is named as village manager of the crown prince: the first (no. 109), dated to 683, and the second (no. 110), dated to the sixteenth of Addaru (March) 681, twelve (or two) days before Esarhaddon’s accession.14 The following text (no. 111) of Seʾmadi, dated to Tashrîtu (October) 680, no longer mentions his title of village manager of the crown prince.15 This change has been interpreted to mean that Esarhaddon’s title was omitted because he had become king of Assyria and was no longer crown prince. From the above evidence, the most likely time for the appointment of Esarhaddon as crown prince would seem to be 683, and to be more precise, it is even possible to propose the month of Nisannu (April), during the New Year Festival at the Akîtu temple of Ashur. In fact, his appointment could have been connected with the dedication of personnel made by Sennacherib in 683 to the newly built Akîtu temple.16 Two inscriptions, unfortunately undated, are concerned with gifts made by Sennacherib to the crown prince Esarhaddon: golden bracelets, a golden crown, a necklace, arm bangles, and a small stone lion head.17 The designation of Esarhaddon as crown prince is difficult to understand for three main reasons. First, Sennacherib already had a crown prince— probably Urdu-Mullissu, who followed Ashur-nâdin-shumi in the position.



Chapter 2: Esarhaddon, the Crown Prince

21

Second, Esarhaddon was his youngest son and was therefore not in line to become crown prince. Third, he had a chronically debilitating illness, which was possibly already visible at that time, and an Assyrian king had to be in good health.18 Esarhaddon himself felt the need to justify his father’s abnormal choice in what is called his “apology,”19 a literary genre justifying or defending an action. The date of this text has been debated. It was added as an introduction to a later text dated to 673. The apology was probably written at the beginning of Esarhaddon’s reign since he holds only a few titles in it and since the place where his brothers had taken refuge is not indicated and thus was not yet known.20 In it he recognizes that he is his “older brothers’ youngest brother” and thus not in line to inherit the throne. If Sennacherib married Naqiʾa in the decade 720–710 BCE, Esarhaddon would have been around thirty years old or slightly older in 683.21 In the apology, Esarhaddon claimed that the decision to make him crown prince was inspired by the gods Ashur, Sîn, Shamash, Bêl, Nabû, Ishtar of Nineveh, and Ishtar of Arbela. Through divination, Sennacherib questioned the gods Shamash and Adad concerning his decision to elevate Esarhaddon above his older brothers. It was more a tamītu than a query to Shamash alone as it was addressed to both Shamash and Adad, copatrons of divination.22 “They answered him with a reliable positive response, saying: ‘He is your replacement’” (an-nu ke-e-nu i-pu-lu-šu-ma um-ma šu-ú te-nu-u-ka).23 One other passage in Esarhaddon’s inscriptions used this kind of direct speech by the gods to the king, presented as a quotation of a divine message.24 These are the first instances in the Assyrian royal inscriptions in which a divine message is presented in direct speech.25 The formulation reflected the style in which the responses to the inquiry were communicated orally by the haruspices.26 Tomoo Ishida compares the succession narrative of Esarhaddon with that of Solomon.27 Both placed great emphasis on their father’s designation of them as royal successors, thereby implying their inferior position in the order of succession. Beyond the divine explanation, what was the true reason for Sennacherib’s choice? Most authors consider that he was influenced by Naqiʾa, possibly his second wife, who wanted to boost her son, even if he was the youngest of his father’s sons and therefore had no right to the throne.28 However, Sarah C. Melville does not consider that Naqiʾa was entirely responsible for Sennacherib’s choice because her important role, well documented during the reigns of her son Esarhaddon and her grandson Ashurbanipal, is less known for the period of Sennacherib’s reign.29 Simo Parpola considered that Esarhaddon was chosen to be the crown prince because he was possibly the only son born after the usurped accession of Sargon, while his elder brothers had been born prior to it.30 Though, in truth, it was not a usurpation, since Sargon, just like his predecessor

22

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Shalmaneser V, was Tiglath-pileser’s son, and so belonged to the same dynasty.31 In particular, because of the important role played by Naqiʾa from the beginning of Esarhaddon’s reign, it seems likely that she already influenced Sennacherib in deciding to designate Esarhaddon as crown prince. A combination of factors probably explain the king’s decision. Esarhaddon undoubtedly also played a role in this decision. He seems to have had a “messianic” dimension, being regarded as the legitimate heir by the diviners and raised by his divine mother, the goddess Mullissu.32 Moreover, the name of his human mother Naqiʾa (“pure,” “innocent”) points to one name of the goddess, meaning that in the eyes of the diviners, he was the god-chosen Assyrian king who would defeat the forces of evil, restore order, and save the empire. Sennacherib must have been aware of the trouble his decision provoked, and he decided to contain it by imposing an oath of loyalty. According to Esarhaddon’s apology, after having received the approval of the gods, Sennacherib gathered together all the people of Assyria, his sons and his family. Even Urdu-Mullissu, the previous crown prince, was bound by this oath: “Before the gods Ashur, Sîn, Shamash, Nabû, (and) Marduk, the gods of Assyria, the gods who live in heaven and netherworld, he made them swear their solemn oath(s) concerning the safe-guarding of my succession.”33 A very fragmentary treaty found in the excavations of Assur is probably the text of this very succession treaty. From the list of gods appearing in the curse sections, it is likely that the text dates from 683 or 682.34 The name of Sennacherib is preserved but not that of the crown prince. However, it probably concerned the controversial promotion of Esarhaddon: “You shall protect [Esarhaddon, the crown prince designated, and] the other princes [whom Sennacherib, king of Assyria, had presen]ted to you.”35 At that point in time, there was probably only one crown prince and not one for Assyria and one for Babylonia as in the last period of Sennacherib’s reign, because there is no mention of this fact, either in Esarhaddon’s apology or in the treaty.

2.2. The Opposition to Esarhaddon The succession treaty was followed by Esarhaddon’s admission into the House of Succession (bīt redûte), described by him in his inscriptions: “In a favorable month, on a propitious day, in accordance with their sublime command (of the gods), I joyfully entered the House of Succession, an awe-inspiring place within which the appointing to kingship (takes place).”36 The designation of Esarhaddon as crown prince caused a great deal of internal strife and the most acutely shocked was probably Urdu-Mullissu, especially if he had been crown prince for some fifteen years. Sennacherib was perfectly aware of the trouble that his decision provoked, which explains why he imposed an oath of loyalty.



Chapter 2: Esarhaddon, the Crown Prince

23

However, he felt that he could control the situation because he did not expel his other sons from the capital, letting them stay at the court of Nineveh in close contact with Esarhaddon. The element of surprise must have played a role as the brothers did not react immediately, but prepared their conspiracy over a long two-year period, between Nisannu (April) 683, the date of designation, and Nisannu 681, the date of the crown prince’s departure from Nineveh to a secret location. In his apology, Esarhaddon described the different steps of this period in detail. At first, his brothers felt persecuted and were jealous, and they forsook the will of the gods. As a result, they started plotting evil revenge against the crown prince. Their first action was prolonged and conducted secretly: “they started evil rumors, calumnies, (and) slander about me against the will of the gods, and they were constantly telling insincere lies, hostile things, behind my back.”37 Did they know that Esarhaddon had a chronic illness? According to Simo Parpola, the rumors that were spread by his brothers focused on his illness.38 It was probably not a secret at the court in Nineveh because of the numerous consultations with the doctors, and it could have been visible, at least intermittently. It is possible that he then suffered a bout of illness that would have handicapped him in carrying out his royal functions.39 In any case, be it with or without visible illness, it is always easy to discredit somebody by spreading calumnies and false rumors. The next move taken by his brothers was to try to convince his father to change his mind concerning his choice of crown prince: “They alienated the well-meaning heart of my father from me, against the will of the gods, (but) deep down he was compassionate and his eyes were permanently fixed on my exercising kingship.”40 We must add that his wife Naqiʾa was there to watch over the interests of her son, striving to counteract the negative reports about Esarhaddon that were reaching Sennacherib. She resorted mainly to extispicy, astrology, and oracles to obtain favorable signs for her son. Both Sennacherib and Naqiʾa consulted several oracles because of the seriousness of the situation and the need to acquire a prognostication on the future of the kingship.41 For example, we know from a letter sent to Esarhaddon two months after his accession that Bêl-ushezib, a famous Babylonian astrologer, had supported him.42 Esarhaddon understood that his brothers were capable of anything and were going to stop at nothing to take power. Therefore he turned to the gods Ashur, the main god of Assyria, and Marduk, the main god appropriated from Babylon: “I prayed to (them) … with benedictions, supplications, and expressions of humility, and they accepted my words.”43 In other words, he turned to the priests, both Assyrian and Babylonian, who served as intermediaries between him and the gods.

24

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

2.3. The Departure of Esarhaddon from Nineveh The next step was decided by the gods, that is to say, by the priests who transmitted the orders of the gods: “By the command of the great gods, my lords, they settled me in a secret place away from the evil deeds, stretched out their pleasant protection over me, and kept me safe for (exercising) kingship.”44 In around Nisannu (April) 681, the conspiracy against Esarhaddon had become more serious, and the situation was too dangerous for the crown prince. Under what conditions did Esarhaddon leave Nineveh? Was it an exile or was it a protective measure for the sake of his safety? According to some authors, Esarhaddon would have been exiled because he was temporally in disfavor or even plotting against his father (and finally killing him).45 This hypothesis is unlikely because Sennacherib did not alter his appointment of Esarhaddon as crown prince. It is most logical that he decided to protect the crown prince whom he had chosen by sending him away.46 He was probably supported in his decision by his wife Naqiʾa and by the group of priests favorable to Esarhaddon and his mother. His removal from the court of Nineveh lasted approximately nine months. The “secret place” (ašar niṣirti) where he stayed during this period is not revealed in his inscriptions, and its location has been much debated. One of the places proposed is Harrân in northern Syria, where he could have found a safe haven with family members.47 In the meantime, in Nineveh, the situation was completely chaotic as is described in the royal inscriptions: “Afterwards, my brothers went out of their minds and did everything that is displeasing to the gods and mankind, and they plotted evil, girt (their) weapons, and in Nineveh, without the gods, they butted each other like kids for (the right to) exercise kingship.”48 The disruptiveness of the situation is illustrated, for example, by a document of the “eponymy after Nabû-sharru-usur” dated to the fifth of Ayyâru (May), in 681: in other words, the year had no eponym as the uneasy situation had probably prevented the appointment of a new eponym at the correct time.49 What happened to Naqiʾa during this period? According to some scholars, she wielded a new power, perhaps serving as governor of Babylonia,50 but this theory is not supported.51 According to others, as she had immense influence over Sennacherib, she was given a new religious status that placed her at his side in religious ceremonies, in the context of his religious reform, which is quite possible.52 Esarhaddon’s brothers were at an impasse as they could do nothing against somebody who was absent, and the succession remained unchanged as Sennacherib persisted in his decision. Moreover, the crown prince had supporters in Nineveh, in particular among the diviners and soothsayers who delivered several oracles in his favor.53 As Esarhaddon explained in



Chapter 2: Esarhaddon, the Crown Prince

25

his inscriptions, the gods saw the evil deeds of the conspirators and did not support them. Moreover, “the people of Assyria, who swore by oil and water to the treaty, an oath bound by the great gods, to protect my (right to exercise) kingship, did not come to their aid.”54 Therefore, Esarhaddon’s brothers could achieve nothing by waiting and consequently, they opted for action. Sennacherib was killed on the twentieth day of Tebêtu (January) 681, as indicated in the Babylonian Chronicles: “On the twentieth day of the month Tebêtu, Sennacherib, king of Assyria, was killed in a rebellion. For [twentyfour] years Sennacherib ruled Assyria.”55 Sennacherib’s murder is only alluded to in veiled terms by Esarhaddon: “I … quickly heard of their evil deeds. I said ‘Woe!’ and rent my princely garment, I cried out in mourning.”56 To tear one’s clothes was a sign of despair.

Chapter Three Esarhaddon’s Accession to the Throne 3.1. The Conquest of Power A time lapse of around two months occurred between the murder of Sennacherib on the twentieth of Tebêtu (January) 681,and Esarhaddon’s accession to the throne on the twenty-eighth/eighteenth of Addaru (March).1 What happened during this time? From wherever he had taken refuge, Esarhaddon was undoubtedly in close contact with his mother Naqiʾa and his supporters, and thus was immediately apprised of events in Nineveh. After the assassination of his father, he ceased being passive in the face of these events and moved into action because he had become de facto king. He had to return from where he had been living for the last nine months to the capital of Nineveh. He described a change of attitude, which was immediate according to him, as he “did not hesitate one day (or) two days.”2 In fact, he did not leave for Nineveh until Shabâtu (February), that is to say several days after the assassination, possibly because of the time frame necessary for the news to arrive from Nineveh, some five hundred kilometers distant. He was also obliged to carry out certain preparations for departure though, according to his Apology, he made a pretense of not readying his rear guard, nor checking the assignment of horses harnessed to the yoke, nor preparing his battle equipment, nor stocking up on travel provisions. In reality, he had immediately assembled his army and supporters, since, as the apology tells us, when he confronted his enemies, he had a “mighty battle array.” According to his account, he was not put off by the snow and cold of the severe winter season. His enemies blocked his advance in the land of Hanibalgat, the onetime kingdom of Mitanni. A battle ensued and Esarhaddon was victorious thanks to Ishtar, his protective divinity, and the other gods who came over to his side and marched behind him. The enemy was afraid of his army and became “like crazy women.”3 During his march toward Nineveh, the Assyrians he met on the road rallied to him: “The people of Assyria, who had sworn by the treaty, an oath bound by the great gods, concerning me, came before me and kissed my feet.”4 Esarhaddon then described the attitude of the rebels who were in Nineveh, 27

28

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

when they heard of his advance: “These rebels, the ones engaged in revolt and rebellion … they deserted the army they relied on and fled to an unknown land.”5 According to the Babylonian Chronicles, the rebellion lasted around five weeks: “The rebellion continued in Assyria from the twentieth day of the month of Tebêtu until the second day of the month of Addaru.”6 The disturbances that occurred in Assyria are also referred to in a passage related to the revolt of Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir, governor of the Sealand.7 Most of the time before Esarhaddon’s investiture was probably devoted to crushing the rebellion inside and outside Nineveh. The rebels must have had the support of a large part of Assyrian society. They were probably joined by the royal guard, by the cities profiting from imperial wars, and by all the people to whom traditional royal succession was sacred.8 One wonders why Urdu-Mullissu did not take advantage of the murder of Sennacherib to seize power, as he had planned to do at the outset. It was probably because he had to fight against his brothers, who were also ambitious, and over whom he was unable to assert his influence in order to win this war of succession. When Esarhaddon and his army reached the embankment of the Tigris River, with the help of the gods it managed to cross the wide river successfully. Afterward, Esarhaddon was able to enter into Nineveh: “In Addaru, a favorable month, on the eighth day, the eššēšu-festival of the god Nabû, I joyfully entered Nineveh, my capital city, and I sat happily on the throne of my father.”9 This event is also commemorated in the Bible: “His son (of Sennacherib) Esarhaddon reigned in his place.”10 From the second day of Addaru, when the rebellion was crushed, up until the twenty-eighth/eighteenth day, date of the investiture ceremony, there must have been a fair amount of “cleaning up” to do in Nineveh.11

3.2. The Investiture of the King On the eighth day of Addaru, ten or twenty days after Esarhaddon entered Nineveh, the investiture ceremony took place in Assur.12 Even though Assur (Baltil) was no longer the political capital of the empire, it remained a traditional center, a sacred one, considered the site of the Sargonid dynasty’s ultimate origin.13 Esarhaddon insisted on the fact that the gods had placed him on the throne: “they elevated me to the kingship.”14 He described in euphoric terms what his state of mind was at that moment: “The south wind, the breeze of the god Ea, the wind whose blowing is favorable for exercising kingship, blew upon me. Favorable signs came in good time to me in heaven and on earth.”15 He received from the god Ashur the power “to let (cities) fall into ruins and to (re)populate (them, and) to enlarge Assyrian territory.”16 The investiture



Chapter 3: His Accession to the Throne

29

ceremony is not described in detail in the royal inscriptions, although there could be reference to it in a much-damaged tablet fragment from Nineveh.17 A fragment of a treaty could be related to Esarhaddon’s ascent to the throne.18 The text is very damaged, with only twenty-eight lines partly preserved on the reverse. No reference to it is found in contemporary sources, making it difficult to interpret. It probably belonged to the category of loyalty oaths. The term mamîtu “oath” is employed twice in a lacunary passage. The extant treaty clauses exclusively consist of assurances of loyalty to Esarhaddon. According to Simo Parpola and Kazuko Watanabe, the fact that he was referred to not as “king” but as “my lord” seems to indicate that the treaty was imposed shortly before his accession.19 However, in the list of curses, in the expression “into the presence of god and king,” the god was clearly Ashur and the king was probably Esarhaddon.20 Moreover, the obligation to report to him any criticisms leveled against him by the magnates, governors, and eunuchs implied that he was a king rather than a crown prince. Therefore, it is possible that this loyalty oath was organized at the time of his ascent to the throne or shortly thereafter.

3.3. The King’s Priorities As soon as he ascended the throne, Esarhaddon neutralized all his opponents and punished the supporters of his rebellious brothers very severely: “I sought out every one of the guilty soldiers, who wrongly incited my brothers to exercise kingship over Assyria, and imposed a grievous punishment on them: I exterminated their offspring.”21 At that time, the extermination of the offspring represented one of the worst punishments. For the time being he was unable to capture his brothers and take revenge on them, but probably planned to do so later when it would be possible. Obviously he was shocked by the assassination of his father and by the infamous death of his grandfather. The want of a funeral for the deceased king, as prescribed by tradition, was considered highly inauspicious. His father Sennacherib had been dismayed by his own father’s demise and investigated the nature of Sargon’s sin (or sins), which was considered to have been the cause of his unhappy end.22 A difficult damaged text investigating the sin(s) of Sargon has been attributed by some authors to Esarhaddon, but it has not been included by Erle Leichty as part of Esarhaddon’s inscriptions.23 Sennacherib identified himself at the beginning of the text. He wrote about his father Sargon who, having offended the gods, met an infamous death. He explained that he had decided to determine the nature of this offense by exstispicy in order to avoid his father’s fate. He divided the haruspices into several groups, intending to get answers independently. He found out that Sargon had honored the Assyrian gods at the expense of the gods of Babylonia and in doing so violated a

30

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

divine covenant. He urged his son to reconcile the gods of Babylonia with those of Assyria, but he was prevented by Assyrian scribes from making a statue for Marduk as he had done for Ashur. According to some scholars, this text is a political and propagandistic document drawn up to justify Esarhaddon’s costly and controversial Babylonian policy, which propagated equality between Assyria and Babylonia. According to this view, the text relays a dream, inspired by the spirit of Sennacherib, and transmitted to Esarhaddon. It would be a highly sophisticated literary oeuvre, a type never used before, possibly originating from a member of the haruspex guild: “Altogether, the text is a multilayered, skillfully contrived, almost Machiavellian composition.”24 This interpretation is tremendously over-complicated and lacking any convincing arguments. It is more logical to consider that this text was written during Sennacherib’s reign, as is explicitly mentioned in the inscription, and was an investigation into the sin(s) of Sargon.25 Hence, it has no place in our biography of Esarhaddon. Unlike the Babylonians, who did not care that the Assyrian king had been assassinated given his destruction of Babylon in 689 BCE, Esarhaddon struggled to understand the reasons for Sennacherib’s murder. According to the inscriptions of Ashurbanipal, Sennacherib was killed in his palace in Nineveh, next to the colossi, and he was avenged by the new king, Esarhaddon, some sixteen years after the murder, during the latter’s campaign against Shubria.26 The question as to who murdered Sennacherib has been much debated.27 Simo Parpola was the first author to identify the murderer in a letter dealing with a conspiracy against the king, which had been misunderstood by Leroy Waterman, who edited the letter.28 Historical sources provide several explanations for the murder of the king. In Babylonia and Judah, the murder was probably perceived as a divine punishment imposed by the gods for his misdeeds. Sennacherib was the savage king who had destroyed Babylon and who had conducted a military campaign against Judah.29 He was at one and the same time the executor of divine punishment on behalf of angry gods (Marduk and Yahweh) and the object of divine judgment.30 But what were the true reasons for Sennacherib’s murder? First of all, the conversation has to be situated in the broader context of ancient Near Eastern dynasties, such as those of Egypt and Persia. Regicide and parricide were enabled by the ambiguity of the succession rules, the number of possible heirs, the rivalry between the different wives and family branches, and harem intrigues.31 It is clear that Urdu-Mullissu, although he was not the secondoldest son after Shamash-shumu-ukîn, his deceased brother, did not accept his supplantation by Esarhaddon, his father’s youngest son. The influence of Naqiʾa probably played a role. Esarhaddon was clever enough to obtain the support of the religious circles at the court of Nineveh. He was possibly, or at least pretended to be, of the same political opinions as his father.32 Yet, there



Chapter 3: His Accession to the Throne

31

was a general agreement against Sennacherib: the opposition was led by his other sons, starting with Urdu-Mullissu. Another reason for the murder could have been that the majority of the population regarded his efforts to adapt tradition to the new historical reality of the Assyrian Empire as an offense to the gods and a danger to the existing order.33 What was Esarhaddon’s attitude in the face of his father’s murder? According to Benno Landsberger, he explained it with childish simplicity: Sargon had been punished for neglecting the god Ashur and Sennacherib for his neglect of Marduk.34 Esarhaddon wanted to exorcise the past, as is shown by the stone slab that he set in the floor of the cella of the Ashur temple.35 This slab was inscribed with a text about the “sins” of his forefathers and he used it to prostrate himself before the deity. He needed to provide an explanation for his reversal of his father’s policy toward Babylon. He rewrote the account of the destruction of Babylon, in which he masked the guilt of Sennacherib by accusing the Babylonians of being responsible for the city’s destruction. In his revisionist version Babylon rebelled against Assyria and committed a sacrilege by using the Esagil treasure to pay for Elamite support: “They opened the treasure of Esagil and s[ent] my gift(s)—the silver, gold, (and) precio[us stones that] I had given as presents [to the god Bêl (Marduk) and the goddess Zarpanitu] the property (and) possession(s) of the temple of the[ir] gods—[as a bribe (ṭa-a ͗ -tú)] to Humban-menânu, the king of the land of Elam.”36 Moreover, the Babylonians split into factions, plotting rebellion and forsaking their gods. Therefore, Marduk, their protective god, was very angry at them: “For the overthrow of the land and the destruction of its people he devised evil plans.”37 Esarhaddon accused Marduk of having flooded Babylon in order to punish the Babylonians: “The river Arah[tu, (normally) a river of abun]dance, [turned into a huge] flood like the deluge, (and) [swept (its) waters] destructively across the city, its dwellings, (and) shrines, and turned (them) into ruins.”38 Babylon was not destroyed by Sennacherib but by Marduk using natural elements. The gods were not crushed and Marduk was not taken into captivity by Sennacherib, as he said in his inscriptions, but they decided to leave in order to withdraw their protection of the Babylonians: “The gods and goddesses dwelling in it went up to the heavens.”39 Marduk alone, not Sennacherib, had plotted evil.40 The aim of Esarhaddon was to exonerate his father from any imputation of impiety, by imposing a religious and ahistorical perspective on the destruction of Babylon. It was the fault of the Babylonians and the decision of Marduk. In any event, if Sennacherib was responsible of something, he was acting purely on orders from Marduk.41 In so doing, his actions, deemed impious during his reign, were transformed into pious actions. Even if the Assyrians were not fooled, Esarhaddon intended to rewrite history to sanction his change of policy and to reconcile Assyria and Babylonia, following a pro-Babylonian trajectory.

32

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Moreover, he was distressed by his father’s crimes, and hence was anxious to dissociate himself from them. He tried to minimize and repair them throughout the whole of his reign. In his effort to rehabilitate his father, by discretion, he never mentioned his name: “At that time (or before my time), in the reign of a previous king.”42 In short, when Esarhaddon ascended the throne, his priorities were to neutralize all his opponents, to punish the supporters of his rebel brothers, and to rehabilitate his father’s memory and expiate his crimes. Of course he also wanted to capture his brothers and punish them but he probably did not know their place of refuge at the beginning of his reign.

Chapter Four Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh 4.1. Their Role in the Assyrian Empire Unlike in our modern scientific and Cartesian society where divination is poorly regarded, in the Assyrian Empire it was considered to be a science in its own right and played an important role.1 Knowledge was then divided into five areas: the art of the scribe and astrologer (ṭupšarrûtu), divination/extispicy (bârrûtu), exorcism (âšipûtu), medicine/therapy (asûtu), and the science of lamentation (kalûtu).2 Divination is well documented in the correspondence between the king and his scholars, and in particular thanks to two books related to divination and astrology concerning the period from 680 to 648 BCE, that is to say, to the period of Esarhaddon’s reign and the beginning of Ashurbanipal’s.3 The fact that hardly any divinatory texts from Sargon’s and Sennacherib’s reigns are available may simply be because they have not yet been brought to light.4 The large number of documents dating from the reign of Esarhaddon could be explained by the king’s state of health and by his interest in this discipline.5 Whether astrology developed in this period to the detriment of divination is subject to debate.6 The king, as well as all Assyrians, wanted to find a lost past or to foresee the future. The gods spoke directly through the mouth of an ecstatic or sent signs that had to be correctly interpreted. The role of the diviner, through his training and experience, was to interpret the signs sent by the gods or question them to receive a precise answer. Besides his own knowledge, he had interpretation manuals at his disposal, which, depending on a given situation (protasis), would give the interpretation of the sign (apodosis). These manuals were completed by explanatory comments. The signs sent by the gods were considered fortuitous omens. For example, abnormal births were compiled in the series Šumma izbu.7 The cities and events of daily life were compiled in the series Šumma âlu.8 Fortuitous omens could also be in the form of meteorological phenomena, the observation of the stars, eclipses, meteors, earthquakes, the behavior of animals, remarks made during extispicy, dreams, and so on. From among the fortuitous omens, scholars 33

34

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

excerpted those that, to them, appeared to have the closest bearing to the king’s gravest concern, often providing elaborate explanations and comments to support their conclusions. Interpreting celestial phenomena was a difficult task, even for the most competent scholars. Faulty observations are attested in the reports. For example, Nabû-ahhê-eriba criticized one of his colleagues by writing to the king: “He who wrote to the king that Venus is visible in the month of Addaru is despicable, a fool and a liar … if he does not know, he should shut up.”9 Scholars criticized those whom they considered to be charlatans providing the king with false information, for example Issâr-shumu-êresh who quoted the following proverb: “The unskilled can frustrate a judge; the ignorant can trouble even the mighty.”10 But even the most competent scholars occasionally had to admit that they could not provide all the answers: “There is absolutely no reference to it.”11 The role of the diviner was to interpret the fortuitous omens, not to dictate behavior, but so that the king could be warned and could act accordingly, in particular by using rituals against particular dangers. The diviner should not just observe the signs; he should also be able to question the gods. The oracular query was known as tamîtu, and was addressed to Shamash and Adad, copatrons of divination: “Shamash, lord of the (oracular) verdict” (Šamaš bēl dīnim), and “Adad, patron of extispicy” (Adad bēl bīri). One of the most frequent methods at that time was the practice of extispicy (nēpešti bārûti).12 Extispicy was used by the Sargonid kings, mainly Esarhaddon, in eliciting divine responses to their queries to determine the advisability of any course of action to be taken, be it in the realm of international diplomacy or in domestic affairs. The extispicy reports are in reality records of autopsies performed on dead sacrificial animals, most of the time a sheep, consisting of observations, rather like those of the modern pathologist, of the physical condition of these animals. The text of the query always started with a prayer to Shamash: “Shamash, great lord, give me a firm positive answer to what I am asking you” (dUTU EN GAL-ú šá a-šal-lu-ka an-nam GI.NA a-pal-an-ni).13 The context is presented, followed by the question. Then a series of exclusion formulas (ezib) served to facilitate questioning and avoid confusion with other subjects. The question was asked again and the diviner requested the god to place in the sacrificed animal signs that he could interpret: “Be present in this ram, [place] (in it) a firm positive answer, [favorable signs], favorable, propitious [omens] by the oracular command of your great divinity, and may I see (them). May (this query) go [to your great divinity], O Shamash, great lord, and may an oracle be given as an answer.”14 The starting point of the haruspex’s inspection during the autopsy of the animal was the liver. Liver models were helpful to the apprentice diviner. A relatively large number of such models have been discovered in Mesopotamia.



Chapter 4: Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh

35

Four markings in particular, which usually appear as creases or fissures on the surface of liver models, were considered parts of the liver. They were known in Akkadian as naplastu/manzānu, padānu, danānu, and šulmu, meaning “station,” “path,” “strength,” and “well-being” respectively.15 The absence of any of these parts, their dislocation from their normal position, or any other abnormality observed by the haruspex led him to make predictions. The count of positive and negative omens was carried out, which made it possible to know whether the overall final omen was favorable or unfavorable. Other parts of the animal are attested in extispicy reports, such as the lungs, the heart, the intestines, the vertebrae, the breast bone, the stomach, and so on. The lungs are the next organ to be examined, some of the most common parts being the “middle finger,” which is the accessory lobe of the right lung, and the “cap,” possibly the apical lobe of the lung. It is recorded that Esarhaddon performed extispicy for selecting between the workshops in Assur, Babylon, and Nineveh for the reconstruction of the Babylonian temples. He placed before the diviners separate lists of craftsmen who should do the work, and they indicated the workshop to use and the craftsmen to perform the work.16 Sometimes, for a potentially controversial affair, the king might ask the diviners for some kind of blind test: for example, they were divided into several groups having no contact one with another, and they had to give independent answers.17 Esarhaddon was very attentive to the signs sent by the gods. He recalled that under the reign of his father, “bad omens occurred in Sumer and Akkad.”18 Conversely, he received “good omens concerning the (re)construction of Esagil.”19 What were the functions of the group of scholars that comprised different specialists at the court of Esarhaddon and throughout other major cities of Assyria and Babylonia? By virtue of their position in charge of divination, they were bound to play an important role in the policy-making decisions of the Assyrian king.20 Despite their total dependence on his royal favor for their position and livelihood, Esarhaddon depended on them to relieve him of his well-attested fears and anxieties. He questioned, disputed, or simply did not understand what had been explained to him by the scholars. However, their main function was not to predict the future and advise him, but to protect him. The expression maṣṣartu ša šarri, used in the reports of the scholars to the king, clearly meant “keep the king’s guard,” referring to their role to protect his person from physical danger but also to prevent him from following a path not recommended by the gods or consciously or unconsciously performing a wrongdoing. They had to answer the king’s questions by examining all the signs sent by the gods. They also had to inform the king of the good and bad (that is, propitious and unpropitious) days so that he would not make any

36

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

mistake. In the event of a problem, they had to practice the corresponding protection rituals.

4.2. Their Influence on the King From Esarhaddon’s reign, the royal archives of Nineveh have yielded a large number of letters written to the king by various people, commonly defined as “scholars” and attached to the court for royal service. It seems that Assyrian scholars preferred using the letter format whereas the Babylonians mostly wrote reports.21 Even if they had a specialization in a specific field, for example, divination and extispicy, this did not exclude knowledge of the others. The chief chanter Urdu-Ea or Bêl-leʾi the exorcist might also make astrological observations, and exorcists were familiar with the hemerologies.22 They were probably educated in ṭupšarrūtu and specialized as the need arose. Another example is Adad-shumu-usur who started his career as a scribe, then became Esarhaddon’s personal exorcist, and ended as an astrologer on the accession of Ashurbanipal.23 The term ummānu, “teacher” or “master,” was applied to practitioners of various disciplines, including diviners, exorcists, astronomers, astrologers, and physicians. The king regularly availed himself of the talents of these specialists and counted them among his most trusted advisors.24 Prophetic oracles enjoyed a second-rank position compared to the work of court scholars. Prophets probably received no training or education at all and were mostly illiterate.25 Therefore their oracles had to be recorded and possibly interpreted by more learned scholars. The king seems to have taken an active interest in the education of his scholars. The Babylonian author of a letter informed the king as follows: “the apprentices whom the king, my lord, entrusted to me have now learned Enūma Anu Enlil.”26 Another fragmentary letter asked the king to authorize a change in the curriculum of apprentice scribes, proposing a more job-oriented training.27 The general character of their education is illustrated by the lists of acquisitions by libraries in Nineveh, which were in different fields of specialization.28 Scholars were dependent on the king’s goodwill for their position and livelihood. They were not well paid if we can judge based on the chief scribe whose financial status was not one to be envied: “The house of the chief scribe is miserable, a donkey wouldn’t go in there!”29 This unpleasant situation explains the use of flattery in the letters written by scholars. However, Urdu-Gula received a mule or an ox and two minas of silver a year and some scholars seem to have enjoyed a certain license with the king, such as the astrologers Balasî and Nabû-ahhêeriba who tried to persuade him to stop fasting because it was unhealthy for him in his weak condition.30



Chapter 4: Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh

37

The scholars sending letters and reports to the king can be divided into two groups.31 Those of the first group, mainly composed of ummāni, belonged to the “inner circle,” mostly residing in Nineveh but not actually at court. In the correspondence, they were invited or summoned to visit the king. For example, the king wrote to Nabû-ahhe-eriba: “Visit me (ina pānīa erba) on the first day I am not occupied.”32 They probably had the privilege of attending royal audiences regularly.33 Some of them seem to have visited the king fairly often to explain their written observations and interpretations. The second group, belonging to the “outer circle,” consisted of less-favored scholars and those who were stationed around the empire in Assyria and Babylonia. Their letters and reports were probably read to the king by lesser-trained scribes or by clerks attached to the court of Nineveh. Balasî wrote without illusions about such scribes. “Maybe the scribe who reads to the king did not understand.”34 Those scholars who were members of the royal court had a special status as they were closer to the king, and consequently could exert greater influence on his decisions.35 The inner circle was often a family affair: members of a few families were looking for positions, having scholarly traditions that could go back at least 250 years. Sargon II had contributed to the rise of court scholars, an initiative that was continued by Sennacherib and reached its apogee during the reigns of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal; they were so important that some of them were sometimes mentioned in royal lists, next to the kings.36 For example, Issâr-shumu-êresh was the grandson of the famous Nabû-zuqupkênu, active from 716 to 683, under Sargon’s and Sennacherib’s reigns.37 His own grandfather, Gabbu-ilâni-eresh, was Ashurnasirpal II’s chief scribe; Adadshumu-usur was also the son of Nabû-zuqup-kênu and the father of Urdu-Gula; Nabû-zeru-leshir was another son of Nabû-zuqup-kênu.38 This highly placed scribal family used its vast erudition to help strengthen and centralize the power of the Assyrian king, possibly working first in Nimrud before moving to Nineveh.

4.3. The Most Influential Scholars According to Simo Parpola, the inner circle at that time consisted of seventeen men engaged in a more or less regular correspondence with the king, all of them Assyrian except for Bêl-ushezib who was Babylonian.39 Some of the most influential scholars of Esarhaddon are well known, such as Adad-shumu-usur, scribe, and then chief exorcist and close confident and advisor of the king. Family connections may have assisted him in his carreer.40 He is best attested by his correspondence with Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal. With over fifty letters surviving, he was by far the most prolific letter writer among all the scholars of Nineveh. He had a distinctive writing style, enabling us to identify

38

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

him as the sender of many damaged letters in which his name is not preserved. He wrote at a high literary level and made a lot of literate puns.41 Adad-shumuusur appears to have had some authority over some of his colleagues; the exorcist Marduk-shakin-shumi had clearly been his subordinate during the reign of Esarhaddon.42 As expected from an exorcist, the majority of Marduk-shumu-usur’s letters deal with the health of the king and of his family, and whatever rituals were necessary for their well-being, particularly the substitute king ritual. One example of his counsel to the king was when he advised him that the crown prince Ashurbanipal should neither ride a horse nor draw a bow. After the king had recovered from an illness, he mentioned counter-spells and rituals to be performed by other persons who had fallen ill. After the crown prince had moved with his family to the bīt rēdûte, “House of Succession,” he was given responsibility for the health of the children living there. He informed the king that he and the staff were working day and night to care for their charges in the House of Succession, he reported on the condition of various patients or indicated the rituals to be performed, for example against an earthquake.43 He gave several pieces of advice related to the substitute king ritual. He also gave Esarhaddon advice regarding his private life: for example, when he was deeply affected by the loss of a child suffering from an incurable disease, he explained that nothing could have saved him, not even if he had given half of his kingdom.44 In order to organize his succession, Esarhaddon asked Shamash whether he should name his eldest son Sîn-nâdin-apli as crown prince, to which he received a positive response.45 But this son disappeared following this consultation. He was then haunted by a question: “Who?,” meaning either who killed him or by whom should he replace him. In another answer, Adad-shumu-usur admitted that the king was right in saying that servants should first taste the drinks served to the crown prince, probably Ashurbanipal. This mistrust could be explained if his eldest son, the first designated heir, was poisoned.46 The exorcist congratulated Esarhaddon on having chosen two of his sons as successors to the thrones of Assyria and Babylonia, a decision that must have been difficult to take because he knew from his own experience that the brothers were potential rivals.47 Adad-shumu-usur was also the author of astrological reports.48 At the beginning of the reign of Ashurbanipal, he seems to have lost his dominance because neither he nor his son Urdu-Gula were summoned to the royal court.49 Issâr-shumu-êresh, son of Nabû-zeru-leshir, was chief scribe and “master” (ummānu) of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal.50 He was also a prolific letter writer with thirty-five letters and thirty-eight reports preserved.51 In particular, he was involved in a complicated story concerning a meeting between Esarhaddon and his son the crown prince Shamash-shumu-ukîn at Nineveh. The king wanted to



Chapter 4: Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh

39

know when this meeting could take place under favorable auspices. It depended on the observation of the planets, in particular Mercury and Venus.52 The king had consulted a scholar whose name is not known, but he had not understood the answer given. Therefore, he questioned Issâr-shumu-êresh who wrote that his colleague was incompetent and gave another explanation.53 However, the king still failed to understand and went on to consult two other scholars: Nabû-ahhê-erîba and Balasî. Both of them concluded that Issâr-shumu-êresh was not only an incompetent scholar but also a liar.54 Balasî then recounts to Esarhaddon the end of this scholars’ quarrel: “Concerning Mercury, what the king my lord wrote to me about: yesterday Issâr-shumu-êresh quarreled with Nabû-ahhê-erîba in the palace. Afterwards, at night, they went together to make observations. They observed it (Mercury) and were satisfied.”55 Nabû-zeru-leshir, father of Issâr-shumu-êresh and brother of Adad-shumuusur, was chief scribe and ummānu of Esarhaddon.56 In a letter to Ashurbanipal, Urdu-Gula mentioned the fact that his father’s brother was Nabû-zeru-leshir, who was almost certainly the same individual who had served Esarhaddon as ummānu.57 Only three letters of his correspondence with the king have been preserved. Balasî was ummānu of the crown prince Ashurbanipal and evidently a personal friend and favorite of the king himself; twenty-seven letters of his correspondence with the king and twenty astrological reports have been preserved.58 His field of expertise was astrology, but he worked in other fields as well. He often collaborated with other colleagues, such as Nabû-ahhê-erîba, Nabû-nâdin-shumi, and Bammâia. The wide range of his expertise probably explains why Esarhaddon appointed him as the ummānu of the crown prince. Balasî thanked him for the appointment in a letter dated to 671 and used this privileged position to ask a personal favor of the king.59 He is the author of several astrological reports, for example, on the position of Mars, Saturn, Mercury, and Venus, and on the new and the full moon.60 He answered the king’s questions on various astrological subjects, explained to him the meaning of an earthquake, and informed him about bird omens. He interpreted a difficult passage in the omen series Šumma izbu for him. He refused to answer the king’s questions on certain matters on “evil days.”61 That the scholars’ relationships with one another were not always bad is shown by the fact that Balasî told the king that his colleague Akkullânu would read and explain his report on a lunar eclipse to the king, an indication that he trusted him.62 Nabû-ahhê-erîba was the colleague and close associate of Balasî and probably enjoyed a similar position having become a personal friend and favorite of the king.63 He was in no way considered inferior to Issâr-shumuêresh, the mighty chief scribe.64 He was one of Esarhaddon’s astrologers and very competent in hemerology.65 He was the author of twenty-five letters of

40

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

correspondence with the king and forty-one astrological reports. When he disagreed with the interpretation of a colleague, namely, Issâr-shumu-êresh, he was able to argue with him to come to a conclusion, as related above. Akkullânu was an astrologer and priest of the Ashur temple in the reigns of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal.66 He held the extremely influential position of “temple enterer” in the Ashur temple, empowering him to supervise the celebration of traditional festivals, to monitor the conduct of the Ashur clergy and to impose loyalty oaths on other countries.67 As a “priest” (sangû) of the Ashur temple, he acted as the prime witness in a judicial settlement involving Ashur and in a lawsuit against Lû-shakin.68 He probably received cuts of meat at a ceremonial banquet, possibly in connection with the New Year festival.69 He was the author of twenty-five letters and thirteen astrological reports sent to Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal, which included a report to Esarhaddon on the occultation of Jupiter and its consequences, one on the consequence of Mars reaching Cancer, and another on the moon.70 Bêl-ushezib was the only Babylonian scholar of the inner circle, probably originally from Nippur, but active in Nineveh during the reigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon. At first he belonged to a team of exorcists residing in Nineveh who played a substantial role in the problem of Sennacherib’s succession, and he was still in office under Esarhaddon’s rule.71 As a scholar his main expertise was in astronomy and astrology, judging from his thirteen preserved letters and the vast amount of astronomical phenomena and astrological omens dealt with. Yet, he is said to have displayed a greater interest in politics than in astronomy. For example, he reminded Esarhaddon that it was he, based on the celestial signs, who correctly predicted his succession to the throne of Sennacherib.72 Similarly, he brought celestial omens to bear on a prediction for a victory over the Manneans.73 Most of his letters to Esarhaddon followed the same pattern. First he related astronomical omens, then he explained their exact meaning and finally he gave a complicated message with advice, suggestions, and warnings. Occasionally, in a very subtle way, he tried to guide the king’s Babylonian policy, taking both the interest of the empire and of Nippur into account. In his first letter to Esarhaddon, he reminded him that he was loyal to him during the succession war against his brothers and that it was he who predicted his kingship to the exorcist Dâdâia and the queen mother Naqiʾa.74 He accused Shuma-iddin, the “governor” (šandabakku) of Nippur of changing the siting of the dais in the temple and warned the king that a conspiracy was in the making, with Shuma-iddin behind it and several other individuals involved.75 Other letters focused on scholarly matters.76 For example, he wrote that he was unable to observe an eclipse: “Now there were clouds everywhere; we do not



Chapter 4: Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh

41

know whether the eclipse took place or not. The lord of the kings should write to Assur and all other cities, to Babylon, Uruk, and Borsippa, perhaps it was observed in those cities.”77 Marduk-shumu-usur was chief haruspex during the reigns of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal.78 Five letters of his correspondence to the king and one astrological report have been preserved. One of them gives an idea of how he was paid: he had been given a field of twenty acres and a farmer to tend it.79 Marduk-shakin-shumi was also chief exorcist during the reigns of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal.80 He was a prolific letter writer, with thirty-nine of them preserved. In one of them, he seems to flatter the king: “Concerning the writing of the king, my lord, Kênî will die of envy when he sees it! Bêl and Nabû have given the king a beautiful handwriting.”81 Simo Parpola suggested understanding this sentence as sarcasm,82 but this is not convincing. Mardukshakin-shumi’s successor was Nabû-nâdin-shumi, who was also chief exorcist and author of fifteen letters to the king.83 Urdu-Gula was an exorcist and former deputy chief physician.84 He enjoyed special privileges as a son of Adad-shumu-usur, personal exorcist and close confidant of Esarhaddon: he ranked even higher at court than the chief exorcist Marduk-shakin-shumi.85 He also made astrological observations.86 Seven letters addressed to Esarhaddon have been preserved. In turn, the king wrote to him asking for explanations.87 After the king’s death, Urdu-Gula wrote a very long letter to Ashurbanipal, asking why he and his father had been forgotten, and had been not called to the court.88 Nabû-nâsir was also an exorcist during Esarhaddon’s reign and left eleven letters.89 It should be noted that in the introductory section of letter no. 297, his name preceded that of the chief physician Urdu-Nanâia who had written fourteen letters.90 Ikkâru was a physician, possibly the predecessor of UrduNanâia and author of five letters addressed to Esarhaddon; in one letter, he appears to be overseeing the work of other physicians.91 Urdu-Ea was chief chanter during the reign of Esarhaddon and author of seven letters and three astrological reports; he may also have communicated occasional astrological observations.92 He is mentioned in a damaged letter receiving an order from the king to start the work before the performance of the sacrifices of the Inner City.93 Nabû-zeru-iddina was his son and successor as chief chanter, during Ashurbanipal’s reign.94 Mâr-Issâr was a scribe, author of twenty-four letters, with a role as Esarhaddon’s special envoy in Babylonia, the royal “eyes and ears.”95 He was ordered to observe a lunar eclipse and reported that it was observed in Akkad.96 Akkad was certainly not an observatory; he only mentioned it because he had seen the eclipse there himself. He might have been there to supervise the

42

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

reconstruction of Eulmash.97 He was the key figure in the reorganization of the cultic services and the rebuilding of the destroyed temples of Babylon, Borsippa, Akkad, Uruk, and other Babylonian cities. Many other scholars, similar to those of the inner circle, were scattered around the empire, in the so-called outer circle. However, only a few of them, carefully selected, could be engaged in any sort of regular correspondence with the king. They could occasionally write a letter to him or receive a letter from him, but such exchanges remained very restricted and exceptional.98 This group sent, almost exclusively, lunar and calendric reports to the king, probably because of the need to calibrate inconclusive lunar and solar observations made in the capital. In a Seleucid king list, Aba-Enlil-dari is said to be the ummānu of Esarhaddon, and he is identified with Ahiqar, his Aramaic name.99 In the Story of Ahiqar, a widely circulated narrative written on papyrus in Aramaic, he is said to have worked for Sennacherib initially; Esarhaddon, incited by Ahiqar’s treacherous stepson who said that a wise scribe was dangerous, ordered his death. Ahiqar was saved by the officer Nabû-shumu-ishkun; later he was reinstalled by Esarhaddon who regretted his decision.100 According to Ulla Koch-Westenholz, the Babylonian Munnabitu, who was an astrologer, might have belonged to the inner circle like Bêl-ushezib.101 Bammâia was a fellow astrologer of Balasî.102 Some astrologers can be located: Aplâia (13 astrological reports), Nabû-iqisha (12 astrological reports) and Shapiku from Borsippa (7 astrological reports); Nabû-iqbi from Cutha (21 astrological reports); Ahhêshaia from Uruk (5 astrological reports), and Nabûahhê-iddina from Dilbat (7 astrological reports).103 The origin of others is unknown: these include Asharêdu,104 Bêl-nasir haruspex, Bêl-leʾi exorcist, and Kudurru, who specialized in extispicy and was familiar with the Enūma Anu Enlil.105 Arrâbu was an exorcist from Nippur.106 Kênî, Shumaya (2 astrological reports), Nasiru, Tabnû, and Kalizi were scribes.107 Issâr-nâdin-apli was the chief of the “collegium of ten” scribes from Arbela; Nabû-shumu-iddina was the chief of ten from Nineveh; Nabûa (17 astrological reports) was probably the chief of the Assur team.108 Other scholars from the reign of Esarhaddon about whom nothing certain is known as regards their positions were, for example, Babu-shumu-iddina from Nimrud, Tab-sil-Marduk from Kar Mullissu (4 astrological reports), Marduk-shâpik-zêri, Zakiru (16 astrological reports), Bêl-upahhir (1 astrological report), and Nabû-rêhtu-usur.109 Some prophets or prophetesses have male names, but appear with female determinatives, such as Ahât-abîsha, Issâr-bêlî-daʾʾini, Urkittu-sharrat, Sinqîsha-âmur and Bayâ, active in 681–680, and Mulissu-kabtat (raggintu) in 672.110



Chapter 4: Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh

43

4.4. Esarhaddon’s Relationship with Them The role of diviners and other scholars in the reign of Esarhaddon can not be underestimated.111 In spite of their dependence on royal favor for their livelihood and position, the king was also dependent on them to relieve him of his fears and anxieties, starting with the constant concern for his chronic illness. More than two hundred royal requests for oracles reflect more routine worries, such as uncertainties about the loyalty of proposed royal appointees, whether proposed campaigns would be successful, whether proposed diplomatic marriages would be worthwhile or whether the collection of horse taxes could be carried out without the tax collectors being kidnapped or killed.112 Esarhaddon was continually bombarded with letters, reports, and counsel from his scholarly advisors at court because he consulted them for everything. He addressed his requests to several kinds of experts: “Favorable signs came in good time to me in heaven and on earth. They (the gods) continually and regularly encouraged me with oracles through ecstatics, the message(s) of the gods and goddess(es) … They were sending me reliable omen(s).”113 He was attentive to the meaning of the stars.114 He also used other types of divination such as the diviner’s bowl, exstispicy with livers, dreams, and oracles.115 For political matters, the Babylonian scholar Bêl-ushezib displayed a great interest in politics and answered several of Esarhaddon’s political questions.116 However, the idea that the scholars were manipulating the evidence for intervening in Assyrian politics seems to be exaggerated.117 One of the conditions for being able to manipulate a king would be his inability to control the information presented to him, when in fact, Esarhaddon, in his fear of being fooled and misled, had the very habit of checking and rechecking the predictions and prescriptions.118 Did he feel a certain skepticism toward divination, as suggested by some authors? Probably not, as is shown by his inquiries about investigations and interpretations. He always questioned the diviners so that all his actions were taken in a favorable month and on a propitious day.119 If he felt any skepticism, it was toward his experts.120 Was Esarhaddon a literate king? For a long time, Assyrian kings were considered to be illiterate, just like most of the population because the writing was so complex that only scribes were able to master it.121 Today we believe that a larger part of the population could read.122 Even if Esarhaddon never claimed to be as literate Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal, he could read himself when a scribe was not reading for him, and he was able to discuss texts.123 He had a basic knowledge of divinatory disciplines and possessed luxury editions of scholarly books such as Enūma Anu Enlil, one in Assyrian and one in Babylonian characters, which enabled him to verify certain references. He had a special routine for receiving reports, in particular concerning eclipses

44

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

and their significance. He did not remain passive before the information he received, but often sought to understand passages that seemed obscure to him. For example, he wrote to Urdu-Gula: “In that writing board [wh]ich you dispatched to me via Ahi-duri there [were…] phylacteries […]. And the pertinent ritual is written (there) as follows: ‘Incantation: … Ninkilim, exorcist of Ninurta! Fall of heavens’. What is this? The heavens exist forever.”124 Difficult passages could be explained by glosses, for example, in a letter sent by Balasî to the king: “The said house will have išdihu. Išdihu (means) profit.” This technical sense was different from the first meaning of the verb šadâhu, “move in procession.”125 Another possibility was that the scholar visited the king and explained to him directly, as Asharêdu did: “The lords of kings may say: ‘what do you mean? The month is not over, and yet you have sent me good and evil (omens)’. Tupšarrûtu cannot be discussed in the marketplace! May the lord of kings summon me on a day that suits him, so that I can explain to the king, my lord.”126 Esarhaddon himself asked Balasî about a comment on a tablet of Šumma izbu. Balasî sent another tablet to the king containing that comment. However, he added: “Maybe the scribe who reads to the king did not understand … The first time that I come before the king, my lord, I shall (personally) show, with this tablet that I am sending to the king, my lord, how the omen is written. Really, [the one] who has [not] had (the meaning) pointed out to him cannot possibly understand it.”127 We note in passing that Balasî is careful not to criticize directly the intellectual capacities of the king. Prophetic messages were sometimes regarded as suspicious and proved to be false, as in the case of Esarhaddon’s succession treaty: “Any improper word heard from the mouth of prophets, ecstatic or of an inquirer of oracles should not be concealed by the king.”128 They needed to be checked by another means of divine communication. The objective was that the omens should be unanimous and answered the king with a reliable positive response.129

4.5. Naqiʾa’s Relationship with Them Esarhaddon wanted to show that his mother Naqiʾa was pious and had his support. This he did by having her participate in some religious ceremonies and contribute to temples, and by displaying her statue in certain sanctuaries.130 Her relationship with diviners and other scholars is evidenced through various documents: queries, oracles, and letters. Three questions to Shamash are concerned with the appointment of a bodyguard for Naqiʾa, and as to whether she would get over her illness.131 Several oracles are related to her. The first oracle was addressed to Esarhaddon and the queen mother; it was issued by the prophetess Ahât-abîsha of Arbela and concerned the king.132 Several prophetic



Chapter 4: Diviners and Other Scholars in the Court of Nineveh

45

messages were addressed to the king and the queen mother, and one to Naqiʾa only, by Ishtar of Arbela.133 The main information concerning Naqiʾa’s relationship with the diviners and other scholars comes from letters. The exorcist Dâdâia seems to have been close to the queen mother, as can be seen, for example, in a letter sent by Bêlushezib, the well-known Babylonian astrologer, two months after Esarhaddon’s accession, in which he reminded him of what he had done to support him earlier: “I told the omen of the kingship of my lord Esarhaddon the crown prince, to the exorcist Dâdâia, and to the mother of the king.”134 A letter sent to her by Issâr-shumu-êresh, chief scribe and ummānu of the king is important, although it is damaged, because it shows that she was approached with due respect and deference, as a figure of authority: “[The verdict of the mother of the king, my lord] is as final as the gods. What you bless is blessed; what you curse is cursed … May Mullissu … give long-lasting days, happiness (and) joy […] to the king, [the crown prince] and the name [of the mother of the king].”135 Adad-shumu-usur, Esarhaddon’s personal exorcist, sent him a report on the health of several of his children and of his mother.136 Aplâia, a priest of Nabû and Nanâya from Babylonia, sent Naqiʾa a letter of greeting and reassurance, and Nabû-shumu-lishir, another Babylonian priest, informed her concerning the ritual for an eclipse.137 Nergal-sharrani, a functionary of the Nabû temple of Nimrud, answered two letters to her queries about a ritual and an offering.138 Since the context of any letter was understood by both the writer and the receiver, most information is given without details. Dâdî, priest of the Bet-Kidmuri of Ishtar in Nineveh and son of the priest Bêl-remanni, mentioned in a letter sent to Ashurbanipal that his father had received gifts from the king and the king’s mother.139 It was probably Naqiʾa who helped a goldsmith of her household whose son was studying to become an exorcist as he would have needed a powerful patron for such a breach of custom.140 In Duʾûzu (June) 670, the queen mother became seriously ill, possibly suffering from psychosis.141 Four of Esarhaddon’s chief advisors were called on to cure her. They reported their progress to Esarhaddon in four successive letters: two sent by the exorcist Adad-shumu-usur, one by the exorcist Mardukshakin-shumi, and one jointly by the exorcist Nabû-shumu-usur and the physician Urdu-Nanâia.142 They performed counter spells, incantations, and rituals to break the curse. The last two letters stated that she had recovered. Iqbi-dammiq also questioned Shamash in order to know whether she would recover.143

Chapter Five The Rebuilding of Babylon and Other Building Activities 5.1. The Decision to Rebuild Babylon A large-scale building program was a key component of the activities of every Neo-Assyrian king who tried to surpass his predecessor. Esarhaddon was probably aware of the propaganda value of such a program of building and refurbishing palaces, temples, aqueducts, quays, and military installations in impressing his subjects, the court, and the gods. The priority program for him was to sponsor the rebuilding of Babylon: “I am the one who (re)built Babylon, (re)construct Esagil, renewed (its) gods and goddesses, completed (its) shrines, (re)confirmed (its) satukku offerings, (and) who gathered its (Babylon’s) scattered people.”1 To explain his intervention in Babylon at the beginning of his reign, he invoked the change of decision expressed by Marduk, who was no longer angry against the Babylonians: “The merciful god Marduk wrote that the calculated time of its abandonment (of Babylon) should last seventy years, (but) his heart was quickly soothed, and he reversed the numbers and (thus) ordered its (re)occupation to be (after) eleven years.”2 The figure seventy was written in Akkadian with the sign GEŠ (60), followed by the sign U (10). It was simple enough to invert the order of the signs by turning the tablet over, the vertical sign GEŠ can also be read DIŠ (1).3 As Babylon was destroyed in 689, eleven years from the occupation therefore meant 678, that is to say, the third year of Esarhaddon’s reign. He wanted to allow himself a few years for the reconstruction. The Babylonian Chronicles are brief but precise concerning this lapse of time: “During eight years under Sennacherib, during twelve years under Esarhaddon, that is during twenty years in total, Bêl (Marduk) remained at Assur and the New Year festival was not celebrated.”4 Why did Esarhaddon decide to rebuild Babylon? Why did he completely reverse Sennacherib’s policy toward the Babylonians? Some scholars suggest that he may have had some sort of alliance with them and that they may have looked to him to change their fortunes,5 possibly because his mother Naqiʾa 47

48

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

might have been an Aramean from Babylon or his wife Esharra-hammat was perhaps Babylonian. The Babylonian scholar Bêl-ushezib had declared that, while Sennacherib still reigned, Esarhaddon had been ordained to rebuild Babylon.6 However, there is no clear evidence that Naqiʾa and Esharra-hammat were Babylonian.7 As stated above (see ch. 3), Esarhaddon was shocked by the assassination of his father and by the infamous death of his grandfather. He wanted to exorcise the past; he did not want to commit the same mistakes as his forefathers and decided to repair his father’s grave error of destroying Babylon. He intended to restore the cosmic order transgressed by him. That is why he rewrote the account of this event, masking the sin of Sennacherib by accusing the Babylonians of being responsible for the destruction of Babylon: it was Marduk who had flooded Babylon in order to punish them. This blatant revisionism applied to recent history, however, must have been futile, since, after only eleven years, nobody had forgotten the ruthless destruction of Babylon by Sennacherib. However, the king’s primary concern seems to have been to offer a religious justification rather than to provide a historical narrative. In fact, attention was centered on the divine participation of Marduk at each step of the cycle of “alienation-devastation:reconciliationreconstruction.”8 Esarhaddon anticipated divine reward for his reconstruction efforts: “let (my) kingship be sustaining to the people forever like the plant [of] life so that I may shepherd their populace in truth and justice; (and) let me reach old age, at[ta]in extreme old age, (and) be sea[ted with] the prime [of li]fe [until far]-off [days].”9 Similar rewards were expected for reconstruction works elsewhere as well, for example, with the temple of Ashur: “I built (it) for my life, the prolongation of my days, the security of my reign, the well-being of my seed, the safeguarding of the throne [of] my priestly office, the overthrowing of my enemies, the prospering [of the harvest of] Assyria, (and) the well-being of Assyria.”10 By reconstructing Babylon, Esarhaddon also made a judicious political calculation. As the relationship between Assyria and Babylonia was a complicated one, he favored a reconciliation to simplify the situation. As a matter of fact, there were two political points of view in Assyria: the first one was nationalist and anti-Babylonian, and the second pro-Babylonian, favorable to peace and equality between the two countries.11 Esarhaddon chose the latter, as Sargon II had done in the past. After whitewashing his father to make people forget his impiety, he hoped to reconcile with the Babylonians. By rebuilding Babylon and refurbishing the statues of his gods, in particular Marduk, he sought to appease the Babylonians and restore equality between the gods Ashur and Marduk.



Chapter 5: The Rebuilding of Babylon

49

5.2. The Falsification of the Dates The reconstruction of Babylon was so important for Esarhaddon that he described it, often in detail, in over a dozen inscriptions, most on clay but once on stone—the famous black basalt stone now in the British Museum.12 Some of these inscriptions are dated, but the date is falsified as can be seen from some of the events mentioned—events that occurred later. This false dating was not a scribe’s error, but a purposeful pseudo-dating.13 The inscription Assur-Babylon A (As.BbA), recording the refurbishment of the statues of Babylon’s tutelary gods, and mentioning the rebuilding of Esagil and Babylon, is dated in the colophon as follows: “At the beginning of my kingship, in my first year.”14 In fact, this first year (680) was different from his accession year (681), which lasted only a few days: from the twenty-eight or eighteenth of Addaru (March) to the end of that month.15 The same dating occurred in the inscriptions commonly referred as Babylon Prism A (Bab. A), Babylon Prism C (Bab. C), Babylon Prism E (Bab. E), and Babylon Prism G (Bab. G), but at the end they bear the text: “Accession year (šarrat rēš šarrūti, MU.SAG.NAM.LUGAL.LA) of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria.”16 First, there is a contradiction of dating inside these inscriptions: 680 (year 1) and 681 (accession year). Second, some events mentioned show that these inscriptions did not date from 681 or 680, but that at least one of them was presumably no earlier than the last month of 674.17 The complete restoration of Babylon described in these inscriptions was hardly achievable during the accession year of a few days, nor even during the first year. Indeed, the work began with the preparation of the brick molds of ivory and precious woods, followed by a year-long process simply to make the bricks for the reconstruction.18 As Mordechai Cogan pointed out, the original inappropriate date “served as an exhibit of royal piety, for the rêš šarrûti dating was taken to mean it. From his very first days on the throne, Esarhaddon turned to the affairs of Babylon, and with due deliberateness, rapidly completed its reconstruction.”19 This antedating was a literary convention that had a propagandistic purpose. Even though the Babylonians themselves must have known when and what had been actually been accomplished in the field, the Assyrian king wanted to indicate that his piety and his will to reconstruct Babylon were so important that he started the work immediately. In similar circumstances, King Nabonidus used rêš šarrūti to designate the early years of his reign.20 The term “in the first year” was also employed with a similar purpose in the biblical book of Chronicles to indicate the piety manifested very early on by King Hezekiah of Judah.21 Esarhaddon commissioned his numerous inscriptions on the rebuilding of Babylon for use in Babylonia to commemorate his sponsorship of these projects.22 As he was

50

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

actively courting acceptance of his rule in Babylonia, these inscriptions differed significantly from his Assyrian inscriptions and were intended to appeal to Babylonian audiences.23 When in fact did Esarhaddon really start the reconstruction of Babylon? It is difficult to know exactly, but he first had to reestablish order in Nineveh by punishing all those who had helped his brothers. Then, we know that he was rebuilding Esharra, the temple of the god Ashur in the holy city of Assur, during the eponymy of Itti-Adad-anênu, governor of Megiddo, that is, in 679.24 Did he start his military campaigns before the reconstruction of Babylon? Although his royal inscriptions were not arranged chronologically, it is possible to determine that, in 680, a campaign was launched against the rebel Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir, governor of the Sealand who was replaced by his brother Naʾid-Marduk. However, Esarhaddon did not conduct this campaign directly, but sent his officials.25 The first military campaign that he himself may have conducted was possibly in 678 (year 3) against Shamash-ibni of Bît-Dakkûri in Chaldea.26 The letters addressed to the king by Mâr-Issâr, his agent in Babylonia, concerning the progress of reconstruction work of Babylon, are sometimes dated, but only from the month and day because the year was supposed to be known.27 Even if the precise date of the beginning of the reconstruction cannot be determined, it was necessarily “in a favorable month, on a propitious day.”28 The reconstruction work lasted several years, through the end of Esarhaddon’s reign, and was completed by his successor Ashurbanipal at the beginning of his reign.29

5.3. The Financing and Organization of the Reconstruction Esarhaddon was raised to be the king who would rebuild Esagil and Babylon, restore the gods and goddesses who lived there, and ensure the return of the plundered gods. He acted on the order of Marduk: “He ordered me to complete the cult centers, to renovate the shrines, (and) to organize well the rites of Esagil, the palace of the gods.”30 He was in communication with Marduk who was sending him signs on what to do precisely: “[in] heaven [and on earth], he constantly sent me his omen(s) concerning the (re)settl[ing of the city] and the renovat[ion of its] shrines.”31 He consulted the gods Shamash and Adad through diviners and extispicy in order to be sure that he was designated to undertake the renovation work, and to know which workshop he had to choose: “The omens were unanimous: they answered me with a firm ‘yes,’ (and) told me (it should be) in Baltil (Assur) … They indicated to me the workshop to use (and) the craftsmen to perform the work … (saying) thus: ‘Do (it) quickly, pay attention, (and) be careful! Do not procrastinate! You should not turn your attention to anything else!’”32 Esarhaddon trusted the words of the diviners



Chapter 5: The Rebuilding of Babylon

51

and felt confident. He also consulted them on the best date for starting the reconstruction of Babylon, in a favorable month and on a propitious day. The month chosen was Shabâtu (January), which is said to be the “favorite month of the god Enlil.”33 What is the connection with Marduk? In the same inscription, Marduk is called “the Enlil of the gods” because he had seized the kingship of the gods held by Enlil.34 On the exact date indicated by the diviners, Esarhaddon entered the workshop chosen by the gods, where the renovations would be prepared prior to being installed in the temple to be restored by the carpenters, jewelers, copper smiths, and seal cutters, all of them skilled craftsmen selected by divination.35 How was such a gigantic project to be financed? This ambitious restoration of the city was particularly expensive because it first involved removing the large amount of debris left since Sennacherib’s destruction of most of the buildings as well as the restoration of the city walls. The first regular source of financing was the yearly tribute paid by the peoples already conquered and the new peoples, such as the Medes and Egyptians, who had been vanquished by Esarhaddon.36 With visible satisfaction, he produced a tribute list furnished by the Egyptians.37 He often boasted having taken booty, the fruit of his military campaigns, to Assyria, for example, the spoils from Sidon, Kush, and Egypt.38 Booty was collected in 677 from Sidon, but mainly—later, in 671—from Egypt. The Babylonian Chronicles mention booty taken from Shubria to Uruk in 673 and from Memphis in 671.39 This means that the reconstruction was mainly financed by the spoils of Esarhaddon’s campaigns during the last part of his reign. Some of the booty was used to decorate the royal palace in Nineveh, as evidenced by a bronze lion bearing the following inscription: “The palace of Esarhaddon, king of the world, king of Assyria: (this is) booty from Egypt (and) Kush.”40 However, most of it was used for the temple reconstructions: “with the booty of the vast enemies which my hands had captured through the help of the great gods, my lords, I had shrines of cult centers built in Assyria and Akkad; I decorated (them) with silver (and) gold and made (them) shine like daylight.”41 The booty was stored in the armory of Nineveh: “The plunder of enemies, everything that the god Ashur, king of the gods, gave me as my royal share.”42 It was so abundant that the original armory became too small and that a bigger building had to be built to house it. Who were the workers mobilized for the reconstruction of Babylon? According to the different versions of the inscriptions they belonged to different groups. Mordechai Cogan thinks that there were three groups.43 In the first group, Babylonians were set to work on their own city’s reconstruction: “I mustered all the craftsmen throughout Karduniash (Babylon).”44 In the second group, the Babylonians were said to have been joined by other workers: “I

52

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

mustered all of my craftsmen and the people of Karduniash to its full extent.”45 In the third group, prisoners from conquered territories labored on the reconstruction of Babylon.46 Each of the three different formulations could possibly be explained by the simple fact that they came from different authors, having Assyrian or Babylonian orientations.47 The king was ready to launch the project: “I was encouraged and ordered the (re)building.”48 He insisted on wanting to reconstruct Babylon exactly as it had been, probably because he thought that the reparation of his father’s guilt would be more complete and that the Babylonians would be more satisfied to find their city exactly as it was before. For example, concerning Esagil, he wrote: “in (exact) accordance with its earlier plan I did not diminish (it) by one cubit nor increase (it) by half a cubit, I built (and) completed Esagil.”49 He applied the same procedure to a site that had become a heap of ruins, such as the Eniggidrukalamasuma, the temple of Nabû: “I opened up its dirt piles and surveyed (and) examined its structure. I measured its foundation platform in (exact) accordance with its earlier plan and did not add (even) a single brick more.”50 Only one text informs us about the procedure followed by Esarhaddon after having mustered all the craftsmen; it is referred to as Babylon G (Bab. G) and is very damaged: “They cut down the trees and reeds with axes (and) tore out their roots.”51 Abandoned for a period of eleven years, trees and reeds had overgrown the city, and the site first had to be cleared in order to gain access, obliging the workers to tear out the roots so that they did not grow again. After having cleared the site, all the water that had flooded the site had to be drained: A.MEŠ ÍD.pu-rat-ti ab-bu iš-tu qer-bi-šú ap-ru-us-ma a-na ma-laki-šu-nu maḫ-re-e ú-šar-di.52 Erle Leichty translates: “I diverted the waters of the Euphrates River, the washout, from its midst and redirected (them) to the previous channels.” He explains that “the CAD (A/1 p. 48 sub abbu) suggests that ab-bu is a scribal error and should be removed from the text,” but prefers to retain it and translate “the washout,” without explanation. It seems more likely that the scribe wanted to write abūbu, “deluge,” “Flood monster,” which described the preceding expression “the waters of the Euphrates,” in relation to the inundation of Babylon by Sennacherib. This word is used twice in a damaged letter, probably sent by Esarhaddon to the priest and chief administrator of the temple of Marduk, whose name is lost in the break, concerning the reconstruction of Babylon. He sent dispatches concerning statues of “golden waters” and “Flood monsters” cast in bronze and iron: a-bu-ba-nim … a-bu!-ub.53 The bearers of these dispatches were named Marduk-sharru-usur, Marduk-eriba, Nergal-sharruusur, the “third man,” and Issâr-shumu-êresh, chief scribe and ummānu of the king. The same word abubu is used for the statues, possibly representations



Chapter 5: The Rebuilding of Babylon

53

of deified bodies of water, erected in commemoration of the inundation of the city: “I (also) set up twin Flood monsters cast of shining silver […] in the Kamsu-Igîgû Gate.”54 The next step, after clearing the site of trees and reeds and removing all the water remaining from the inundation, was to clear the city of all the debris and to start the reconstruction by making a vast quantity of bricks, a task that took a full year. Inscriptions stamped on the face of bricks record their manufacture: “For the god Marduk, his lord: Esarhaddon, king of Assyria (and) king of Babylon, had baked bricks made anew for Esagil and Babylon.”55 He describes the brickmaking operation in detail. First the aggregate was prepared: “I mixed (the mud for) [its re]vet[ment] with fine oil, [honey, ghee], kurunnu-wine, muttinnuwine, (and) pure mountain beer.”56 Then the bricks were cast in molds: “I [had its bricks made in brick-molds of ivory], ebony, [boxwood, (and) musukkannuwood].”57 Then Esarhaddon describes in detail the reconstruction of the city. The greatest care was taken during the rebuilding of Esagil, depositing precious stones, scented oils, and perfumes into its foundations. Precious metals were chosen to cover the doors of the temple and the pedestals that were to house the statue of Marduk and Tashmêtu, were built in red gold. “The gods Bêl-Marduk, Bêltiya, Bêlet-Bâbili, Ea, (and) Mandânu, the great gods … I adorned their necks and covered their chests with magnificent ornaments (and) precious jewelry … They fashioned images of their great divinity more artfully than before (and) greatly adorned them.”58 He rebuilt the temple tower Etemenanki: “I built anew Etemenanki, the ziggurat, on the site where it previously stood.”59 He also rebuilt several temples: Edadihegal, a shrine in the Esagil complex, Ekarzagina, Ekur of Enlil, Enamtaggadua of Amurru, Esabad, Eumusha of Tashmêtu, and Kahilisu of Zarpanitu.60 He rebuilt the city gates: the Kamsu-Igîgû Gate, the Gate of the Path of the Enlil-Stars, and the Royal Gate.61 He rebuilt the ImgurEnlil and Nêmed-Enlil (the great and outer walls of Babylon, respectively), the battlements, drains, courtyards, and various other buildings and structures. Esarhaddon took a great interest in the progress of Babylon’s reconstruction work and was kept informed of even the minutest details. Reports from officials overseeing the reconstruction confirm claims made in his official inscriptions concerning the scope of the project. The rebuilding of Esagil is the topic of several of the reports sent by Urdu-ahheshu. For example, letter no. 161 informed the king that the perimeter wall of Esagil, the foundation of the city gates, and the ziggurat had been laid, and that perfumes, sweet-scented oils, and precious stones were to be deposited in them.62 According to letters no. 162 and 168, the structures eventually rebuilt included battlements, courtyards, shrines, daises, and drains.63 One hundred thirty-eight cedar trunks were brought from Carchemish for reconstructing the cella of Bêl and the main city gate (Letter 162). Cedar, cypress, and fir were used to roof the shrines and precious metals

54

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

to ornament the doors (Letters 163, 164, and 166).64 According to Letter 174 sent by Rashil, gold was used to adorn the image of Zarpanitu and gems to ornament the crown of the sky god and the solar disks.65 According to Letter 179, probably sent by Shuma-iddin, governor of Nippur, the pedestal destined to receive the image of Bêl was manufactured out of gold, and both gold and gems—thirty kilograms in all—were used to fashion Bêl’s equipment.66 Letter 168, sent by Urdu-ahheshu, informed the king that the restoration of Esagil was completed.67 After having rebuilt Nêmed-Enlil, the outer wall of Babylon, and making it an object of wonder, Esarhaddon took care of the Babylonians, who were authorized to come back and live in their city. To facilitate their return, he established a “remission of debts” (andurâru): “I established anew the remission of debts of the wronged citizens of Babylon, people (entitled to) the privileged status (and) freedom (guaranteed by) the gods Anu and Enlil.”68 Then he assembled the inhabitants who had become slaves and who had been dispersed in different places and counted them as Babylonians again. “I returned their looted possessions, provided the naked with clothing … I encouraged them to (re)settle the city, build houses, plant orchards, (and) dig canals.”69 He restored their interrupted privilege status, which had fallen into disuse and wrote on a tablet all their exemptions. Finally he gave the Babylonians an honored status among all the peoples by offering them the opportunity to develop their business: “[I] opened roads for them in all directions so that they [could establish an imp]ortant position by having [(commercial) relations] with all the coun[tries].”70 To complete his reconciliation with the Babylonians and their god Marduk (still prisoner at Nineveh), he had made foundation inscriptions in the reconstructed Esagil on which he had written: “the might of the great hero, the god Marduk, (and) the deeds I had done, my pious work.”71 A report to the king from the commandant installed in Babylon confirms that the reconstruction was very well received by the Babylonians: “I have entered Babylon. The Babylonians have received me kindly, and daily they bless the king, saying: ‘what was taken and plundered from Babylon, he has returned,’ and from Sippar to Bab-marrat the chiefs of the Chaldeans bless the king, saying: ‘(It is he) who resettled (the people) of Babylon.”72 How much of the reconstruction of Babylon was actually carried out during Esarhaddon’s reign is uncertain, but it is likely that he fulfilled most of his restoration goals, in particular Esagil and Etemenanki, with the possible exception of the city walls, which seem to have been fully restored by his successor. In summary, the rebuilding of Babylon was a wise political calculation in the short term to reconcile with the Babylonians. However, it was a bad long-term move because Esarhaddon had spent too much money on this disproportionate project to the detriment of Assyria, and had strengthened Babylon, which again became a powerful enemy.



Chapter 5: The Rebuilding of Babylon

55

5.4. The Question of Statues Several royal inscriptions are related to the refurbishment of the statues of the gods of Babylon. It was a mission entrusted to Esarhaddon by Ishtar: “The goddess Ishtar, [my lady], gave me [a royal destiny] as [a gift] (while I was still) in the womb of my mother to refur[bish] the gods[… .”73 He was “the one who renewed the statues of the great gods.”74 He adorned the divine statues with ṣāriru-gold from Mount Araru and covered their chests with magnificent ornaments and precious jewelry. He had divine statues made and greatly adorned them.75 He made a new seat with a footstool, covered with red gold for the goddess Tashmêtu, who lived in Eumusha, the cella of Marduk. He refurbished the god Amurru, who lived in Enamtaggadua. He was kept informed by reports sent by his officials—for example, Nabû-bessunu, Nabûbani-ahhê, and Mâr-Issâr—regarding the progress of the refurbishment of statues.76 Esarhaddon stated several times that he had returned the plundered gods: “[I am the one who] returned [the] plundered [god]s of the lands to their (proper) places, and made (them) dwell on (their) eternal daises in the shrines of all the cult centers; who clothed (them) daily in silver (and) gold.”77 He enumerated all the gods that he returned to their original locations following the orders of Ashur and Marduk: Great Anu, Sharrat-Dêri, Nirah, Bêlet-balâti, Kurunîtum, and Sakkud to the city of Bubê; Mâr-bîti to Dêr; Usur-amâssa to Uruk; Shamash to Larsa; Humhumiya, Shuqamuna, and Shimaliya to SipparAruru.78 At the same time, he boasted of having restored all the holy rites, that had been interrupted, for example, those of Esagil: namely, the guqqû, nindabû, and sattukku offerings. He placed at the service of the gods “the ramku-priests, pašišu-priests, ecstatics, those initiated into secret rites, …, purification priests, āšipu-priests, [lamentations priests], (and) singers.”79 However, while his description of the return of the gods from Assur to Babylon is very precise, it does seem to be falsified. He wrote that the plundered gods of Babylon, including Bêl-Marduk, returned from Assur to Babylon. Yet they were not exactly the original statues of these gods, but either revivified old ones or totally new ones, created in the city of Assur and sumptuously adorned: “They took the [ro]ad to Shuanna (Babylon), a joyful path. From Baltil (Assur) to [the quay] of Babylon, (piles) of brushwood were lit every third of league (and) they slew fattened bulls at each league … I had them joyfully enter into Babylon, th[eir] home city.”80 Esarhaddon took the hand of the god Marduk, according to the tradition, in order to signify that he was also king of Babylon. However, his attempt to return Marduk to Babylon was in fact probably a failure as his son Shamash-shumu-ukîn was said to have returned and solemnly reinstalled the statues of Bêl-Marduk and the other Babylonian

56

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

gods in their sanctuaries in Babylon in May 668.81 According to Simo Parpola, Esarhaddon’s attempt to return the statue of Marduk took place in Ayyâru 669, but an ominous event during this journey halted his plans.82 Nevertheless, Esarhaddon had anticipated the return of Marduk, which, according to the inscription Assur-Babylon E (AsBbE), and probably also mentioned in two badly preserved inscriptions, clearly never happened.83 The “royal tiara” mentioned in the text might refer to new headgear that had been intended for Marduk. The reference to the observation of Jupiter, which was not visible in Cancer again until Duʾûzu (July) 668, suggests a date for this inscription to Esarhaddon’s first year (680). A damaged letter sent to the king, probably by Shuma-iddin, governor of Nippur, seems to confirm that Marduk was not returned to Babylon before 668: “[Now] they are speaking [abou]t the statue of Marduk, [saying: ‘The statue] is coming.’ Whatever he says is gossip for the city (um-ma ṣal-mu il]la-ka mim-ma ina pi-šu? dib-bi a-na URU-ma]).”84 Even if Marduk had not yet been returned to Babylon, Esarhaddon anticipated his return in dedicating to him a monumental lapis lazuli cylinder seal, which has been discovered in Babylon.85 In addition, two damaged clay tablets, found in Nineveh, were copied from the pedestal of the statue of Marduk, one of them concerning the refurbishment of the statue.86 Moreover, according to the letter sent to the king by Shuma-iddin: “[The sta]tue of Bêl, which the king, my lord, made [in] Babylon … it would have been finished quickly.”87 If the letter was addressed to Esarhaddon (and not to Ashurbanipal), it would mean that there were several statues of Marduk: the original statue, new one(s) made in Assur, and other(s) made in Babylon.

5.5. Riots in Babylon and Other Problems In their letters, the priests denounced to the king the abuses of royal servants— theft and corruption—from the humblest to the most influential. Several problems occurred during the reconstruction of Babylon. For example, Shumaiddin sent a report on recent events in Babylonia.88 As usual, it is difficult to understand because the facts, presumably already known by the recipient— here the king—are not explained. Following the orders of Mâr-Issâr, Shumaiddin had installed royal statues in Esagil and the temples of Babylon. Then he was told that two eunuchs ran away from Assyria, were hidden by the royal delegate, and then sent to Borsippa. He had captured one eunuch and was going to bring him to the king. A second report, probably also sent by Shuma-iddin, completes the information about the events in Babylonia.89 The text is damaged and hence even more difficult to understand. The first problem it describes involves more



Chapter 5: The Rebuilding of Babylon

57

than sixty men whose encampment and dwellings he was going to disperse. Another problem in the same report concerned a certain Dadâ who was a liar and had spoken untruthfully to the king. According to another letter from Shuma-iddin, there were also difficulties with a Chaldean chieftain, named “the son of Dakuru,” who had frightened the residents and the royal delegate of the towns of Malilati and Apale, given by the king to Bêl-Marduk. Moreover, he refused to give dates to the god and showed no respect for the king, saying: “I will give of my own accord and establish my own name.”90 Another letter, sent by Mâr-Issâr to the king, concerned riots in Babylon.91 The first part of the letter referred to thirty jewels, twenty-six “eye-stones” of serpentine, and one mina of gold sent by the king and the queen mother for the tiara of the god Nabû. The second part was directed against the commandant of Babylon: he “will, perhaps, write to the king, my lord: ‘The citizens of Babylon had thrown lumps of clay at me,’ but that is a lie.”92 Indeed it would have been easier to find lumps of clay than stones in Babylon. The commandant was not named, but we surmise that there were tensions between him and Mâr-Issâr, Esarhaddon’s special envoy in Babylon, especially during the difficult period of reconstruction. The commandants of the region had been told by the king to prepare their war chariots, to impose substantial silver dues on the citizens of Babylon, Borsippa, and Cutha, and to collect them. However, there was a problem with the citizens of Babylon who were unable to pay. This probably occurred at the beginning of Esarhaddon’s reign, when they had just come back to Babylon and before they had received remission for debts and privileges. “The citizens of Babylon, poor wretches who have got nothing, lamented and protested.” Mâr-Issâr obviously disapproved of the ruthless reaction of the commandant: “(Whereupon) the commandant imprisoned (so from among them) on the pretense: ‘You threw lumps of clay at my messengers.’” The narrative had changed: he was no longer personally targeted by the rioters, only his messengers were. The commandant had also written to judge Tabî’s wife not to let her husband go outdoors. Mâr-Issâr explained the reason to the king: “I have heard that (this) judge Tabî incited the men who protested. This was the story; the king, my lord, should know it.” He remained cautious because he wanted to blame the commandant, but he could approve neither the rioters, even if he understood their distress, nor the instigator of the riot.

5.6. Building Activities outside Babylon While the ambitious Babylon reconstruction project represented, by far, the main accomplishment of Esarhaddon’s building activities, he also carried out several other construction works as a propaganda tool. Indeed, while the king

58

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

of Assyria was generally supposed to be a warlord, the king of Babylon was ideally seen as a restorer and a builder, particularly of temples.93 First, in his capital of Nineveh, he built his palace, the construction of which he described in detail in the inscription Nineveh A (Nin. A), after the account of his military campaigns. He summoned twenty-two kings of Hatti (Syria-Palestine), from the seacoast, and from the “midst of the sea” “for large beams, tall columns, (and) very long planks of cedar (and) cypress, grown on Mount Sirâra and Mount Lebanon.”94 He built a palace ninety-five large cubits long and thirtyone large cubits wide, that is to say about 50 meters long and 16 meters wide, a cubit measuring approximately 0.50 meters.95 This is the building recently discovered at Tell Nebi Yunus in Mosul.96 The palace had a room of white alabaster and palatial halls of ivory, ebony, boxwood, musukkannu-wood, cedar, and cypress, roofed with cedar beams. They had doors made of cypress, whose fragrance is sweet, decorated with bands of silver and copper, gates protected by bull colossi, zebus, lions, and twin lamassu-statues. There were also large copper columns and tall cedar columns, together with black- and blue-glazed friezes. As was usual in the Assyrian palaces, reliefs described the king’s deeds: “Through the craft of the sculptor, I depicted on (them) the might of the god Ashur, my lord, (and) the deeds that I had accomplished in enemy lands.”97 Alongside his palace he planted a botanical garden, a replica of Mount Amanus, with all kinds of aromatic plants and fruit trees, and he channeled a canal into the garden to provide a watering place for horses. He named his palace “Eshgalshiddudua, ‘The palace that administers everything.’” Finally, he invited the gods to its inauguration, then his subjects: “I seated all of the officials and people of my country in it at festive tables, ceremonial meals, and banquets, and I made their mood jubilant … with wine … with fine oil (and) perfumed oil.”98 Esarhaddon also rebuilt the armory of Nineveh, adjoining it to the palace. This armory, built by his ancestors, was intended to house thoroughbreds, mules, chariots, military equipment, implements of war, and the plunder taken from enemies. It “had become too small for me to have horses show their mettle (and) to train with chariots.”99 He razed it in its entirety, added on a large area of what had been farmland, and raised the terrace with limestone. In the eponymy of Abî-râmu, grand vizier, in 677, he restored the temple of Mullissu and the temple of Shamash.100 A clay cylinder, possibly a foundation document, bears a dedicatory inscription for Esarhaddon’s rebuilding of the temple of Ishtar of Nineveh.101 The king rebuilt a temple for the gods Sîn, Ningal, Shamash, and Aya in Nineveh.102 He refurbished the statues of the gods Amurru, who lived in Enamtaggadua, and of Anshushu and Abtagigi, who lived in Egishurankia, the temple of Ishtar.103 A brick from Nineveh records that Esarhaddon had



Chapter 5: The Rebuilding of Babylon

59

an adjoining house built onto the Akîtu temple in the heart of the city.104 A fragment of a clay tablet also referred to work on the Akîtu temple.105 In other northern cities, namely, Assur, Arbela, Nimrud, and Tarbisu, the king of Assyria also carried out construction activities. The inscription Assur A (Ass. A), describing the rebuilding of the temple of Ashur, is precisely dated to 679: one exemplar dated to Duʾûzu 19, the eponymy of Itti-Adad-anê[nu], governor of Megiddo, and another exemplar from the month of Simânu.106 As Ashur was the main god of Assyria, Esarhaddon described at length the history of the previous building work carried out on the temple by his predecessors. Ushpia, one of the seventeen kings who “lived in tents,” that is, in the distant past, first built the temple. Then Erishum I, a paleo-Babylonian king (ca. 1974– 1935) rebuilt it after it became dilapidated. Then Shamshi-Adad I (ca. 1808– 1776) rebuilt it 126 years later. Then Shalmaneser I (ca. 1263–1234) rebuilt it again, some 434 years later. Finally, after a further 580 years, the temple was once again dilapidated and Esarhaddon decided to rebuild it in 679.107 The chronology of reigns of the quoted kings is approximate and the lapses of time between the different reigns seem to be more or less correct. However, it is evident that they were approximations since the inscription Assur B (Ass. B) gives 586 years instead of 580 years for the last interval.108 Following the advice of a diviner’s bowl and the extispicy of a liver, Esarhaddon razed the temple from its battlements down to its foundations, but without changing its location. He participated symbolically in the preparation of the bricks by placing a basket on his head in order to transport the clay which, mixed with chopped straw, will be used to make the bricks.109 After one year of preparation, he inaugurated the laying of the first brick. The second year, he rebuilt Esharra, roofed it with beams of cedar and cypress from Mount Sirâra and Mount Lebanon, fastened bands of gold on doors of cypress, and restored the shrines, daises, and cult platforms. Then he had Ashur, Ninurta, Nusku, and the other gods and goddesses set up residence in the temple. Finally, he slaughtered a fattened bull and butchered sheep, killed birds and fish, and burned incense. The god Ashur blessed him and named him “the builder of the temple.”110 Together with his nobles and his subjects, he held a three-day celebration in the courtyard of Esharra. The importance of the rebuilding of Esharra is evidenced by the fact that it is reported in many inscriptions, in particular the building of a gatehouse of the palace in Assur.111 Esarhaddon plated Egashankalama, the temple of the goddess Ishtar of Arbela, with silver, making it shine like daylight. Then in the entrance, he installed lions, screaming anzû-birds, laḫmu-monsters, and kurību-genii fashioned from silver and copper.112 Several inscriptions mention the building activities in Nimrud: “(with regard to) the armory, which is in Nimrud, that Shalmaneser (III) … had built, I incorporated unused lands as an addition (to it),

60

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

raised the terrace with massive stones from the mountains, (and) built a palace for my lordly pleasure on it.”113 The stone bull colossi and the two stone humanheaded lions forming the door jambs of a monumental portal in the Southwest Palace bear a proprietary inscription of Esarhaddon.114 An inscription on a limestone slab described his waterworks program in the vicinity of Nimrud, mentioning the cleaning of the Tebiltu canal, dug by Ashurnasirpal II from the Upper Zab River to Nimrud.115 An inscription, dated to 18 Ayyâru 672, ends with an account of the construction of a palace for the crown prince Ashurbanipal in Tarbisu, modern Sherif Khan, not far from Nineveh. He transformed the site of Egaltura, which had become too small: “I built (and) completed a magnificent palace, whose site is very extensive, for the pleasure of Ashurbanipal, senior son of the king, who (resides) in the House of Succession, my beloved son.”116 He roofed it with cedar beams from Mount Amanus and installed doors of cypress in the entrance gateways. In central and southern Mesopotamia, Esarhaddon performed building activities in Bâs, Dêr, Cutha, Borsippa, Nippur, and Uruk. A fragmentary inscription attributed to this king described the reconstruction of Edurgina, the temple of the god Bêl-sarbi in the city of Bâs.117 Mâr-Issâr sent a letter to the king to inform him about the construction of the temple of Dêr, situated on the border of Elam, which did not advance: “This year they (the workers) have started to build, (but) one day they do the work, the next day they leave it.”118 To avoid disturbances from the Elamites, Mâr-Issâr suggested the king should send him a bodyguard and an Assyrian master-builder. Another letter from Mâr-Issâr describes the building work in Akkad: transporting asphalt from the country of Ituʾu, and glazing and gilding kiln-fired bricks.119 A damaged inscription describing construction work in the city of Cutha could possibly be ascribed to Esarhaddon, and a letter addressed to this king concerns the wall repair of the Nergal temple.120 A cylinder fragment commemorated work on the temple of the goddess Gula at Borsippa “which had become weak due to the strength of the (river’s) destructive flooding.” The letter mentioned above also addresses flooding that damaged several bridges, which needed to be reinforced as a result: “Let the bridge of ships be kept as it is … they will put in an improved filling, (so that) the king, my lord, can cross over it in his chariot.” The same problem occurred for the quay-wall of Ezida, the temple of Nabû, who traveled to Babylon with his processional boat on the canal.121 Several cylinders from Nippur describe Esarhaddon’s renovation of Ebaradurgara (“Dais of the Throne”), temple of the goddess “Queen-of-Nippur” (i.e., Sharrât-Nippur), which had become aged.122 He identified its original emplacement, removed its dilapidated sections, surveyed its entire foundation, and completely rebuilt it. Another inscription found on four cylinders recorded



Chapter 5: The Rebuilding of Babylon

61

the restoration of the Ekur temple (“House Mountain”) of Enlil at Nippur.123 Two inscribed bricks recorded the fact that Esarhaddon used baked bricks to enlarge the Pukudadaga well (“Pure, Shining well”) in the courtyard of this temple.124 Finally, the restoration of Eanna (“House of Heaven”), temple of Ishtar at Uruk, is described n several clay cylinders.125 This temple of “highest rank” housed several cellae that he also restored: Enirgalana (“House, Prince of Heaven”), the cella of Ishtar, and Ehiliana (“House, Luxuriance of Heaven”) of Nanâya, “which Nazi-Maruttash, king of Babylon (1324–1298), had built, (and which) Erîba-Marduk, king of Babylon (769–761), had shored up.”126 In the context of construction work as a propaganda tool, it is not surprising that Esarhaddon’s mother Naqiʾa also built a palace. Two of Naqiʾa’s inscriptions report that she built a palace on the citadel of Nineveh, behind the temple of Sîn and Shamash, “a gift for (her) son Esarhaddon.”127 According to Sarah C. Melville, this palace was probably underway by about 676.128 The construction of a palace such as this for the king was unprecedented in the NeoAssyrian period.129 A small palace was built in Nineveh by Esarhaddon, called Ashur-etel-ilâni-mukîn-apli, when he was still crown prince, for his “princely residence.”130 In total, the construction of five palaces are mentioned in the royal inscriptions: three palaces in Nineveh—one by Esarhaddon when he was crown prince, one when he was king, one by the queen mother—and two palaces in Nimrud and Tarbisu. The boast “I constructed palaces throughout my country” was a common literary motif.131 Many letters from priests to Esarhaddon concern the design, manufacture, and installation of the statues of the king in various temple cellae within the empire; they were erected next to those of the gods and were considered divine, following an old tradition.132 Statues of the queen mother were also fashioned and placed in temples and in the streets, for example, in the streets of Gadisê.133 Statues of the king’s sons were installed behind and in front of the image of the moon god in Harrân.134 Together with the king’s statues, statues of the princes served as guardians of a treaty imposed on imperial vassals.135 The royal inscription Assur-Babylon E (AsBbE) refers to a cast silver dais decoration in the Ashur temple: “I fashioned on it (the dais) my royal image (shown) praying to their divinity (and) imploring (them) constantly to give me life, and an image of Ashurbanipal, my crown prince.”136

Chapter Six The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675) 6.1. The Strategy of the Campaigns When Esarhaddon ascended the throne, he had two priorities: first, to neutralize his opponents and punish the rebels, supporters of his brothers; and second to redress the sin of his father Sennacherib by rebuilding Babylon.1 These two priorities were contradictory because the first one implied violent action and possibly a military expedition to find the rebels, while the second was a peaceful enterprise. Moreover, he was not naturally inclined to go to war because of his chronic illness. However, as king of Assyria, he was forced to be a warlord and, if possible, to surpass his predecessors in this field or, at minimum, to project such an image through propaganda. His first obligation was to suppress revolts to ensure the security of the empire. A change of reign was always a delicate moment, one that the vassals would take advantage of, if possible, to revolt. In addition to stabilizing the empire, he had to extend his borders: “The god Ashur … empowered me to loot (and) plunder (any) land (that) had committed sin, crime, (or) negligence against the god Ashur (and) to enlarge the territory of Assyria.”2 He needed to project an image that proved that he had fulfilled the missions entrusted to him by the gods: “(I am the one who) ruled over all lands and [made all rulers submissive] to him.”3 The main difficulty in studying Esarhaddon’s campaigns is not the lack of information, but their chronological arrangement. Even if the inscription Nineveh A (Nin. A) is sometimes considered as the king’s annals, they are not annals in the strict sense of the term, such as we have from the reigns of other Assyrian kings. For dating Esarhaddon’s campaigns, three different systems were used, but none systematically: the year of reign, the name of the eponym, and the number of the campaign. The first two systems are helpful for the historian but the third one does not provide clear information because not all the campaigns are numbered and, anyway, the number only gives a relative chronology. Moreover, some inscriptions are only dated by the day and month, simply because the year was known to the Assyrians, but it is unknown to us. The astrological reports are sometimes helpful in determining 63

64

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

events chronologically, for example, when they refer to datable eclipses. However, several campaigns are mentioned without any precision, in disorder or merely by geographical association. Last but not least, in terms of difficulty, it is sometimes hard to know, even when Esarhaddon claims to have done so, whether it was the Assyrian king who was leading the campaign, or one of his generals. Esarhaddon’s campaigns can be divided into two main phases: the first one from 680 to 675 and the second from 674 to 670. The difference between the two phases is whether or not the campaign was centered on Egypt. The first phase was not, but included several different countries all around the empire. The second phase was focused on Egypt. Does this mean that Esarhaddon did not plan to campaign in Egypt during the first phase of his reign? No doubt he shared the Assyrian dream of conquering Egypt, and his campaign against the city of Arzâ at the Brook of Egypt, for example, seems to support this view. But his priority strategy was probably to quell revolts as they erupted. His strategy may have been to wait for the right moment to launch his campaign against Egypt. In any event, it is evident that during the second phase of campaigns, his focus was Egypt, a land he was fully intent on conquering. Before most of his campaigns, Esarhaddon asked questions of the sun god Shamash in order to know whether he or one of his generals should lead them, when and how, and whether or not he would win the victory. Some of his questioning corresponds to events mentioned in the royal inscriptions. Other queries provide otherwise unknown information. Through their responses to Esarhaddon’s questioning, the major role of the diviners in the orientation of the campaigns must be underscored.

6.2. The Campaign against the Sealand The first campaign was conducted against the Sealand. The Assyrian account is not dated precisely: “At that time (ina u4-me-šu-ma),” but the Babylonian Chronicles dated it to Esarhaddon’s year 1 (680).4 The Sealand was the area of Bît-Yakin on the shore of the Persian/Arabian Gulf. When Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir went to Ur, he “had gone upstream,” meaning that he went up the course of the Euphrates from the shore of the gulf where the river then flowed directly.5 BîtYakin was very important for the king of Assyria because the Chaldean leaders of this tribe were powerful and, on several occasions, had taken the throne of Babylon. Esarhaddon did not want to risk suffering the nasty surprise of a new ambitious tribal leader. That is why he reacted immediately in his first year. The so-called rebel and traitor Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir was the son of Mardukapla-iddina II, known in the Bible as Merodach-baladan, who was the tribal leader of Bît-Yakin and king of Babylon from 721 to 710, and in 704 or 703.6



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

65

After the defeat of Merodach-baladan, who had lost the throne of Babylon and fled to Elam, Sennacherib appointed Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir as “governor” (šaknu) of the Sealand, shortly after 689.7 He was loyal to Assyria until the beginning of Esarhaddon’s reign, when he still held the same position.8 He probably has nothing to do with the Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir mentioned in a letter relating to a cook who stole a golden statue of the plague god Erra.9 Esarhaddon complained that the governor of the Sealand “did not keep his treaty nor remember the agreement of Assyria, forgot the good relations of my father.”10 The Akkadian term for “treaty” is adê in one text11 and mamîtu in the others.12 Taking advantage of the “disturbances in Assyria” (da-li-iḫ-ti KUR aššur.KI) and trusting in his own strength, he mustered his army and camp, and besieged Nikkal-iddin, the governor of Ur, who was loyal to Assyria and cut off his escape route. Nikkal-iddin had probably been appointed governor of Ur by Sennacherib, possibly in 689, and he is mentioned in several documents: royal inscriptions, letters, and legal and administrative texts dated to Esarhaddon’s reign.13 Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir probably rebelled against Esarhaddon because he wanted to enhance his position in the south. The Assyrian king reproached him for his lack of respect and recognition: “He was not respectful, did not stop (his evil deeds), and would not leave my servant alone. Moreover, he did not send his messenger before me and did not ask after the well-being of my kingship.”14 Esarhaddon was in Nineveh when he heard of these evil deeds, and responded in anger. There are two versions of his reaction: “I sent my officials, the governors on the border of his land, against him”15—a logical decision because the Sealand was a long way from Nineveh and the neighboring governors could rapidly halt the rebel. However, in an abbreviated version of this text, he boasted of having conducted the army himself: “[I mustered] my [army] and took the direct [route] to the Sealand.”16 The Babylonian Chronicles, less distorted by propaganda than the royal inscriptions, agree with the first version, giving credit for this initiative to his Assyrian officials.”17 Nabû-zêrkitti-lîshir, who had not succeeded in capturing Ur, heard of the Assyrian army’s approach, and fled “like a fox” to Elam, putting his trust in the king of Elam. But the king was unable to save his life and he was killed by sword allegedly by the gods in Elam because he had broken his oath to them. The names of the gods referred to differ from one text to the other: either Ashur alone, or Ashur and Shamash, or Ashur, Sîn, Shamash, Bêl, and Nabû.18 According to the Babylonian Chronicles, however, he was not killed by the gods, but rather by the king himself: “The king of Elam took him prisoner and put him to the sword.”19 His brother Naʾid-Marduk, who had probably fled with him to Elam, witnessed his assassination and fled Elam, coming to meet the king of Assyria in Nineveh. Esarhaddon had pity on him and appointed him governor of the Sealand: “I made the entire Sealand, the domain of his brother, subject to him. (Now) he

66

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

comes yearly, without ceasing, to Nineveh with his heavy audience gift and kisses my feet.”20 In an abbreviated version of the annals, he says: “[I impose upon him the tribute and paym]entof my lordship yearly (šat-ti-šam), without ce[asing].”21 However, a sentence of this inscription is difficult to understand: “I had pity on [Naʾid-Marduk and] Ummanigash, his brother.”22 Ummanigash is Humban-haltash II, king of Elam from 681 to 675,23 but why would Esarhaddon have pity on him? Moreover, he was said to be the brother—ŠEŠ-šú (ahu-šú)—of Naʾid-Marduk, a tribal leader of Bît-Yakin. Either the lacunae of this passage were misinterpreted or there was a scribal error. What subsequently became of Nikkal-iddin, governor of Ur? Two texts from Ur are dated to the eighth and twelfth year of Nikkal-iddin: they can tentatively be dated to 681 and 677 respectively if he was appointed governor of this city by Sennacherib in 689.24 It would mean that, after the campaign against Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir, Nikkal-iddin was confirmed by Esarhaddon in his position of governor of Ur.

6.3. The Campaign against Arzâ and the Brook of Egypt The expedition to the city of Arzâ, which is in the district of the Brook of Egypt, is not dated, but probably occurred in Esarhaddon’s second year of reign (679).25 He conquered and plundered the city of Arzâ, “which is in the district of the Brook of Egypt” (šá pa-a-ṭina-ḫal KUR.mu-ṣur-ri),26 or “the neighborhood of the Brook of Egypt” (šai-te-e na-ḫal KUR.mu-uṣ-ri).27 On an alabaster tablet, he even wrote: “I conqu[ered the] Brook of Egypt” (ak-˹šud˺ [URU].˹na˺-ḫal mu-ṣur).”28 However, this last inscription is a summary of Esarhaddon’s most important military feats and the scribe probably had no idea of the geography of this area. In fact, the terms itû, pattu, and pāṭu referred to an area rather than to a border. Two identifications have been proposed for the location of the Brook of Egypt: Wâdî Gazze (Nahal Besor) and Wâdî el-Arish.29 Arzâ was clearly located near the Brook of Egypt, but its identification is still uncertain: it is possibly Tell Jemmeh.30 The areas beyond these wâdîs were controlled by the Arab tribal leaders who cooperated with the Assyrians, thus gaining greater power and economic strength.31 Asuhîli, king of Arzâ, was possibly a tribal leader cooperating with the Assyrians like Idibiʾilu, Siruatti, and the sheikh of Laban in the preceding reigns.32 Esarhaddon put Asuhîli into fetters and brought him to Assyria “together with his heavy audience gift” (it-ti ta-marti-šú [ka]-bit-ti).33 There are several variants in the inscriptions: either he was deported alone, or with his counselors, or with the people of Arzâ.34 He was (or they were) seated and bound near the citadel gate of Nineveh “along with bear(s), dog(s), and pig(s)” (or “like a pig”).35 Esarhaddon boasted of having suppressed the revolt of Arzâ himself, but the city of Arzâ was more than one



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

67

thousand kilometers from Nineveh and it would have been difficult for him to conduct a second campaign in the same year 679 against twenty-one cities of Cilicia and against the Cimmerians.

6.4. The Campaign against Cilicia and the Cimmerians The campaigns against Cilicia and the Cimmerians are always linked in the royal inscriptions, with two exceptions in which Cilicia is missing.36 In nine other inscriptions where they are linked, the order is always the same: the Cimmerians followed by Cilicia.37 The Cimmerians of the western group were recorded as having conquered Phrygia in 696–695, prompting King Midas to take poison rather than face capture, and a query made to Shamash referred to an alliance of Phrygia with the Cimmerians.38 In fact, the weakening of Urartu had opened the way for a Cimmerian incursion into the area between Lake Van and Lake Urmia, and farther west into Asia Minor to the kingdoms of Phrygia and Lydia. During the reign of Esarhaddon, the Cimmerians attacked Cilicia and Tabal under their new ruler Teushpa. The king of Assyria briefly recounted his victory over the Cimmerian chief, immediately after the suppression of the revolt of Asuhîli, king of Arzâ: “Moreover, I struck with the sword Teushpa, a Cimmerian, a barbarian whose home is remote, together with his entire army, in the territory of the land of Hubushna.”39 He was victorious over Teushpa, but did not kill him as, in an abbreviated version of the annals, he added that he “[imposed upon him] a heavy [tribute].”40 The battle took place in the “territory (erṣetu or kaqqura) of the land of Hubushna,” or in the “land of Hubushna,” in eastern central Anatolia. A more precise localization for Hubushna is found in the Til Barsip stele: “A district in the land of Ish[…]ar (na-ge-e KUR.iš-[x]-ar),”41 but unfortunately the name of the district is damaged. According to André Lemaire, Hubushna was near Ereğli in the Konya Plain, traveling westward from Que after having crossed the Cilician Gates. According to Askold I. Ivantchik, Hubushna was located in the Anatolian kingdom of Tabal.42 Among his questioning of Shamash, Esarhaddon wanted to know whether Kuzzurakeans, Tabalians, or Cilicians would invade Que.43 If the chronological order of the battles is correct, the king of Assyria faced the Cilicians after his defeat of the Cimmerians. Cilicia was composed of two parts: Que and Hilakku. Que probably corresponded to the plain of Cilicia Pedias. It was bounded by the Mediterranean to the south, the Taurus Mountains to the north, the Amanus range to the east, and to the west the mountains of Cilicia Traccheia. Cilicia Traccheia probably corresponded, at least in part, to Assyrian Hilakku.44 The main land passes by which entry could be gained into Que were the Cilician Gates and Amanus Gates. From Hubushna, Esarhaddon had two possibilities to reach Hilakku: either he went down through the Cilician Gates

68

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

to the plain of Que where he may have established his military base, or he directly crossed the “inaccessible (Taurus) mountains in the neighborhood of the land of Tabal.”45 The people of Hilakku were “evil Hittites, who trusted in their mighty mountains and who from earliest days, had not been submissive to the yoke.”46 In 709, the Assyrian governor of Que had conducted three raids against Midas who had captured cities in a mountainous region, probably Hilakku.47 In 696, Kirûa, the city lord of Illubru (Byzantine Lampron, modern Çamlιyayla), had incited the population of Hilakku to rebel, and the cities of Ingirâ (Anchiale) and Tarzu (Tarsus) aligned themselves with him.48 Sennacherib’s campaign had comprised three operations, the first of which was the defeat of the population of Hilakku. In fact, most of this population was not sheltered inside fortifications but benefited from the ruggedness of the terrain where they fought. Esarhaddon divided this population into two parts: those who rebelled and those who did not. His action against the rebellious faction was very violent: “I surrounded, conquered, plundered, demolished, destroyed, (and) burned with fire twentyone of their fortified cities and small cities in their environs.”49 The figures he gives are undoubtedly exaggerated because there were probably not that many fortified cities in Hilakku. As regards the other section of the population, those who had not rebelled, Esarhaddon contented himself with submitting them to his yoke: “(As for) the rest of them, who were not guilty of (any) sin or crime, I imposed the heavy yoke of my lordship upon them.”50 The revolt of the people of Hilakku can probably be explained by a desire to control the Cilician Gates, which would allow them, for example, to gain access to the silver mines of Bulgar Malden, about forty kilometers away. The Assyrians, wanting to prevent external access to their resources, could not give up control of this area.

6.5. The Campaign against Bît-Dakkûri After Sennacherib’s destruction of Babylon in 689, Assyrian control in the area of Bît-Dakkûri had possibly become somewhat lax, encouraging BîtDakkûri to appropriate fields, which were lying vacant at that time, around the destroyed city.51 Esarhaddon’s campaign against Bît-Dakkûri is dated in the Babylonian Chronicles to 678 (year 3).52 His objective was to reconcile himself with the Babylonians by solving their problems. He said he conducted this campaign himself, which is possible because it corresponded to his objective: “I plundered (or sacked) the land of Bît-Dakkûri, which is in Chaldea, an enemy of Babylon. I captured Shamash-ibni, its king, a rogue and outlaw.”53 He had gained power by encroaching by force on fields belonging to citizens of Babylon and Borsippa, without respecting the oath of the gods. For fear of the gods Bêl and Nabû, Esarhaddon returned the plundered fields to the citizens of



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

69

Babylon and Borsippa. According to the Babylonian Chronicles, Shamash-ibni and the governor of Nippur were transported to Assyria and executed.54 We do not know why the governor of Nippur was also executed. Shamash-ibni was replaced on the throne of Bît-Dakkûri by Nabû-shallim, the son of Balâssu, who was loyal to Assyria. This Balâssu was the tribal leader of Bît-Dakkûri in the reign of Tiglath-pileser III.55

6.6. The Revolts of Abdi-Milkûti and Sanda-uarri The date of the revolt led by Abdi-Milkûti, king of Sidon, is given in the Babylonian Chronicles: “[The fourth year (677)]: Sidon was captured (and) sacked.”56 The royal inscriptions mention: “In my second campaign.”57 Esarhaddon probably only numbered the campaigns that he conducted (as opposed to his generals), but it is difficult to know whether the campaign that he counted as the first one was against the Sealand, Arzâ, or Cilicia and the Cimmerians. Abdi-Milkûti revolted because he was overwhelmed by the tax burden and excessive control of his business activities: “(He) did not fear my lordship (and) did not listen to the words of my lips, (and) trusted in the rolling sea and threw the yoke of the god Ashur.”58 However, his revolt was a risky endeavor because he did not have the benefit of an island refuge as did the neighboring Phoenician city of Tyre. The main agglomeration at Tyre was built on the continental shore and two small islands lay offshore: Zire and the island that is today connected to the seashore by a jetty and houses the Castle of the Sea. Abdi-Milkûti was looking for allies, but he could not count on the king of Tyre, his defeated rival, nor on the overly cautious king of Byblos, nor on the king of Arwad who did not want to suffer the same fate as his neighboring city Simyra.59 Abdi-Milkûti therefore concluded an alliance with Sanda-uarri, king of Kundu and Sissû in Cilicia, with whom he undoubtedly had commercial ties. He may have had other reasons as well, but what they might be is unclear. The two allies swore an oath by the great gods with one another and they trusted in their own strength. However, this oath had no value in the eyes of Esarhaddon because it was sworn between two vassals and was guaranteed by local gods. Sissû was identified with the town of Kozan, and Kundu with either the town of Anavaza twenty kilometers to the south or with Cyinda near Mersin.60 Esarhaddon was interested in the Phoenician coast mainly because of its strategic location on the route to Egypt. He also intended to develop Assyria’s sea power through Phoenician war fleets. The crushing of the revolt of Sidon is the only western event of his reign recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles because it was so violent that it left its mark in peoples’ minds. The royal inscriptions recount the crushing of the revolt in great detail and in a lyrical

70

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

style: “I leveled Sidon, his stronghold, which is situated in the midst of the sea, like a flood, tore out its wall(s) and its dwelling(s), and threw (them) into the sea; and I (even) made the site where it stood disappear.”61 Abdi-Milkûti fled out to sea: “I caught him like a fish from the midst of the sea and cut off his head.”62 As he had no Assyrian ships, he used either a Sidonian ship or a ship from another Phoenician city for this endeavor. Esarhaddon carried off to Assyria the king of Sidon’s wife—implying that he did not have a harem—along with his sons, daughters, and palace retainers. In his palace he amassed gold, silver, precious stones, garments with trimming, linens, elephant hides, ivory, ebony, and boxwood in large quantities. Two inscribed translucent alabaster amphoras coming from the plundering of Sidon were found in Assur.63 He also carried off oxen, sheep, goats, and donkeys in huge numbers. Then he ordered the kings of Hatti, including the other Phoenician kings, to build a new city named “Kâr-Esarhaddon” where he settled people captured from the eastern mountains and sea. He captured all the cities of the Sidonian territory: Bît-Supûri (Tell Sippor, Bsafaray?), Sikkû (Rmayle?), Giʾ (Jiyye), Inimme (Nâʽme), Hildûa (Khalde), Qartimme (Kfarshima?), Biʾrû (Beirut), Kilmê (Kalmin? 4 kilometers east of Batrun), Bitirume (Batrun), Sagû (Shekka), Ampa (Enfe), Bît-Gisimeya(?), Birgiʾ (Barğa), Gambûlu(?), Dalaimme (Delhum), and Isihimmu (Shîm).64 In these cities too he settled people captured from the eastern mountainous areas or from the seacoast. He reorganized Sidon as an Assyrian province: “I placed my official as a governor over them, and increased and imposed upon it (this province) tribute and payment greater than before.”65 Finally, he favored Baʾalu (Ba’al), king of Tyre, by handing over to him the Sidonian cities of Maʾarubbu and Sarepta (Sarafand): as Sidon and Tyre were two rival cities, the Assyrian kings employed a special policy to weaken the strongest in order to strengthen the weakest, alternatively, as Esarhaddon himself explained: “(your king) shall abase the mighty, raise up the lowly.”66 In the same year, after having quashed the revolt of Abdi-Milkûti, Esarhaddon took care to suppress that of Sanda-uarri. In the same way, he presented his adversary as “a dangerous enemy, who did not fear my lordship (and) abandoned the gods, who trusted in the impregnable mountains.”67 The so-called Papyrus of Adon has been misinterpreted as a call for help from Sanda-uarri to the pharaoh when it actually dates much later—to 603 BCE— and concerns the Neo-Babylonian Empire.68 The king of Assyria’s actions against these two kings run in parallel, one at sea, the other in the mountains: “(I) caught him (Sanda-uarri) like a bird from the midst of the mountains, and cut off his head.”69 He thus boasted of being an excellent fisherman and an excellent hunter, and in killing Abdi-Milkûti, he outdid his father Sennacherib who had failed to capture Lûli in 701.70 He did not carry off booty from the



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

71

Sanda-uarri campaign, as his goal in this case was only to make an example of him. However he hung the heads of both Abdi-Milkûti and Sanda-uarri around the necks of their nobles and paraded them in the squares of Nineveh to the accompaniment of singers and musicians. The Babylonian Chronicles dated the capture of Sidon to year 5 (677), and the decapitation of Abdi-Milkûti to year 4 (676).71 It is more logical to date both actions to the same year,72 but the parade in Nineveh possibly only took place in 676. According to Hayim Tadmor, the passage of the annals contains the exact wording of an Assyrian victory chant that was cried out during the parade: “‘In Tashrîtu—the head of Abdi-Milkûti. In Addaru—the head of Sandauarri!’”73 This chant, the only one of its kind in Assyrian royal inscriptions, would have been introduced several years after the event and was quoted explicitly because it had grown in popularity. The two following lines represent a comment, chiastically arranged: “I beheaded (both) in the same year: with the former I did not delay, with the latter I was quick.”74 Is it the king of Sidon who is represented on the Til Barsip (Tell Ahmar) and Zincirli (Samʾal) steles? The obverses of both stelae depict Esarhaddon holding two prisoners with ropes attached to a ring pierced through their noses. The kneeling, beardless figure wearing a uraeus headdress is generally identified as Ushanahunu, the crown prince of Egypt. As to the identity of the second, standing figure, a bearded man wearing a conical hat, several hypotheses have been put forward: Abdi-Milkûti, king of Sidon,75 Baʾalu, king of Tyre,76 or a prisoner without any specific identification.77 Abdi-Milkûti’s name is written on the Til Barsip stele just beneath the figures,78 but the king of Sidon had been killed several years prior to the erection of the two steles. The Til Barsip stele has an unfinished inscription and was probably erected not long before Esarhaddon’s death in 669; the Zincirli stele was erected after 671 because it related to the conquest of Egypt. Nevertheless, the image of Abdi-Milkûti, humiliated as a prisoner, could have been used to dissuade other cities from initiating a revolt. Baʾalu, king of Tyre, who revolted in year 10 (671), was never captured,79 but his representation on the stele could have served as a threat or warning.80 In the end, the identification of this standing prisoner remains inconclusive.

6.7. The Treaty with Baʾalu of Tyre Esarhaddon concluded a vassal treaty with King Baʾalu I of Tyre after the reorganization of the territory of the previous city of Sidon.81 Two different dates have been suggested for the treaty: 676 and 670. The treaty is dated to 676 by those who consider its terms to be favorable to the king of Tyre since, at that time, Esarhaddon had given two Sidonian cities to Baʾalu and he wanted to

72

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

complete this gift by stipulating favorable conditions in the treaty. Moreover, the references to “these cities which I destroyed” (URU.MEŠ an-nu-te šá ah-pun[i]) and “the people of Sidon” (KUR.ṣi-du-[na-a-a]), even in damaged passages, further support this dating of the text.82 With only limited power placed in the hands of an Assyrian official based in the Tyrian city of Ushu, the treaty gave Baʾalu full control of the trade in all the Levantine ports. The arrangement was thus rather advantageous for the king of Tyre. Moreover, the Tyrian gods were named as guarantors of the treaty on a par with the gods of the Assyrians. The treatment of Tyre was much harsher after its revolt in 671. In support of dating the treaty to this year, the clauses concerning the ships of Baʾalu and Tyre presuppose that the whole coast was under Assyrian control.83 “His mouth” (pi-i-šú), which Baʾalu should not listen to, would be a reference to Taharqa, with whom Tyre had become allied during the revolt (see §7.5). Overall, this high dating appears to be more likely. Indeed, although the relationship was now relaxed between Tyre and Assyria, Esarhaddon always distrusted this rebellious Phoenician city, which remained impregnable on its island. This is why he imposed on the Tyrian king a treaty that defined his rights and duties, and established strict control over his activities. He also felt the need to regulate the maritime trade of the Levantine coast for the first time since becoming a maritime power. The treaty stipulated that an Assyrian representative (qêpu) was permanently installed in Tyre, more precisely in Ushu, located in its continental territory, because the island was still independent. His mission was to control any messenger received at the Tyrian palace and any letter sent to the king or to the “council of elders” (LÚ.par-šá-mu-te).84 The treaty granted the right of windfall in favor of Esarhaddon in the event of the sinking of a ship belonging to the Tyrian king or to any Tyrian. “However, one must not do any harm to any person on board of the ship but one must return them all to their countries.”85 The treaty also enumerated the trading ports and routes that Esarhaddon “entrusted” (ip-qu-[du-u-ni]) to Baʾalu, on condition of payment of customs duties.86 The expression “to Akko, Dor” (a-na URU.a-ku-u URU.du-uʾ-ri) seems to indicate a direction or a demarcation south of Tyre. The following phrase “to the entire district of the Philistines” (ina na-gi-e KUR.pilis-te gab-[bu]) designated a set geographical area. It has to be remembered that Assyrians did not make any distinction between Phoenician cities and other coastal cities. The phrase “and to all the cities within Assyrian territory on the seacoast” (ù ina URU.MEŠ ta-hu-me šá KUR-aš-šur.KI šá ši-di tam-tim gab-[bu]) designated a second geographical area, probably the Assyrian provinces of Sidon and Simyra. A third geographical area was located north of Tyre: “and to Byblos, the Lebanon, all the cities in the mountains” (ù ina URU.gu-ub-lu KUR. lab-na-[nu] URU-MEŠ šá ina KUR-i gab-b[u]). Finally, a fourth geographical



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

73

designation encompasses all three geographical areas: “all (these) being cities of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria” (am-mar URU.MEŠ [šá maš-š]ur-PAB-AŠ MAN KUR-aš-šur). The city of Byblos was distinct from the second geographical designation, and was associated with Mount Lebanon. This was only natural because this area was undoubtedly an important supplier of wood to Assyria.87 Conversely, the mountain-area cities mentioned in the same geographical grouping as Byblos cannot be identified: if the fourth geographical area applies exclusively to them, it could be the royal forest estate, the paradeisos.88 In any event, Byblos appears to be an autonomous city in this treaty; Arwad, which was also autonomous at this time, is not mentioned, but its name could be lost in a lacuna. In short, this treaty was one of vassalship. With the transformation of Sidon into an Assyrian province, Esarhaddon’s objective was probably to neutralize these two Phoenician cities in preparation for the campaign against Egypt. With their powerful war fleets they could have posed a problem. From the Tyrian point of view, this treaty was quite favorable to them because they could reengage in their maritime commercial activities and reestablish relations with their colonies. However, Baʾalu of Tyre probably bore with difficulty the close surveillance and strict control imposed on him by the treaty.

6.8. The Campaign against Bâzu According to the Babylonian Chronicles, “The fifth year (676), on the second day of the month Tashrîtu (October), the army of Assyria captured Bâzu.”89 The hexagonal prism on which this campaign is related is dated to the twentysecond day of Ayyâru (May) 676 (eponymy of Banbâ, the second vizier), and a second witness is dated to the eighteenth day of Abu (August).90 On a hollow prism from Nineveh, this event is dated by the number of the campaign, but unfortunately the specific number is missing: “[In] my […]th campaign.”91 There is clearly a dating error as inscriptions written in May and August 676 cannot describe a later campaign dated to October 676. This was possibly an issue of the Babylonian Chronicles rather than the royal inscriptions because, for the latter, Assyrian scribes were better informed about their king’s military actions. Bâzu was located 1,500 kilometers from Nineveh, on the Arabian Peninsula, in the Persian/Arabian Gulf, near the island of Bahrain; Mount Hazû is to be identified with modern Jebel Hasu.92 The description of the desert appears realistic as if Esarhaddon had been there: “(As for) the land of Bazû, a district in a remote place, a forgotten place of dry land, saline ground, a place of thirst, one hundred and forty leagues of desert, thistles, and gazelle-tooth stones, twenty leagues of lands where snakes and scorpions fill the plain like

74

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

ants.”93 The length of this desert in northeastern Arabia was 140 leagues (777 km) or 120 leagues (666 km) in other inscriptions,94 figures that seem plausible. After having advanced twenty leagues (111 km) beyond Mount Hazû, Esarhaddon reached a district “to which no king before me had gone since earliest days.”95 This statement was true. He declared having won the victory over eight kings of this district—in fact six kings and two queens. He quoted the names of these kings and queens and of their capital cities. However, there are some contradictions in the names of the kings and cities. In some inscriptions, the list is the following: “Kîsu, king of the city of Haldisu, Akbaru, king of the city of Ilpiatu, Mansâku, king of the city of Magalani, Iapaʾ, queen of the city of Dihrâni, Habîsu, king of the city of Qadabaʾ, Niharu, king of the city of Gaʾuani, Baslu, queen of the city of Ihilum, and Habaziru, king of the city of Pudaʾ.”96 In other inscriptions, the list differs in parts, only providing the names of seven cities: Magalani and Dihrâni which are the same and five new names: Handasu, Alpiana, Qatabuʾ, Padê, and Udêru.97 Esarhaddon carried off the goods of these kings and queens, their goods, their possessions, and their people to Assyria. Another king, Laialê, ruler of the city of Iadiʾ, behaved differently from other kings and queens: he was afraid and fled before the Assyrian army. Then “‘he came to Nineveh, my capital city, before me, and kissed my feet. I had pity on him and said to him ‘aḫulap! (a-ḫu-lap).’”98 aḫulap is used as an exclamation expressing compassion, but a precise translation is not possible. Here, the king of Assyria uses it with reference to a ruler begging for mercy. Esarhaddon asserted the power of Ashur over Laialê’s gods, which he had plundered and returned to him. He created the province of Bâzu in this remote location: “I put that province of Bâzu (na-ge-e KUR.ba-a-zi) under him (and) imposed on him my lordly tribute (and) payment.”99 In a summary of Esarhaddon’s most important military acts, Dilmun is associated with the conquest of Bâzu: “I con]quered the city of Bâzu (Bâza), a district in a remote place; I fixed the tribute of my lordship on Qanâ, king of Dilmun.”100 On a clay tablet from Nineveh, he presented himself as the “king of the kings of lands of Dilmun, Magan, (and) Meluhha.”101 Magan and Meluhha were often associated and had already been presented in Sumerian mythological texts as remote regions from which ships brought every kind of luxury product: copper, wood, and precious stones from Magan, located in the Oman peninsula; gold, silver, and carnelian from Meluhha, located on the Indus delta.102 In the Neo-Assyrian period, Magan designated Kush and Meluhha was Egypt, as is explicit in one of Esarhaddon’s inscriptions: “Magan and Meluhha, which are called] Kush and Egypt in (their) native tongue.”103 Where was Dilmun located? It is described in Sargon’s inscriptions as an island located at “a journey of 30 bêru away in the midst of the Sea of the rising sun,”104 which has been identified with the Persian/Arabian Gulf.105 The bêru was



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

75

an Akkadian unit of time, the “double hour,” and also a unit of distance. As the unit of distance was probably based on the unit of time, the variations in the measurement of the bêru could be explained on the basis of various marching speeds. Based on a value of 10.8 kilometers for 1 bêru, as has most commonly been proposed, 30 bêru would be approximately equivalent to 324 kilometers.106 The question here is knowing whether the point of reference for calculating that distance was the seashore facing Dilmun, the seashore of Bît-Yakin, or the heartland of Assyria. Assuming that the configuration of the Persian/Arabian Gulf was different at that time, the point of reference for the distance calculation would correspond better to the seashore of Bît-Yakin. This would mean that the island of Dilmun was much further to the south of the Gulf. Several proposals for different islands of the Gulf have been made: in particular, Bahrain, Failaka in Kuwait, or Tarut, six kilometers from the town of Qatif on the Saudi Arabian coastline. The excavations conducted at Qalaat Bahrain confirmed that this site was occupied in the Neo-Assyrian period but it cannot be identified with Dilmun because it is located some 800 kilometers from the seashore of Bît-Yakin.107 The excavations at Tarut and the fortuitous discoveries made show a continuous occupation of the site from prehistoric times to the Ottoman period, including the Neo-Assyrian period, but it cannot be identified with Dilmun either because the distance is around 600 kilometers.108 The distance of around 324 kilometers corresponds to the island of Failaka. However, excavations in this island, in particular at Tell Khazneh and Tell Said, revealed an occupation during the Middle Bronze and NeoBabylonian periods, but the Neo-Assyrian period is only attested by some objects, and the stratigraphy is uncertain.109 However, there are problems with the excavations and an occupation of the site in the Neo-Assyrian period is not excluded. Nevertheless, the island of Failaka seems to be the best candidate for Dilmun during this period, especially since, in Sennacherib’s inscriptions, it is stated that, after the Euphrates flooded Babylon, carrying with it much earth, “its earth reached unto Dilmun.”110 This is a precise description of the muddy water that usually surrounds the island of Failaka. The kings of Dilmun were vassals of Sargon, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon, and paid tribute. However, it was difficult to control them tightly on their island refuge. The conquest of Bâzu, on the neighboring Arabian shore, by Esarhaddon might have facilitated control of the island, but control of the entire province was difficult to maintain.

6.9. Problems with Nippur, Bît-Dakkûri, and Melid After a first campaign against Bît-Dakkûri, dated in the Babylonian Chronicles to 678 (year 3), they mention for 675 (year 6): “In an unknown month,

76

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Shuma-iddin, the governor (of Nippur), and Kudurru, the Dakkûrian, were transported to Assyria.”111 According to the Assyrian inscriptions, the previous governor (šandabakku) of Nippur, […-ahh]ê-shullim, and the tribal leader of Bît-Dakkûri, Shamash-ibni, had been transported to Assyria and executed and were replaced: in Bît-Dakkûri by Nabû-shallim and in Nippur by another, unnamed governor. Then, in 675, Shuma-iddin and Kudurru, respectively the new governor and tribal leader, were simply transported to Assyria. Clearly this indicates a problem involving them, but not necessarily one involving a campaign against them. In fact, the incident is not mentioned in Esarhaddon’s inscriptions and the reason for their transfer to Assyria is unknown. A clay tablet inscription from Nineveh only states that the Assyrian king “established freedom for Nippur, Babylon, Borsippa, (and) Sippar,” but the date is unknown.112 For 675 (year 6) the Babylonian Chronicles also mention that “the Assyrians to Melid.”113 Melid is not mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions. Hence, it is impossible to know whether there was in fact a campaign against Melid. What was the situation of Melid/Kammanu at that time? It was a Neo-Hittite kingdom, located north of Kummuhu, comprising several cities, such as Til-Garimmu (modern Gürün), and its royal city Melid/ Meliddu.114 This city on the Euphrates corresponds to the classical Melitene and is identified with Arslantepe, seven kilometers northeast of modern Malatya. After Sargon II’s campaign in 712, the kingdom of Kammanu was converted into an Assyrian province.115 This king made substantial investments to protect the new Assyrian border, including the fortification of Til-Garimmu, and the construction of the so-called Cappadocian wall.116 In 705, at Sargon’s death, Melid may have broken free of Assyrian control. Sennacherib campaigned against Til-Garimmu in 695, but it is not certain whether he controlled Melid.117 During the reign of Esarhaddon, Melid may have formed part of the kingdom of Tabal, under Mugallu, a king hostile to the Assyrians. Such a situation could have justified the military intervention of the king of Assyria, mentioned in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, if he had been victorious, he would have boasted about it in his inscriptions.118 Whatever the case, it is clear that Mugallu remained one of Esarhaddon’s major enemies throughout the whole of his reign. That he was very concerned about the situation in Melid is clear from the numerous queries he directed to Shamash on the subject. Among them, he asked, Will the king of Phrygia or Mugallu attack a fortress of Melid? Will the chief eunuch drive Mugallu away from a fortress of Melid? Should the Assyrian army lay siege to a fortress of Mugallu of Melid? Will Mugallu of Melid or Ishkallu of Tabal attack the chief eunuch Sha-Nabû-shû? Will Mugallu and Ishkallu wage war?119



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

77

6.10. Undated Campaigns Some campaigns conducted by Esarhaddon or one of his officials between 678 and 675 are not dated with precision: these were against Mannea, the Scythians, the Medes, Ellipi, Elam, Til-Ashuri, Gambulu, and the Arabs. The kingdom of Mannea bordered the Assyrian provinces of Parsua and Bît-Hamban on the eastern flank of the Zagros, and the province of Zamua in the region of Sulaymaniyah in Iraqi Kurdistan. Mannea covered what are now Iranian Kurdistan, western Azerbaijan, and a part of eastern Azerbaijan. Mannea is described in Assyrian sources as a country having many cities and fortresses, fine horsemanship, and prosperous agriculture. Archaeological searches in Mannea are now beginning in Iran, Azerbaijan, and in the Kurdistan provinces at the sites of Qalaichi Tepe, Qale Bardine, Rabat Tepe, and Kul Tarike.120 Because of the conflicts between Assyria and Urartu and the political fragmentation of the kingdom of Mannea, it was constantly divided between the influences of Assyria and Urartu.121 Esarhaddon’s first contact with the Manneans (called Gutians) probably occurred at the beginning of his reign: “So that there would be no trespassing on the borders of their countries they sent messengers (with messages) of friendship and peace to Nineveh, before me, and they swore an oath by the great gods.”122 However, he did not have a good opinion of them, rightly so because they probably broke their oath, which would have justified launching a campaign against them. Some of the reasons for the necessity of such a campaign can be found within the questions addressed to Shamash: for example, he was uncertain about their intentions; he wanted to recover the city of Dur-Illil and not lose the city of Sharru-iqbi. This campaign, which probably occurred in 676 or 675, is briefly described and sometimes linked to the Scythians, allies of the Manneans: “I scattered the Mannean people, undisciplined Gutians, and its army; I put to the sword Ishpakâia, a Scythian, an ally who could not save himself.”123 The Scythians were an ancient nomadic people inhabiting Scythia and dominating the Pontic steppe from at least the eleventh century BCE, the first Scythian kingdom dating to the eighth century.124 In many queries posed to Shamash, both Cimmerians and Scythians are mentioned. While they were not themselves linked, they had common allies, such as the Manneans and the Medes. Esarhaddon asked Shamash for example: Will the army of Assyria defeat the Manneans? Will Scythians and Cimmerians invade Bît-Hamban and Parshumash? These Cimmerians belong to a second group, localized on the eastern border of Assyria.125 Either Esarhaddon or his officials and governors also conducted a campaign against the Medes and some peoples of the Zagros. According to

78

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Pierre Villard, this event occurred in 675.126 Its aim was to impose Assyrian control and a yearly tribute on a handful of restless rulers: Uppis, “chieftain” (bēl āli) of Partakka, Zanasana, chieftain of Partukka and Ramateia, chieftain of Urakazabarna.127 For fear of the Assyrian army, “they brought to Nineveh, my capital city, large thoroughbreds (and) blocks of lapis lazuli, hewn from its mountain, and they kissed my feet.”128 The campaign provided the opportunity for an exploratory journey to the east, to the land of Patusharri, “a district in the area of the salt desert,” on the border of Mount Bikni (Demavend, south of the Caspian Sea), probably going as far as the Dasht-i-Kavir salt deserts in northern Iran. There was possibly also an effort to develop routes for conquest or direct trade with the distant east. Esarhaddon claimed to have defeated Shidir-parna and E-parna, two mighty chieftains of the Medes, who did not capitulate. He carried them off to Assyria, “together with their people, their riding horses, oxen, sheep and goats, (and) Bactrian camels.”129 During the same campaign, Esarhaddon also boasted of having crushed “the wicked (city of) Barnaki, which resides in the land of Tîl-Ashurri, which is called Pitânu in the language of the people of the land of Mihrânu.”130 The Mihrânean language was spoken in the Zagros.131 However, the Assyrian scribes did not have a precise idea about these peoples, sometimes considering the toponyms as cities (URU), and sometimes as countries (KUR): Barnaki, Tîl-Ashurri, Pitânu and Mihrânu.132 New names also appear in the oracular queries to Shamash: Will Mamitiarshu of Media and Kashtaritu of Karkashshi become allies? In reality, the effects of Esarhaddon’s victory over the Manneans could not have been long-lasting because soon afterwards we find them, side by side with Medes, Cimmerians, and Sapardeans, allied with Kashtaritu of Karkashshi, in the central Zagros Mountains. Kashtaritu is commonly identified with Phraortes of the Median dynasty of Deioces and Karkashshi would correspond to the Mede Khashathrita.133 In 675, according to the Babylonian Chronicles, Humban-haltash II, king of Elam, took advantage of the Assyrian troops’s presence in far-away lands to launch a deadly raid on Sippar: “The sixth year (675), the king of Elam entered Sippar (and) a massacre took place.”134 The tensions between Assyria and Elam were palpable during the first part of Esarhaddon’s reign. The Elamites are presented as obstinate and hostile rulers: “The land of Elam was disobedient; the evil enemy, the powerful offspring of the gods, rose up against the wishes of the gods and set out to attack.”135 Unfortunately, the rest of this inscription is damaged; there is a talk of clashes but we have no details. King Humbanhaltash died in 675, immediately after the raid on Sippar, and his brother and successor Urtaku agreed to a treaty with the king of Assyria, which lasted about ten years.136 It is probably this treaty that is mentioned in the annals and



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

79

alluded to in a query to Shamash: “Has Urtaku written sincerely about peace to Esarhaddon?”137 Ellipi was an independent kingdom, located between Media and Elam, whose King Taltâ (Daltâ) was a loyal vassal of Assyria until he died in 707 during the reign of Sargon II. In the battle of succession that followed his death, his sons were supported in part by the Assyrians and in part by the Elamites. Sennacherib was forced to intervene and defeated Ashpa-bara, son of Taltâ. He annexed the Ellipean district of Bît-barrû, renamed its capital city Elenzash Kâr-sin-ahê-eriba, “Sennacherib-burg,” and entrusted it to the governor of the Assyrian province of Harhar.138 But this district was only a part of the territory of Ellipi and the rest of the territory was probably experiencing troubles in the reign of Esarhaddon as there is only a single mention in the royal inscriptions: “(I am) the one who depopulated the land of Ellipi,” and one oracular query to Shamash: “Should Ashurbanipal (crown prince) send Sha-Nabû-shû to Ellipi?”139 In short, during the reign of Esarhaddon, Assyrian control in the northern and eastern territories was weakening because of the growing pressure being exerted by Cimmerians, Scythians, and local rulers—such as Mugallu of Melid and Kashtaritu of Karkashshi—over a wide arc stretching from the central Zagros to Lake Van and central-eastern Anatolia. Finally, the relations of Esarhaddon with the Aramean and Arab tribes are cited in his inscriptions, but without dating. Aramean tribal groups are attested from at least the eleventh century as new occupants of strategic areas in the Jezirah, northern Mesopotamia, and the Syrian steppe.140 The first mention of the Arameans is the military expedition organized against them by Tiglathpileser I in 1111.141 The strong Assyrian military reaction during the late tenth to early ninth century could have forced these tribal groups to migrate southward and to occupy the vast southeastern plain between the Tigris River and Elam. Vaster tribal complexes, such as Puqudu and Gambulu, had retained their distinctive identities, but had developed a number of inner clan subdivisions led by their specific sheikhs (nasikani), who took individual courses of action depending on the circumstances.142 One of these figures was Bêl-iqîsha, son of Bunnannû, “a Gambulian whose residence is located twelve leagues distance (about 58 km) in water and canebrakes.”143 Of his own free will, he came to Nineveh, kissed Esarhaddon’s feet, bringing with him tribute and payment, uncastrated bulls, and teams of Elamite white mules. Another inscription specifies that “the tribute and payment were yearly” (bil-tu u man-da-at-tu šat-ti-šam).144 The king of Assyria presented himself as being generous toward him: “I had pity on him and encouraged him,” while in reality he was interested in his position at the Elam frontier. He reinforced Sha-pî-Bêl, Bêl-iqîsha’s strong fortress city, and installed

80

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

him there together with his archers as a garrison. He explained his objective clearly: “(Thus) I locked up (the fortress) like a door against the land of Elam.” Arab presence in the Near East probably started at the beginning of the first millennium BCE.145 In the Assyrian inscriptions, there were three different Arabian political entities: the tribes, the kingdom of Saba, and the kingdom of Qedar. In the Assyrian Empire, the Arab tribes were probably settled in the northern oases and were in control of trans-Arabian trade, occasionally becoming allies of the Chaldeans in their military activities.146 A large proportion of these Arabs were nomads living in tents and engaged in livestock farming: sheep, goats, and camels.147 Other Arabs were settled in oases, the most important of which were Tadmor (Palmyra), Duma (Adumatu/Dumetu/ Adumu), Dedan, and Têma. Duma is usually identified with Dûmat al-Jandal (possibly the biblical Dumah), the main oasis in the Jauf depression in Wâdî Sirhân, mentioned by classical and Arab authors from the first century BCE onwards as an important oasis.148 It certainly was the most important oasis in the whole of North Arabia, located halfway between Syria and Babylonia, a main stopping point on the roads to Damascus, Medina, and Hîra (near Kûfa), on the western border of Babylonia.149 The Arabs of the oases operated caravan routes to transport goods from the south of Arabia—incense, myrrh, and other aromatic resins, products that were sought after throughout the whole of the Near East. Esarhaddon recalled the conquest of Adumatu, the fortress of the Arabs, by his father Sennacherib, the seizure of all the gods and of Apkallatu, “queen of the Arabs” (šar-rat LÚ.a-ri-bi).150 Apkallatu was perhaps not her name, but her title; she was in reality Teʾelhunu, the first Arab leader attacked by Sennacherib.151 Arab women enjoyed a high degree of independence and could even occupy the throne; the queens were possibly also priestesses.152 Hazail, king of the Arabs, came to meet Esarhaddon in Nineveh. Bringing a magnificent present, he kissed his feet and begged him to return his gods to him. Esarhaddon had mercy on him and acceded to his request: “I refurbished the gods Atar-samayin, Dâya, Nuhâya, Ruldâwu, Abirillu, (and) Atar-qurumâ, the gods of the Arabs, and I inscribed the might of the god Ashur, my lord, and (an inscription) written in my name on them and gave (them) back to him.”153 He placed Tabûa on the throne “as ruler over them” (a-na LUGAL-ú-ti UGUšú-nu). Tabûa was a young deportee, raised at the Assyrian court; his relationship with Hazail is unclear.154 But who—Tabûa or Hazail—was actually on the throne? Hazail had to pay a larger tribute to Esarhaddon: “I added sixty-five camels to the previous tribute (which was paid to) my father and imposed (it) on him.”155 When the latter died, Esarhaddon replaced him with his son Iataʾ, imposing on him a very heavy tribute. There are several variants for the name



Chapter 6: The First Phase of Campaigns (680–675)

81

of Hazail’s son: Iataʾ, Iaʾlû, Iaʾutâ, Iaʾtâ, Iautiʾ.156 He then increased the tribute even further: “I added ten minas of gold, one thousand choice stones, fifty [camels, (and) one hundred bags of aromatics to the tribute] of his father and imposed (it) on him.”157 Later, he intervened again to help Iataʾ, whom Uabu was trying to overthrow: “(His battle troops) trampled all of the Arabs, put Uabu, together with the soldiers who were with him, in fetters, and brought (them) to me. I placed them in neck stocks and tied them to the side of my gate.”158 Depending on the version, Uabu was either taken prisoner or succeeded in overthrowing Iataʾ.159 It was important for Esarhaddon to be on good terms with the Arab kings because he would later need to collect their camels for the Egyptian campaign.160

Chapter Seven The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669) 7.1. Esarhaddon’s Objective: The Conquest of Egypt The conquest of Egypt was a long-standing Assyrian dream. The Egyptians, for their part, were nostalgic for the time when they ruled the Middle East, a claim they were forced to abandon to the Assyrians. All the great Assyrian conquerors—Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, and Sennacherib—had tried to conquer Egypt, but without success. As for Ashurbanipal, Esarhaddon’s successor, he did not know how to hold on to the prized territory. Paradoxically, despite all the difficulties he was faced with, it was Esarhaddon who succeeded in conquering Egypt in 671 BCE. The Kushite pharaohs of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty had ruled Egypt since 744. Their principle of governance was to preserve the political fragmentation of the country to facilitate their rule, leaving in place the kings who had submitted. But Taharqa, who had sat on the throne since 690, encountered difficulties with the kings of the delta, in particular the Saites, who were to take power with Necho I in 672.1 Necho I conducted an aggressive policy toward the Assyrians by intervening in the Levant from 683 at the end of Sennacherib’s reign. He wanted to control eastern Mediterranean trade, especially the timber trade, which Tiglath-pileser III had forbidden the Phoenicians to sell to Egypt.2 He supported the Western anti-Assyrian revolts, even though the sources are not always explicit on this subject.3 Necho’s interference in the Levant is one of the motivations for Esarhaddon’s interventions there, for example, against Baʾalu I of Tyre “who had trusted in Taharqa, king of Kush.”4 Esarhaddon declared that one of the objectives of the conquest of Egypt was to “pull the roots of Kush out of Egypt.”5 However, the Assyrian letters and documents that mention Egyptians and Kushites who were present in Assyria indicate that the seem to have shared the same modest status.6 Had Esarhaddon developed a strategy to conquer Egypt before the campaign of 671? He had made preparatory military expeditions in imitation of his predecessors. His increased interest in the Phoenician coast can be partly explained by its strategic location on the route to Egypt.7 For him, it was not a question of establishing a total and definitive domination of the coastal 83

84

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

states, which were still poorly subjugated, but one of conquering Egypt while developing the maritime power of Assyria. The crushing of the revolt of AbdiMilkûti of Sidon in 677 was extremely violent because Esarhaddon wanted to destroy the spirit of rebellion, and he solved the problem definitively by reducing Sidon to an Assyrian province. He then placed Tyre, a city that he distrusted, under close surveillance by imposing a maritime treaty of vassalage. The crushing of the rebellion of Baʾalu of Tyre was also essential before the Egyptian campaign of 671 to secure his rearguard and possibly to use this city as an operational base. Esarhaddon’s first attempted military action against Egypt took place in 679. He walked to the Egyptian border where Tiglathpileser III had had his statue erected in 734 to mark the southern border of the Assyrian Empire.8 He had conquered Arzâ (El Arish) near the border and captured its king, Asuhîli, whom he brought back with his advisers to Nineveh and “bound him like a pig” near the citadel gate.9 It was a demonstration of force and a deliberate provocation at the Egyptian border.

7.2. The First Campaign against Egypt The Assyrian inscriptions make no mention of the first campaign against Egypt. Only the Babylonian Chronicles offer an account: “The seventh year: on the fifth day of the month of Addaru (March), the army of Assyria was defeated in Egypt.”10 The seventh year corresponds to 674.11 The late date in the year was perhaps chosen to avoid the summer heat and the flooding of the Nile.12 If this campaign had been successful, it would certainly have been mentioned by Esarhaddon. In reality, he himself was probably not present, but only “the army of Assyria” (ummān KUR Aššur); the chronicles only directly mention his presence when they recount his third campaign in Egypt, which was a certainty as he died there during that campaign. Curiously, the Esarhaddon Chronicle gives a different version of events: “The seventh year: on the eighth day of the month of Addaru, the army of Assyria [marched] to Shamêlê.”13 An attempt was made by Gerhard Fecht to harmonize the differences between the two versions of the Chronicles.14 He tried to demonstrate that Shamêlê was the Assyrian rendering of the city of Sile, located on the border of Egypt. Although his interpretation is seductive, he himself recognized its difficulties, and it has not generally been accepted. It is now commonly understood that Shamêlê lies in southern Babylonia, in BîtAmukâni. The report about the failed campaign against Egypt was replaced in the Esarhaddon Chronicle by an insignificant campaign in southern Babylonia, which occurred at approximately the same time as the battle in Egypt.15 The author of this chronicle, biased in the king’s favor, and not mentioning any defeat, chose to omit the Assyrian defeat in Egypt, which was probably at



Chapter 7: The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669)

85

the hands of Taharqa, preferring instead to record a minor action in southern Babylonia. The presence of the Assyrian army at one and the same time in two places some one thousand kilometers apart is problematic. Esarhaddon questioned Shamash on several occasions, asking for guidance as to whether he should fight against the Egyptian troops.16 According to Anthony Spalinger, in one of these queries, there is a suggestion that he had already fought against Taharqa once prior to 671.17 I can see no indication of this first campaign in the queries posed to Shamash and, as no dates are indicated, the reference to a conflict with Egypt could relate to either the first or the second campaign against Egypt. In contrast, an allusion to the Assyrian defeat of 674 appears in the epic cycles of Pharaoh Pedubastis II.18 The failure of this campaign, as is suggested in the epic, was due to the fact that the Assyrian army passed through Wâdî Tumilat where Pemu, king of Heliopolis, allegedly forced it to retreat. The Sinai Desert was, from a logistical and strategic point of view, a barrier between the Fertile Crescent and Egypt.19 Despite the defeat he suffered in his first campaign, Esarhaddon did not give up his plan to conquer Egypt. However, he did not start his second campaign immediately for several possible reasons, among them that he first had to rebuild from the losses incurred by his army and that he wanted to make better preparations.

7.3. The Campaign against Shubria In the following year, 673, Esarhaddon conducted a campaign against Shubria (ancient Subartu). Only ten or twelve months had elapsed since the defeat in Egypt prior to the conquest of Shubria, indicating that the Assyrian army had made a rapid recovery. Shubria was situated in the Armenian highlands to the southwest of Lake Van, bordering Urartu to the north and Assyria to the south. Its capital was Uppume. Shubria was a Hurrian kingdom.20 Its inhabitants spoke a different language to that of the Assyrians, so the people deported from this region needed to have interpreters.21 The campaign against Shubria is mentioned in several sources, which reveal a number of discrepancies in the datings. According to the Babylonian Chronicles, “The eighth year: On the … day of the month of Tebêtu (January), Shubria was captured (and) sacked. In the month of Kislîmu (December), its booty entered Uruk.”22 In the Esarhaddon Chronicle, the date of the campaign is different: “On the eighteenth day of the month of Addaru (March), the army of Assyria [captured] Shubria (and) sacked it.”23 In the so-called Letter to Ashur, the date differs again: “In Ulûlu (September), the twenty-first day.”24 It is difficult to reconcile the discrepancy in these different dates, which, in reality, were related to different stages of a

86

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

single campaign. However, Esarhaddon probably did not start the campaign in winter because the high mountains of Shubria would have been inaccessible at that time of year. The booty collected in Shubria was distributed in Babylonia probably during the ninth year (672) since it could not have been distributed in December before it was collected in January.25 Before commencing the campaign, Esarhaddon posed a query to Shamash relating to Urartu and Shubria: “Will Ursaya (Rusâ) of Urartu invade Shubria?”26 He wanted to ensure the neutrality of Rusâ II of Urartu during his campaign against Shubria. The return of Urartean fugitives to Urartu after the campaign was probably a reward for his neutrality.27 The campaign against Shubria is described at length in the so-called Letter to Ashur.28 It comprises two tablets, apparently not written by the same scribe, and badly preserved, especially the first tablet.29 The letter may have been composed for ceremonies held on the occasion of the naming of his heirs designate in 672. This kind of document is quite rare, as they were not composed after every military campaign, but only to mark important military events. For example, Sargon’s “Letter to Ashur” was written after his victory over Urartu.30 However, Shubria was a small kingdom compared with the powerful rival kingdom of Urartu. The Letter to Ashur is a literary work that expressed the considerable propagandistic value of and political significance ascribed to the conquest of Shubria.31 As Esarhaddon’s policy toward Babylonia was conciliatory, Marduk was granted a position of honor in this text, particularly in the miraculous victory at the battle of Uppume, capital of Shubria. The description of the campaign against Shubria starts with its rationale: a demand by Esarhaddon for the extradition of political refugees from Shubria. An offer of amnesty, on the other hand, cannot be clearly deduced from a damaged passage in the text.32 Ik-Teshub, the king of Shubria, received a message in his besieged city from the king of Assyria. He was frightened, tore his royal garment, clothed his body with sackcloth, the garment of a sinner, and cried out for mercy, kneeling against the wall of his city. Then he wrote to Esarhaddon, confessing his sins, begging surrender, and to be personally absolved of guilt: “(I am) the one who does not listen to the word of Esarhaddon … (and) who does not return runaway Assyrian fugitives to his owner.”33 He also confessed to having transgressed the oath of the great gods, which probably means that he or his predecessors had concluded a treaty with a king of Assyria, containing the standard extradition clauses. By way of excuse, he pleaded that his advisers misled him into making a mistake. However, as a matter of principle Esarhaddon did not accept his apologies and repentance: “Did you ever hear a mighty king (give his) order twice? But I am almighty king (and) I have written to you three times (and) you have not listened to the words of my lips! … You began war and battle against me and (by so doing) you called



Chapter 7: The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669)

87

up the fierce weapons of the god Ashur from their sheaths.”34 He proceeded to build a siege ramp by piling up earth, wood, and stones against the city walls of Uppume. On the twenty-first day of Ulûlu (September), and every subsequent night, the Shubrians poured naphtha over the Assyrian siege works and set them on fire. Fortunately, Marduk intervened through the north wind, blew the flames back on Uppume and burned it, thus affording access to the Assyrian troops, who destroyed and looted the city. They built towers of the skulls of its inhabitants and hung their corpses on stakes.35 Ik-Teshub and his advisers escaped the massacre and took refuge in another fortified area of Uppume. When he saw the Assyrians besieging him, his reaction was not military but ritualistic. He made a statue of himself and clothed it with sackcloth, placed it in fetters and gave it a grindstone to hold as a symbol of slavery. He applied a coat of gold on to it and gave it to his two sons in order to beg for Esarhaddon’s mercy with regard to their father. They asked him to transfer all the blame to the statue and promised that Ik-Teshub would revere and honor him. This magical act is unusual and unparalleled in ancient Mesopotamia. It has been interpreted variously as “a not very subtle bribe,” “a scapegoat rite,” or a gesture that resembles “the ritual of a substitute king.”36 In the latter interpretation, Esarhaddon would have been considered by Ik-Teshub as a divine being, endowed with supernatural forces, who could be appeased by ritual means. As we might expect, the king of Assyria refused to forgive Ik-Teshub, pointing out that the king of Shubria had had two earlier opportunities to return the refugees. The time for reconciliation had passed and now he would be killed: “[Your] days [have elapsed] … the carrying off of your people was decreed.”37 The plunder was brought to Assyria and presented to various gods. The citizens of Shubria were mustered into the Assyrian army or distributed among the nobles and citizens of the cities of Assyria. The fugitives from Assyria were severely punished: “I cut off [th]eir [hands] (and) removed their noses, eyes, (and) ears.”28 The treatment was different for the fugitives from Urartu who had taken refuge in Shubria. Esarhaddon sought out and identified the Urarteans and returned them to Urartu “[in] order to keep the treaty (adê) and because of the truth and justice the great gods gave to me.”39 Afterward, he ravaged the countryside, then resettled and reorganized the land of Shubria, bringing it under direct Assyrian rule: “I divided that land, in its entirety, in two and placed two of my officials over them as governors.”40 He minimized the Assyrian losses in the campaign of Shubria as the list of dead comprised only six soldiers: one charioteer, two cavalrymen, and three scouts. The text ends with a list of twenty-one new names given to old Shubrian cities, which do not seem to occur elsewhere in cuneiform texts. The names took the form of slogans expressing the sovereignty of the Assyrian king without specifying

88

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

his name, but in connection with the god Ashur, such as: “Who shall compare with Ashur” and “Ashur has extended his yoke.” It would appear that this new format was initiated at the time of the Shubria campaign and continued to be used as a deliberate act of propaganda. It is remarkable that the tendency to glorify Marduk is not apparent in the changed names of the cities of Shubria, and that Ashur took his place. This literary account of the campaign and the changing of toponyms seem to reflect two distinct ideological systems, one pro-Babylonian and the other one pro-Assyrian.41 In short, the victorious campaign in Shubria was greatly amplified, but it was soon to be eclipsed by the conquest of Egypt. But what were the real motivations that prompted the campaign against Shubria? First, it was intended to demonstrate Esarhaddon’s power to all Assyrian vassals. Second was probably the need to repair his tarnished military reputation and to show a clear manifestation of Assyrian supremacy. A third reason, possibly the main one, was to punish and, above all, to neutralize the pretenders to the throne who had escaped Esarhaddon in 680, one year before the appointment of his heirs (for which, see §8.2).42 According to 2  Kgs 19:36–37, Urdu-Mullissu and his fellow conspirators retreated to Urartu where they were made welcome by friends sympathetic to their cause. The question is why they relocated from there to nearby Shubria. If the king of Urartu had signed a treaty of extradition with the king of Assyria, as seems to have been the case, he was probably under pressure to return the fugitives to Assyria. If the conspirators were forced to take refuge in Shubria, it is not unlikely that their Urartean sympathizers fled with them. However, there is no mention of Esarhaddon’s brothers, which means that they continued to elude capture and were still potential threats.43

7.4. The Ninth Year (672) Esarhaddon’s ninth year (672) is mentioned neither in the Babylonian Chronicles nor in the Esarhaddon Chronicle.44 Rather than being an omission on the part of the scribes, it was most likely thought from their point of view that no important event, such as a military campaign, had taken place. And in fact, there probably was no military campaign because another text, on a clay tablet, passes without transition from the campaign against Shubria in 673 (year 8) to the tenth campaign in 671 against Egypt.45 Nonetheless, some important events did occur in 672. According to the Babylonian Chronicles, on the fifth or sixth day of Addaru (March), the last month of 673, Esharra-hammat, Esarhaddon’s wife, died.46 Afterward, in 672, the king had a mausoleum built for her and charged Ashurbanipal, who was probably her son, with its maintenance.47 Another major event, on the eighteenth day of Ayyâru (May) 672, was the



Chapter 7: The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669)

89

announcement of Esarhaddon’s succession treaty concerning his two sons Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shumu-ukîn (see further, ch. 8). Meanwhile, Assyria’s relationship with the Cimmerians and Scythians continued to evolve along different paths. The Scythian king Bartuta succeeded Ishpakâia and reestablished good relations with the Assyrians. He married a daughter of Esarhaddon in 672 and an Assyrian-Scythian alliance was probably concluded. Herodotus cited this king under the name of Protothyes, saying that he later fought on the side of the Assyrians.48 The alliance lasted into the reign of Madyas, the son and successor of Protothyes. Esarhaddon posed several queries to Shamash concerning the Scythians, for example, Will the Scythians invade Assyria through the passes of Hubushkia? Will the Scythians and Cimmerians invade Bît-Hamban and Parshumash?49 Conversely, the Cimmerians remained hostile to the Assyrians and participated in anti-Assyrian actions conducted by the Manneans and the Medes. In particular, they supported the revolt of Kashtaritu, the chief Mede. The succession treaty finally concluded between Esarhaddon and different chiefs, such as the Median chiefs, is dated to the month of Ayyâru (May) 672. It was probably at that moment that they came to Nineveh, kissed his feet, and offered him large thoroughbreds and blocks of lapis lazuli.50 Of course, the year 672 was also devoted to the preparation of the second campaign against Egypt, which was probably scheduled for the following year. Indeed, the prestige of Assyria was restored, the succession of Esarhaddon was assured with his two sons appointed as his heirs, and the signs were favorable. The king of Assyria had no reason to procrastinate.

7.5. The Campaign against Tyre on the Way to Egypt After the maritime treaty concluded between Esarhaddon and Baʾalu I of Tyre in 676 (ch. 6.7), the king of Tyre revolted against Assyria and allied with his friend the pharaoh Taharqa: “(He) threw off the yoke of the god Ashur, my lord, and kept answering (me) with insolence.”51 Baʾalu refused to submit any longer to Assyria and probably allied with Taharqa 674. Esarhaddon was obliged to put down the Tyrian revolt so as not to risk a rearguard attack and he probably needed the city to serve as a logistical base for his progression toward Egypt. The best time to conduct this military action was while en route to Egypt. The date is clearly indicated in an inscription. First, he mentioned his departure for Egypt: “In my tenth campaign,” and then: “In the course of my campaign, I set up fortifications against Baʾalu, the king of Tyre.”52 A stele erected at Qaqun, six kilometers from Tul Karm in Israel, describes the second campaign against Egypt, starting with the departure from Assyria.53 The fragment of a stone stele found at Ben Shemen in Israel

90

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

bears an inscription that probably relates to the campaign against Egypt, and that may originally have come from the stele of Qaqun.54 Yet, again, Esarhaddon was unable to seize the island of Tyre even though he boasted of having done so: “I conquered Tyre, which is in the midst of the sea” (ak-šud ālu ṣur-ru šá qabal tam-tim).55 In another inscription, he claimed only to have implimented a blockade of the island, cutting off its sources of water and food, which were vital for the islanders: “I cut off the supply of food and water that sustained their lives.” Then, he “took away from him cities of his (that were on) dry land.”56 As he stated that he returned them to Assyrian territory, it is possible that he created a new Assyrian province, as had been done for Sidon, but excluding the island territory. However, both of the kings were in need of a compromise: Esarhaddon needed to continue exploiting the riches of Tyre and Baʾalu wanted to retain his throne. Therefore, the king of Tyre submitted and went to kiss Esarhaddon’s feet. The king of Assyria imposed a heavy tax on him, seized his property, and brought his daughters, provided with rich dowries, back to Assyria. This sounds more like marriage contracts than hostage-taking.57 The toponym KUR.tar-si-si is mentioned once in Esarhaddon’s royal inscriptions.58 It has been interpreted by some scholars as Tarsis-Tartessos, a harbor in the southwest of Spain, in regular contact with Tyre, and by others as a harbor in the Red Sea or Indian Ocean.59 During the siege of Tyre, the Assyrians would have met travelers coming from Tartessos and forced them to submit.60 It is more plausible to identify this toponym with Tarsus in Cilicia given the context of the sentence where it is included: “I wrote to all the kings who are in the midst of the sea, from Iadnana (Cyprus) (and) Ionia to Tarsus, (and) they bowed down at my feet.”61 Iadnana, Ionia, and Tarsus are all located in the same area: the upper part of the Mediterranean sea. Another toponym, Ashkelon, is linked to Tyre in Esarhaddon’s inscription on the rock face at the Nahr el-Kalb in Lebanon. It describes the defeat of the pharaoh Taharqa and the looting of Memphis. Unfortunately, it is mentioned in the last part of the inscription, which is badly damaged: “[…] son of Binzûki, […] Ashkelon […] which Taharqa […] to their fortresses […] Tyre […] 32 kings […].”62 The king of Ashkelon at that time was Mitinti, mentioned in the list of the twenty-two kings of Hatti summoned by Esarhaddon (§9.1).63 However, this damaged inscripton cannot be a list of these kings of Hatti as the number given is thirty-two and not twenty-two. Indeed, it is impossible to know to what the text is referring.

7.6. The Conquest of Egypt Esarhaddon took the credit for the conquest of Egypt, which is related in several royal inscriptions and in the steles of Zincirli, Til Barsip, Nahr el-Kalb,



Chapter 7: The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669)

91

El-Ghâb, and Qaqun (plus the fragment from Ben Shemen).64 He gave precise details to prove that he was present, for example: “By means of (my) arrows, I inflicted him (Taharqa) five times with incurable wounds”; or again: “I entered Memphis, his royal city, (and) I sat joyfully upon (his) gold-mounted stool.”65 In reality, Esarhaddon’s role in the conquest was not what he claimed it to be. This conclusion is based almost exclusively on Assyrian sources: royal inscriptions, oracular letters and consultations, and the Babylonian Chronicles.66 Contemporary Egyptian sources are almost silent on this conquest, apart from a few allusions to it, such as in the “Prayer of Taharqa,” and in later sources, which, however, reconstructed the event to the advantage of Egypt.67 This is understandable because it was a major defeat for Egypt. Was Esarhaddon a strategist? In other words, had he really prepared the conquest of Egypt of 671? He had carried out actions in this direction, but he was dependent on the answers of the diviners whom he constantly asked what he should do, especially with regard to the Levant and Egypt.68 The conquest of Egypt in 671 is sometimes presented as a lightning war in Assyrian inscriptions. In reality, it was a long and difficult campaign, something that Esarhaddon was well aware of before leaving as he had detailed the stages by questioning the god Shamash: “Should he plan the campaign? Should he take the road with his army and his camp, and should he march toward Egypt as he wishes? Should he make war against Taharqa, king of Kush, and his troops? If he goes, should he engage in combat against Taharqa, king of Kush, and his army? In waging this war, will the arms of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, and his army prevail over the arms of Taharqa, king of Kush, and his troops? Will Esarhaddon’s troops take their possessions, defeat them … and gain over them victory, power, might, and conquest? Will Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, come back alive and tread with his feet the ground of the land of Assyria?”69 The conquest of Egypt could not be a quick affair because the journey from Nineveh to Memphis was very long. It was calculated that the distance to be covered there and back was about 3,700 kilometers, taking into account the usual route of the Assyrian conquerors.70 The Assyrian army in the field had to travel an average of 25 to 30 kilometers per day. The number of days of walking would be around 74 or 62 depending on the daily average, not counting the rest stops. The trip to Egypt therefore took at least two months. To this must be added the stay en route at Harrân, the duration of which is not known, and the submission of Tyre on the way. The duration of the trip, on the outward journey alone, could therefore have taken as much as two and a half to three months. The dates given in the sources enable us to establish a relatively precise chronology of the conquest of Egypt. Esarhaddon went on campaign in the month of Nisannu (April), just after the Akîtu festival, perhaps on the evening of

92

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

the third day. Some stages of the route are indicated in the texts: first, he crossed the Tigris and the Euphrates. There is a vague mention of steep mountains and sand dunes in the “land of thirst,” but precise toponyms, such as Tyre, Aphek, Raphia, the border of Egypt, and Ishhupri, are also named.71 The Sinai Desert is described in an incomplete text and we know from the stele of Qaqun that the Assyrians were assisted there by the Arab tribe of Mibsam.72 Ishhupri was a fifteen-day walk from Memphis, or about four hundred kilometers: it has been proposed to identify this city with Magdali in the eastern Delta, near the Isthmus of Suez.73 Although Harrân is not mentioned in Esarhaddon’s inscriptions, the first part of his campaign in Egypt probably involved the route from Nineveh to Harrân, about five hundred kilometers, which the Assyrian army could cover in sixteen to twenty days. It left Nineveh around the third day of Nisannu, so it would have arrived in Harrân around the twentieth day of the same month. Esarhaddon, who had decided to make this pilgrimage, stopped there for a few days. We know about this stop in Harrân from a prophecy that was delivered to him on this occasion and that is mentioned in a letter addressed to Ashurbanipal by Marduk-shumu-usur, chief diviner in Nineveh.74 The prophecy told him that he was going to rebuild the old temple of the moon god Sîn and conquer Egypt. It is possible that Esarhaddon wanted to ask Sîn, one of his favored gods, to help him with his campaign in Egypt, but another plausible hypothesis has been proposed by Karen Radner.75 The curse of the god Sîn consisted of inflicting on his victim an incurable skin condition such as leprosy, making him an outcast.76 The chronic illness of the Assyrian king prompted a skin condition for which he was treated, but which sometimes prevented him from appearing in public.77 In a society where illness was seen as divine punishment and where the king had to be perfect in mind and body, Esarhaddon’s illness posed a serious problem. When his facial rash was visible, he had to avoid showing himself in public, or, alternatively, the people he received had to be veiled and kneeling, in accordance with an ancient tradition. But during this pilgrimage to Harrân he was obliged to appear in public. As a result, far from bringing him a divine cure at the hands of Sîn, the visit resulted in the exposure of his untilnow secret illness, with the potential consequence that his legitimacy as king might be called into question.78 Toward the end of the month of Nisannu, the Assyrian army resumed its march to cross the Euphrates. The following two months, Ayyâru and Simânu (May and June), were devoted to the journey as well as the repression of the revolt of Tyre. On the third, sixteenth, and eighteenth days of Duʾûzu (July), the Assyrian army defeated the Egyptian army, capturing Memphis on the twenty-second day, under the leadership of Esarhaddon, according to Assyrian inscriptions.79 But this is account is impossible because the Assyrian king had



Chapter 7: The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669)

93

left his army for several weeks. Indeed, on the fourteenth day of Duʾûzu, he was subjected to the ritual of šar pūḫri, the well-known ritual of the “substitute king,” because a lunar eclipse occurred, which was interpreted as a fatal sign for him.80 The date of the beginning of the ritual can be calculated retrospectively from the end of the ritual, which took place on the twenty-second day of Tashrîtu (October), according to a letter from Urdu-Nanâia, chief physician in Nineveh.81 Indeed, the ritual generally lasted one hundred days, a fact that was indicated in this letter. During this period, the king was to remain hidden under the label of ikkāru, “farmer,” “cultivator.” In this letter, his two heir apparents were advised to do the same. The substitute king, whose name for this ritual is unknown, took the king’s place to transfer the evil threatening Esarhaddon upon himself, and he was enthroned in Nineveh and, fifty days later, in Akkad, as Esarhaddon was king of Assyria and Babylonia. The substitute king was executed in accordance with ritual tradition. A few other letters relate to this ritual and other rituals that Esarhaddon had already performed and some that he would yet perform before the end of his reign in 669.82 To begin the ritual on the fourteenth day of Duʾûzu, Esarhaddon had to be in Nineveh a few days beforehand for the preparations, as he was perhaps participating in the choice of the substitute king along with the divination experts and had to reside in a secret place. Admitting that he had left Harrân with the Assyrian army, he must have accompanied it at best only until the halfway point between Nineveh and Memphis in order to return to Nineveh in time, even if his return journey was done in accelerated mode. Further, his detailed and realistic description of the route followed after Tyre, in an arid zone, infested with snakes,83 can hardly correspond to his personal experience because he would have had to turn back long beforehand in order to have sufficient time to return to Nineveh. Who decided to dismiss Esarhaddon and for what reason? It was undoubtedly the diviners, who probably accompanied him, as he made no decisions without their agreement: they advised him to perform the ritual because of the danger revealed by the heavenly signs. The reason may have been the deterioration of his health during this difficult journey. However, political motivations may also have intervened, such as personal ambitions to take the king’s place during the campaign, especially since his illness probably called his legitimacy as king into question. The background to the power struggles between rival groups escapes us, not to mention the intrigues conducted by Naqiʾa, the king’s mother. These events beg the question, Who took charge of operations after the king’s departure? Was it possible to direct them from a distance? The answer would be yes, even taking the delays in communication into account. However, from the moment the substitute king was appointed, Esarhaddon was to remain

94

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

in the shadows even if he was kept informed of the situation. The two crown princes appointed the previous year—Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shumuukîn—also had to stay away. It has been discussed whether the substitute king, who assumed all the king’s prerogatives for one hundred days, had the right to make political decisions since Bêl and Nabû had entrusted him with sovereignty over all countries.84 But he only exercised a fictitious sovereignty, a simple stage game. So, we must look for the new person in charge of the campaign in the army itself. Before leaving, the king had to designate this person and give him his instructions. The most logical choice would have been the commander-in-chief of the army who, at that time, was undoubtedly the “chief of the eunuchs” (rab ša rēši), Ashur-nasir.85 The chief eunuch had a prominent role during the reign of the Sargonids, and it was, moreover, another chief eunuch, Sha-Nabû-shû, who replaced Ashur-nasir in 670 and who was entrusted by Esarhaddon with a new mission in Egypt.86 Consequently, all the Assyrian accounts of the conquest of Egypt on the capture of Memphis, the capture of Taharqa’s son and brother, the seizure of an enormous booty87 and the establishment of the Assyrian administration, are falsified by royal propaganda: it was not Esarhaddon who was the author as he claimed. The Babylonian Chronicles are closer to reality in stating that it was the Assyrian army that led the second campaign of Egypt and not the Assyrian king, as would be the case in the third campaign in 669.88 What about the steles, which had been placed notably on the route followed by the army and which recount the conquest of Egypt by Esarhaddon? They would have been erected on the way back, or even later, and also fall into the category of royal propaganda, without the king needing to be there to order their construction. Esarhaddon was therefore unavailable until the twenty-second day of Tashrîtu (October), the official date of the end of the substitute king ritual. He was then occupied by the purification ceremonies of the king, the palace, and the country. Thus, figurines of demons were burned, bearing the following incantation: “Go away, oh evil! (And you,) wellbeing of the palace, come back!” (ṣi-i lu-mun ēkalli er-ba du-muq ēkalli).89 It is not known when the Assyrian army returned from Egypt. The organization of the new administration would have lasted at most a month after the capture of Memphis (that is to say until the end of August), according to the very fragmentary Prism S of Nineveh. This is undoubtedly a pseudo-date, ideologically motivated, and the prism dates rather to late 671 or even early 670.90 Esarhaddon was again subjected to the ritual of the substitute king on the fifteenth day of Tebêtu (January) 671, the substitute king this time being Damqî (see also §9.3).91 In the meantime, the situation had become very difficult for him because of the conspiracies fomented against him, be they real or imagined.



Chapter 7: The Second Phase of Campaigns (674–669)

95

His propaganda was in any case unrestrained regarding this exceptional period of his reign: “I ruled the whole of the country (of Taharqa) … (I am the) king of the kings of (Lower) Egypt, Upper Egypt (Paturisu) and Kush.”92 In reality, only Lower Egypt had been conquered as the Assyrian army stopped in Memphis and failed to capture Taharqa. It was also difficult to maintain this conquest without an occupying army, with the threat of Taharqa’s return and the problems caused by the kings of the delta. Assyria’s Egyptian adventure was to end in 653 in the middle of Ashurbanipal’s reign, after barely twenty years.93

Chapter Eight The Problem of Succession 8.1. A Recurring Problem of the Dynasty The appointment of a crown prince was a practice inaugurated by Tiglathpileser III and systematized by his successors, with the exception of Shalmaneser V who probably did not have sufficient time to organize it during his short reign (726–722).1 Sargon II, his successor and brother (or half-brother), designated Sennacherib as his successor and crown prince. Sennacherib was beyond dispute his eldest son and already around twenty-five years old at the time of his designation, and hence totally legitimate. Sargon designated the crown prince at the very beginning of his reign, possibly in 721, after the internal struggle of 722 and before starting his military campaigns in 720.2 He was in a hurry to do make this arrangement probably because he had seen that Shalmaneser V had not had enough time to designate his heir and because he himself had to face massive opposition in Assyria in 722; therefore, it was vital for him to secure his throne as soon as possible. The problem of succession was particularly difficult to solve for Sennacherib, Esarhaddon’s father. As discussed in §2.1, he seems to have designated several of his sons as crown prince successively. Logically, his eldest son, Ashur-nâdinshumi, should have been designated crown prince.3 However, he was obliged to install him as king of Babylon in 700 and then he was killed in 694. UrduMullissu, another son of Sennacherib, was probably appointed crown prince of Assyria at least from 698. It is uncertain whether Nergal-shumu-ibni was appointed as crown prince of Babylon in 693:4 perhaps two crown princes held office at the same time: Urdu-Mullissu for Assyria and Nergal-shumu-ibni for Babylonia. However, an unprecedented event occurred in 683, possibly in the month of Nisannu (April), during the New Year Festival of the Akîtu temple of Ashur: the appointment of Esarhaddon as crown prince of Assyria. Most authors have considered that Naqiʾa, one of his wives, had so much influence over him that she convinced her husband to appoint him.5 The designation of Esarhaddon as crown prince caused a great deal of internal strife and ended with the murder of Sennacherib by Urdu-Mullissu, the son aggrieved by this decision. 97

98

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Esarhaddon undoubtedly had all these difficulties in mind when he decided to establish his own succession. Once again, it is likely that his mother Naqiʾa was the instigator of this succession. Due to the constraints of his illness, probably increasingly handicapping, he needed people he could trust to help him handle all of his responsibilities. Moreover, he was anxious to avoid a similar succession war to that which took place between the sons of Sennacherib in which he himself was involved. The same scenario could potentially be repeated between his eldest sons, Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shumu-ukîn. As precedent had already been set with Urdu-Mullissu and Nergal-shumu-ibni, Esarhaddon inaugurated a new format of succession by designating Ashurbanipal crown prince of Assyria and Shamash-shumu-ukîn crown prince of Babylonia. That he had probably not succeeded in capturing his brother Urdu-Mullissu and the other pretenders to the throne when he conducted the campaign against Shubria is hinted at by one clause of his succession treaty which stipulates: “You shall not help (anyone) from among his (Ashurbanipal’s) brothers, his uncles, his cousins, his family, or members of his father’s line, whether those who are in Assyria or those who had fled to another country … to seize the throne of Assyria, nor shall you hand over to him the kingship and lordship of Assyria.”6

8.2. The Designation of His Two Sons as Crown Princes It is possible that Esarhaddon had designated his eldest son Sîn-nâdin-apli as first crown prince, “Sîn is the giver of an heir,” who should normally succeed him, but he probably died a short time after his designation. Simo Parpola mentions two business documents relating to Nisannu (April) 677, which refer to a “sales representative” (tamkâru) of the crown prince Sîn-nâdin-apli.7 But an inscription on a cylinder from Babylon, dated after 672, is the only royal inscription clearly naming the two designated crown princes. The mention comes in a prayer of Esarhaddon addressed to the god Nabû: “For Ashurbanipal, crown prince of Assyria, and Shamash-shumu-ukîn, crown prince of Babylon, both brothers, my offspring, may they decree as their destiny a good fate, a favorable fate, one of the lengthening of the days of their reigns.”8 However, three versions of the succession treaty have been preserved: the Nimrud version, the Assur version and the Tayinat version. The Nimrud version, found in the Nabû temple, is represented by at least nine copies, entitled the “Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon” by their first publisher, Donald John Wiseman.9 The reasons why they were excavated in Nimrud have been much discussed.10 The Assur version is known to us in three fragments: the first one was published by Ernst Friedrich Weidner, the second and the third were published by Eckart Frahm.11 The Tayinat version was discovered in 2009 in a



Chapter 8: The Problem of Succession

99

small temple (Building XVI) of Tell Tayinat, ancient Kunalia (Kunulua, Kinalia), the capital of an Assyrian province.12 It was unearthed by the University of Toronto expedition in 2012, and rapidly published by Jacob Lauinger.13 This version had been issued for the governor of Kunalia: “The treaty of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, son of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, with the governor of Kunalia … with [all] the men [in his hands], great and small, as many as there a[re], [wi]th them and with the men who are born after the treaty in the [fu]ture.”14 It is clear that these documents were issued to all those who took the succession oath and thus a great number of copies of the documents were actually issued.15 Even though the city of Nimrud, with its prestigious temple of Nabû, a scribal deity and the keeper of the Tablet of Destinies, was chosen for the adê ceremonies in Assyria, Esarhaddon arranged for small adê ceremonies to take place in all provinces of the empire. The Nimrud version is a composite text that has been reconstructed from hundreds of fragments. While all the tablets share the same text, except for some linguistic and orthographic variations, errors, and omissions, they do not bear the names of the same oath takers.16 Each manuscript names a different city ruler as the other contracting party: Humbares of Nahsimarti, Bur-Dadi of Karzitali, Hatarna of Sikris, Larkutla of Mazamua, Ramateia of Urakazabanu, Tunî of Ellipi, and so on. They all ruled areas on the eastern periphery of Assyria, in Media, Mazamua, and Ellipi. Some of them are mentioned in the royal inscriptions.17 These succession treaties could function in the same manner as, and in parallel with, vassal treaties and loyalty oaths (adê) to the crown prince Ashurbanipal.18 Thanks to letters that Issâr-shumu-êresh, the chief scribe, addressed to Esarhaddon discussing suitable dates in Nisannu to conclude the treaty ceremonies in Nimrud, it is obvious that the king spared no effort in making his succession arrangements as “universal” as possible.19 His target audience was the royal family, the magnates and anyone who could pose or support a threat to the throne. In reality, the second crown prince, Shamashshumu-unkîn, is only mentioned on two occasions, the second being in the colophon: “The treaty concluded on behalf of Ashurbanipal, the ‘great crown prince’ (marʾi šarri rabiʾi) designate of Assyria, and Shamash-shumu-ukîn, the ‘crown prince’ (marʾi šarri) designate of Babylon.”20 A letter clearly designated Shamash-shumu-ukîn as the eldest son: “You have girded a son of yours with headband and entrusted to him the kingship of Assyria; your eldest son you have set to the kingship in Babylon. You have placed the first on your right, the second on your left side.”21 Esarhaddon gave a religious dimension to his succession treaty by introducing it with the three sealings of Assur: Old Assyrian, Middle Assyrian, and Neo-Assyrian, which needed to be understood as one: “Seal of the god

100

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Ashur, king of the gods, lord of all the lands, not to be altered. Seal of the great ruler, father of all the gods, not to be contested.”22 The treaty tablets were of relatively monumental size (28 cm high × 42 cm long). They were made to be fully read by rotating along their vertical axis to continue reading from the obverse to the reverse, as if turning a page in a book.23 The treaty was a supralegal document, embued with “theophoric substance.”24 The text is divided into nine sections: three seal impressions and their captions, title of the documents, commands, decrees, conditional clauses, relative clauses, curses, oath, and a colophon containing the date and the title.25 The date is the sixteenth day of Ayyâru (May), eponymy of Nabû-bêlu-usur, governor of Dûr-Sharrukin, that is 672. The title of the documents declares that they are adê, and states whom they concern and before which gods they are established. Then orders are given to each person who had been summoned to swear by each god: “By Ashur, swear each individually!”26 The decrees are the most important element of the treaty, for example: “When Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, passes away, you will seat Ashurbanipal, the great crown prince designate, upon the royal throne, and he will exercise the kingship and lordship of Assyria over you”;27 or “Ashur will be your god, Ashurbanipal will be your lord.”28 There then follow various conditional and relative clauses related, for example, to the obligation to protect the heir; to report opposition to the succession; to reject rebellion and avenge the murder of Ashurbanipal; to refrain from killing him; to honor the brothers of Ashurbanipal; and to uphold the oath.29 The curses are numerous (19) and are roughly divided into two groups. The first group reflects the Babylonian style, for example: “May Zarpanitu, who grants name and seed, destroy your name and your seed from the land.”30 The second group comprises curses that were more prevalent in Assyria and the countries situated to the west of Assyria, such as Anatolia and Syria, for example: “May Kubaba, the god[dess of] Carchemish, put a serious venereal disease within you; may your [urine] drip to the ground like raindrops.”31 Then came the actual oath of allegiance to Ashurbanipal, expressed in the first-person plural, probably to be recited by the person who took the oath: “May these gods be our witnesses: we shall not make rebellion or insurrection against Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, against Ashurbanipal, the great crown prince designate, against his brothers, sons by the same mother as Ashurbanipal, the great crown prince designate, and the rest of the sons of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, our lord, or make common cause with his enemy.”32 The Medes also played a role in the protection of the crown prince. Esarhaddon had to explain his intentions in terms that everyone in his empire would be able to understand, for example: “You shall love Ashurbanipal, the great crown prince designate, son of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, your lord, like yourselves.”33



Chapter 8: The Problem of Succession

101

This succession oath is not a normal oath document because, in this type of document, the person who takes the oath should seal his oath document, and the man who made the document should keep it. Here, the succession oath was sealed by the god Ashur just like the Tablet of Destinies. The triple sealing by Ashur served to ensure that the numerous written curses would be realized in the event of oath breaking. The succession oath functioned as mass-produced media of political propaganda for everyone in the whole Assyrian Empire. This document was legal, political, religious, and divine at one and the same time.34 Its main purpose was evidently to avoid any conflicts between the disaffected brothers of Ashurbanipal. It was also intended to contain Shamash-shumuukîn and the Babylonians under his rule, and to place Babylonia in the position of a puppet state under Assyria.

8.3. The Consequences of the Double Kingship Esarhaddon represented the two crown princes on the steles of Til Barsip and Zincirli, one on each side of him, in an equal position.35 Possibly another, similar stone stele, showing a figure of Ashurbanipal on one side and a figure of his brother on the opposite side is referred to in the succession oath: “whoever removes the statue of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, the statue of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, the great crown prince designate, or the statue(s) of his brother(s).”36 The succession is also represented on seals by the engraving of three men killing a lion (instead of one as is usual): probably the king and the two crown princes.37 All these representations would mean that he wanted to show to everybody that there was no difference in status between these two crown princes. However, these representations are propaganda: the reality was very different. The succession oath included a demand of exclusive loyalty to the crown prince Ashurbanipal, repeated insistently several times.38 Some scholars have pointed out that the demand for the exclusive adoration of Yahweh in biblical texts is in accord with the demand for exclusive loyalty to Ashurbanipal in the succession oath.39 The fact that Shamash-shumu-ukîn is only mentioned twice means that he was excluded from the succession oath, and and, with him, the Babylonians. What are the reasons for this exclusion? It is possible that Naqiʾa played a role in this succession oath. Ashurbanipal was privileged as he was the eldest son of Naqiʾa, his Assyrian mother. Shamash-shumuukîn’s mother was from Sippar in Babylonia.40 By their names, the two sons had been placed under the protection of different deities: Ashurbanipal under that of Ashur and Shamash-shumu-ukîn under that of Shamash. Aššur-bāniapli means “Ashur is the creator of the heir” and Šamaš-šumu-ukîn means “Shamash has established the name.” Esarhaddon clearly showed his preference

102

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

for Ashurbanipal, “my beloved son,” for whom he had a palace built in Tarbisu.41 Shamash-shumu-ukîn was therefore victim of the traditional Assyrian mistrust with respect to the Babylonians. What were the results of this succession oath? Esarhaddon seemed anxious to satisfy the Babylonians by granting them their own king, which had not been the case under his predecessors. Tiglath-pileser III and Shalmaneser V had called themselves king of Babylonia in addition to king of Assyria, to spare the sensibilities of the Babylonians.42 Sargon II and Sennacherib made the mistake of appointing a governor at the head of Babylonia, treating it as a mere Assyrian province.43 On the other hand, Esarhaddon’s designation of a crown prince to be the king of Babylonia was politically clever because, combined with all his reconstruction works, it allowed for a reconciliation with the Babylonians. In reality, this initiative hid other intentions. It could already be seen in the succession oath that Ashurbanipal had by far the main role. However, it became even more obvious after Esarhaddon’s death. First, Ashurbanipal was the only son to ascend to the throne, according to the Esarhaddon Chronicle: “In the month of Kislîmu (December), Ashurbanipal, his son, ascended the throne of Assyria.”44 The version presented in the Babylonian Chronicles is different because it is Shamash-shumu-ukîn who is named first, as he was their king: “Shamash-shumu-ukîn (and) Ashurbanipal, his two sons, ascended the throne in Babylon and Assyria respectively.”45 However, Naqiʾa, Ashurbanipal’s grandmother, was worried and consulted the diviners about a rumored conspiracy against Ashurbanipal that was circulating. She still had enough influence at that time to organize a pact of loyalty to Ashurbanipal, which was imposed on the Assyrian royal family, the aristocracy, and the Assyrians at large.46 She was especially wary of her other grandsons, particularly of Shamash-shumu-ukîn, but her fear at that time was unjustified since he had not yet been crowned king of Babylonia.47 Later, Ashurbanipal’s inscriptions dealing with his brother’s rebellion would refer to him as follows: “That faithless brother of mine, Shamash-shumu-ukîn, who did not guard my ‘treaty’ (adê), made the people of Babylonia, Aram, and the Sealand, my servants and subjects, defect from me.”48 Ashurbanipal waited at least one year before installing his brother on the throne of Babylonia. He continued to intervene constantly in Babylonia and replaced his brother in his royal functions.49 The Babylonian officials always turned to the king of Assyria to solve their problems, for example, when they were threatened by the Chaldean and Aramean tribes. The loyalty pact organized by Naqiʾa in 669 thus maintained the internal stability of the empire for seventeen years, but it would ultimately be broken by Shamash-shumu-ukîn in 652.50 In short, the succession oath organized by Esarhaddon in 672, calculated to avoid dynastic conflicts, was a success in the short term. However, in the



Chapter 8: The Problem of Succession

103

long term the calculation fell short because the Babylonian question was not resolved. Indeed, Esarhaddon’s initiative was probably one of the causes behind the fall of the Assyrian Empire in 612.

Chapter Nine The End of Esarhaddon’s Reign After the Assyrian conquest of Egypt in 671, Esarhaddon was at the height of his glory, power, and wealth. With this conquest, he had realized the dream of his predecessors. The whole of his empire was pacified except for the island of Tyre, and probably also that of Arwad, neither of which had been captured. Yet, these islands were so small that it was a negligible problem so long as their kings were Assyrian vassals and paid their tribute. Moreover, he had solved the problem of his succession with the designation of two crown princes: Ashurbanipal for Assyria and Shamash-shumu-ukîn for Babylonia. The difficult Babylonian question also seemed to be resolved. However, the last years of Esarhaddon’s reign were very dark. The main challenges that the king of Assyria now faced were not coming from outside Assyria but from within, and not from his family with whom he had secured relations, but rather with his officials, with whom his relationship had completely deteriorated. In eliminating his opponents (see §9.4) Esarhaddon badly mismanaged this difficult situation.

9.1. The Twenty-Two Kings of Hatti Esarhaddon, in an inscription recording his military campaigns, drew up the glorious balance sheet of his reign: “Neither he who made the sea his fortress nor he who made the mountain his stronghold escaped my net…. Who among the kings, my ancestors, was there whose dominion was as great as mine?”1 He cited a proverb quoted by his enemies, comparing them to a fox and himself to the sun: “Where can the fox go to get away from the sun?”2 He enumerated twenty-two western kings, vassals of Assyria who, thanks to the tribute they paid and the supplies they furnished, contributed to the construction and embellishment of his royal palace in Nineveh.3 They were ordered to carry out two major tasks: to search for large beams of cedar and cypress that grew on Mount Sirâra and Mount Lebanon4 and to haul from the heart of the mountains all variety of stones needed for his palace. The list of these twenty-two western kings was divided into two groups: twelve along the coast of the sea and ten in the middle of the sea. Three of the twelve kings of the seacoast were Phoenician: Baʾalu, king of Tyre; Milki105

106

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

ashapa, king of Byblos; and Mattan-Baʾal, king of Arwad. Four were Philistine: Sil-Bêl, king of Gaza; Mitinti, king of Ashkelon; Ikausu, king of Ekron; and Ahî-Milki, king of Arwad. Three kings were from Transjordan: Qaʾush-gabri, king of Edom; Musûri, king of Moab; and Bûdi-il, king of Ammon. There were also Manasseh, king of Judah; and Abî-Baʾal, king of Samsimurruna. This last king had a Phoenician name, but the location of his city remains disputed: possibly Baalbek, rather than Tabbet al-Hammam or a city next to the Nahr esSimerian.5 The great Phoenician city of Sidon was absent from this list because it had been turned into an Assyrian province in 677 (see §6.6). Baʾalu of Tyre and Manasseh of Judah figured at the beginning of the list perhaps because they were important western kings. The second group comprises the ten kings of Iadnana (Cyprus). Iadnana has been interpreted as an “island (ʾy in Phoenician) of the Danunians” (Dnnym).6 The ten kings of Iadnana were: Ekishtûra (ʾΑκέστωρ) of Idalion; Pilagurâ (Φιλαγόρας) of Kitrusi (Chythroi); Rîsu (ʾΑκέσας or Qîsh) of Salamis; Itûandar (E-te-wa-to-ro in syllabic Greek) of Paphos; Erêsu (Ἄρητος) of Soloi; Damâsu (Δάμασος) of Curium; Admêsu (Ἄδμητος) of Tamassos; Damûsu (Dʿmʾš, Damysos) of Qarti-hadasti (Qart ḥadašt, “New town” in Phoenician); Unasagusu (ʾΟνασαγόρας) of Lidir (Ledra, modern Nicosia); and Bususu (Βουθύτης or Βουθύτου) of Nuria (Marion).7 The absence of the kings of Kition and Amathus is surprising, and we have no explanation for this. The list of the twenty-two kings is included in the so-called annals of Esarhaddon, which are dated to 673/672.8 A similar list exists in the royal inscriptions of Ashurbanipal and some scholars believe it was only a copy of Esarhaddon’s list.9 However, some differences between the two lists seem to indicate that the second list was not simply a copy—for example, Yakinlu is given as king of Arwad instead of Mattan-Baʾal, and Ammi-nabdi is named as king of Beth-Ammon instead of Bûdi-il—and accurately reflects the situation under Ashurbanipal.10

9.2. Undated Events of the Last Period of His Reign The Cimmerians invaded the kingdom of Phrygia in around 670 and Midas, its king, was probably killed at that time.11 This Midas was not the Midas who was a contemporary of Sargon II (ca. 738–695).12 Esarhaddon had posed a query to Shamash to discover whether Midas would send troops.13 A letter to Esarhaddon dated to 670/669 and probably sent by Marduk-shâkin-shumi14 alludes to a military conflict between the Cimmerians and Assyrians, as a result of which the Cimmerians were forced to return home, but provides no further information. Esarhaddon’s relationship with the Cypriot kings seems a little strange. As noted above, ten kings of Iadnana, listed among the vassals of Assyria,



Chapter 9: The End of Esarhaddon’s Reign

107

were summoned to bring wood and stones for use in the building of the royal palace. They were mentioned in a summary of his most important military feats, where he reported his victories over the rulers of the four quarters of the world. Esarhaddon did not defeat them, but merely wrote to them: “I wrote to all of the kings who are in the midst of the sea, from Iadnana (and) Ionia to Tarsus, (and) they bowed down at my feet. I received [their] heavy tribute.”15 In 709, Sargon II had sent an officer to Cyprus to solve some kind of problem.16 Around 708, seven kings from the district of Ia in Iadnana went to Babylon and submitted to the Assyrian king who had a stele erected at Kition.17 They lost their independence and became vassals of the Assyrian Empire but, because of their insularity, they were probably not closely controlled nor forced to pay tribute with regularity. Therefore, Esarhaddon’s letter to the Cypriot kings can be understood as a reminder to pay the tribute. Another problem, which became serious under the reign of Ashurbanipal, began to manifest itself in the latter part of Esarhaddon’s reign: it concerned Yakinlu, king of Arwad. Yakinlu had succeeded Mattan-Baʾal III, who was mentioned in the list of the twenty-two kings summoned by Esarhaddon.18 He ruled over Arwad from ca. 670 to 660.19 He is known through Ashurbanipal’s royal inscriptions, through a query to Shamash, and through two letters of denunciation20 sent to the Assyrian king by Itti-shamash-balâtu, an Assyrian official in charge either of the province of Simyra or of the city of Arwad under Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal.21 The Ikkilû of the letters and the Ikkalû of the query are the same person, namely, the Yakinlu of Ashurbanipal’s royal inscriptions.22 King Yakinlu probably refused to continue to submit to Assyria because the conditions of domination became more and more burdensome. He felt secure on his fortified island and, even though he was less powerful than the king of Tyre, in comparison he had additional assets: his island was further from the coast and, in the event of a blockade, in addition to wells and cisterns, he had access to a source of fresh water from the seabed, by using a leather pipe.23 While he was crown prince, Ashurbanipal was already mistrustful of him and asked Shamash about him: “Should Ashurbanipal, son of Esar[haddon, king of Assyria], send Nabû-sharru-usur, the rab mūgi (chief of the contingent?), to Ikkalû, who dwells in the city of Arwad? If he sends him, will Ikkalû listen to and comply with the message which [Ashurbani]pal is sen[ding] to Ikkalû by the hand of Nabû-sharru-usur, the rab mūgi?”24 In his royal inscriptions, Ashurbanipal presented Yakinlu as being a longtime rebel: “Yakinlu, king of the land of Arwad, who resides in the middle of the sea and who had not bowed down to the kings, my ancestors” (Ia-ki-in-lu-u MAN KUR.a-ru-adda a-šib MURU4 tam-tim ša a-na LUGAL.MEŠ AD.MEŠ-ia la kan-šú).25 The use of the plural for designating Ashurbanipal’s predecessors would indicate

108

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

that Yakinlu rebelled not only under Esarhaddon’s reign, but also under that of Sennacherib. This is an error as Yakinlu ascended the throne of Arwad in ca. 670 and Sennacherib was killed already in 681. This sentence could simply mean that the island of Arwad was never conquered by the Assyrians. In his two letters, Itti-shamash-balâtu denounced to Ashurbanipal the evil deeds of Yakinlu and the corruption of certain Assyrian officials and asked him to intervene. These letters probably date from the beginning of Ashurbanipal’s reign, although we cannot be more specific. In spite of some lacunae, the essence of the accusation against Yakinlu is clear. He reminded Ashurbanipal that the situation had been ongoing since the reign of Esarhaddon, but that he had not dared denounce it because of the notoriety of the Assyrians involved: “There are many in the entourage of the king who have invested silver in this house (a-na bîti an-ni-i).26 Those, with the merchants, are frightened from the first to the last.” He tried to convince Ashurbanipal that he had never compromised with them: “Not a shekel or a half shekel I have given to someone; I only give to the king, my lord (1 šiqlu ½ šiqlu a-na me-me-e-ni la ad-dan a-na šarri bêli-ia ad-dan). May the king remember,”27 and he apologized for his inaction under the previous king. Itti-shamash-balâtu accused Yakinlu of managing his territory’s maritime trade against Assyrian interests: “Yakinlu blocks the ships, so that they cannot dock at the king’s port. He appropriates the port’s revenue. If someone docks in his port first, he allows him to leave, but if he docks in the Assyrian port, he kills him and confiscates his ship while claiming that he has committed atrocities.”28 The king of Arwad probably had to collaborate in the efficient functioning of trade with Assyria in order to be allowed to remain autonomous in his own trading activities. But Yakinlu was a skillful trader with a good business sense, and he took advantage of the complicity of Assyrian officials who also found their own interests in the situation. Yakinlu’s harbor was probably the double harbor of the island of Arwad. The Assyrian kāru (harbor or quay in a harbor) was perhaps Qarne (Tell Qarnum).29 In order to be forgiven by Ashurbanipal for having turned a blind eye to the traffic of Yakinlu and the corrupt Assyrian officials, Itti-shamashbalâtu behaved like an assiduous courtier: “I was like a dead dog … The king is my god … he gave me life, may I not die!”30 It is obvious that Esarhaddon did not care what was going on in Arwad. However, a man called Ilu-maʾadi, from Simyra, is mentioned in one letter as someone who was going to visit the king at Assur.31 The person referred to may have been a sukallu commissioned to report to the Assyrian king on this matter, and Itti-shamash-balâtu may have been obliged to take the lead himself by writing to the king straight away. Despite Ashurbanipal’s suspicion of Yakinlu while crown prince, the probable report of a sukallu from Simyra to the king of Assyria, and the two



Chapter 9: The End of Esarhaddon’s Reign

109

letters sent by Itti-shamash-balâtu, the situation in Arwad continued with impunity for several years more, until Ashurbanipal’s expedition between 665 and 649, perhaps in 662 during his third campaign against Tabal and Tyre.32 This would imply that the campaign against Yakinlu was not a priority for Ashurbanipal. Moreover, the corruption of certain Assyrian officials from the area of Arwad is not mentioned in the royal inscriptions, which clearly means that both Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal wanted to cover up this affair.

9.3. Conspiracies against Esarhaddon After the conquest of Egypt in 671 and the end of the substitute king ritual (šar pūḫi), on the fourteenth day of Tashrîtu (October), Esarhaddon encountered serious difficulties in governing in the form of several conspiracies. At the beginning of this period, he was busy with the purification ceremonies of the king, the palace, and the country that were required following a substitute king ritual. For example, it was necessary to burn figurines of demons.33 Meanwhile, the situation had become very difficult for Esarhaddon because of the conspiracies fomented against him, real or imagined. The first conspiracy of this period was formed in Harrân. On his way to Egypt for the second campaign, the king of Assyria visited the city of Harrân, where the shrine of the moon god was one of the most prominent Near Eastern sanctuaries of the seventh century. It was a holy place of wide-ranging and far-reaching importance.34 The king’s initiative to visit this sanctuary seems to coincide with the beginning of a building project that was to transform this shrine.35 As we know from a letter of King Ashurbanipal, Esarhaddon received an initial favorable prophecy predicting his victory over Egypt.36 This divine favor was probably the result of the interest he had developed in the temple, which had prompted his visit. A second prophecy was totally different. A local woman had fallen into ecstasy, uttering a strange message: “This is the word of Nusku: ‘Kingship belongs to Sasî. I shall destroy the name and the seed of Sennacherib.’”37 This prophecy accused Sennacherib and his heirs, among them Esarhaddon, of being impostors and unworthy to rule over Assyria. Thus, it provided an ideological foundation for a possible revolt. Who was this Sasî about whom we know nothing and whose name was quite common? It is likely that he had been part of the royal family, possibly from a parallel branch, otherwise there would have been no justification for him being considered as king of Assyria. Anyway, in a very short period of time, Sasî’s cause succeeded in winning over many followers across the whole of the Assyrian Empire. A second conspiracy was formed in Harrân at the same time and was related to the Sasî conspiracy. According to a letter sent to Esarhaddon, Kudurru, a

110

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Babylonian diviner, warned the king that, in the temple of Sîn, he was forced by Nabû-killanni, the great cupbearer, to answer the following question: “Will the chief eunuch take the kingship?”38 He gave him a false affirmative answer and implored the king to forgive him. Two interpretations of his sentence are possible: either Ashur-nasir, the chief eunuch and true conqueror of Egypt, would become king, or he was a supporter of Sasî, the true contender to the throne of Assyria.39 In any event that, Sasî was a highly charismatic individual is indicated by the spread of his movement and the recruitment of new followers. A loyalty oath was possibly sworn to Sasî, as if he was already king, or as an “oath of rebellion” (adê ša sīḫi) against Esarhaddon.40 The goal of Sasî’s followers was to make the prophecy come true: to get rid of Esarhaddon and his crown princes and to install Sasî on the throne of Assyria. This conspiracy did not remain secret. Various denunciation letters were sent to Esarhaddon in the month of Arahsamna (November) 671,41 informing him that the pretender’s followers were not only active in the Harrân region, but also in central Assyria and Babylonia.42 These letters were mixed with fervent proclamations of loyalty and love for the king. Esarhaddon did not take action against Sasî and his followers, but he gathered more information about the conspiracy with the help of his excellent intelligence service.43 Abdâ, governor of Assur, also organized a conspiracy with the complicity of Sasî. He wanted to seize power in order to realize a premonitory dream.44 In these conspiracies, the eunuchs seem to have been involved in some way. Nabûrêhtu-usur’s advice to the king was quite explicit: “Save your life [from the hands of eu]nuchs!”45 Even though Esarhaddon was extremely concerned for his safety and his life, he took no action against the conspirators. He preferred opting for a measure that effectively removed him from the public eye and thus offered better protection against any attempt on his life. That is, he had the substitute king ritual performed again, on the fifteenth day of the month of Tebêtu (January) 671, only three months after the end of the preceding ritual (see also §7.6). This new ritual was probably prescribed to him by the diviners as usual.

9.4. The Purge of High Dignitaries The Babylonian Chronicles offer only a brief sentence for the year 670: “The king put his numerous officers to the sword in Assyria.”46 The same sentence is found in the Esarhaddon Chronicle, but without the location “in Assyria,” which was obvious.47 This statement is brutal and explicit, but provides no information on the event or its context. In the reconstruction of this episode, we are solely dependent on the references in chronicles and in letters, as well as indirect hints such as those found in the dating of archival documents and



Chapter 9: The End of Esarhaddon’s Reign

111

archaeological remains. However, it is possible to reconstruct this event in some way. The date is known: immediately after the substitute king ritual, on the fifteenth day of Tebêtu (January) 670. As soon as his second “time out” was over, Esarhaddon took immediate action against the conspirators or those he thought were conspirators. What is certain is that they were numerous and that they were not ordinary subjects, but his magnates. The king of Assyria used maximum force and brutal violence, probably taking them by surprise. This massacre was the second that he had ordered among his own people within a decade. The first one occurred at the beginning of his reign as punishment for the supporters of Urdu-Mullissu, the murderer of his father Sennacherib. In both these massacres, Esarhaddon was successful, crushing the conspiracies without having to pay with his life. The consequences of year 670 massacre were visible. As the well-oiled machinery of the administration was the backbone of the Assyrian Empire, it is clear that killing off numerous top officials would cause substantial and permanent harm to the empire.48 One fact proves that the government structure was damaged: in the first months of the new year 670, no official was chosen as eponym to provide the year’s name. Some documents are dated to the first year “after Kanûnâiu.”49 Such a situation is extremely rare in Assyrian history and usually marks a time of inner unrest.50 The crisis of year 670 seems to have spread far beyond the royal court of Nineveh. For example, an archive of dated legal documents (679, 676, and 673) was discovered in a private house in the small city of Burmarina (Tell Shiukh Fawqani), located on the Middle Euphrates close to Til Barsip.51 These texts suggest that the building was destroyed in 670, and a connection with Esarhaddon’s crushing of the Sasî’s conspiracy is therefore likely.52 Two dated business documents were found in the remains of a building in Samʾal (Zincirli): its destruction also appears to correspond with the events of 670. Both cities are situated in the region of Harrân: if Sasî’s cause had met with particular sympathy in this area, it was perhaps especially struck by Esarhaddon’s vengeance. Ashur-nasir, the chief eunuch who had conquered Egypt, was probably among the magnates killed because he was replaced after the massacre in 670 by Sha-Nabû-shû,53 to whom Esarhaddon entrusted a new mission in Egypt. Ashur-nasir was still alive at the beginning of the king substitute ritual on the fifteenth of Tebêtu (January) as he had participated together with Sasî, the conspirator.54 He might have boasted of having conquered Egypt and could have participated in a conspiracy aimed at overthrowing the king. In any event, this is what Esarhaddon believed, before having him killed in order to remain the sole conqueror of Egypt.55 Esarhaddon never mentioned the purge of high dignitaries in his inscrip­ tions. Conversely, he focused only on royal propaganda, for example: “I erected

112

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

(this stele) forever so that all my enemies may gaze (at it) in admiration.”56 He was probably referring to his enemies abroad and not within Assyria. After the purge, the atmosphere of fear and suspicion probably became overwhelming. As a result, security measures in the royal palace were tightened and it became even more difficult to meet the king. Two additional ranks were introduced into the hierarchy of the officials who supervised access control to the palace.57 The shrine of the moon god in Harrân apparently emerged from the crisis of 670 unharmed and even strengthened, probably because the key figures of the Sasî conspiracy were executed together with the other conspirators.58 In reality, Esarhaddon owed his personal salvation and his political survival to an excellent domestic intelligence network including spies, informants, and professional agents provocateurs, who were hated by the population: “Because of what I heard and see and betray for the king, my lord, many people hate me and are plotting to kill me.”59 The situation seems to have been under control, which was confirmed by the goddess Ishtar of Arbela through the words of a prophetess: “I shall banish trepidation from my palace. You will eat and drink safely! Your son and your grandson will rule as kings, (protected) in the lap of the god Ninurta.”60

9.5. Troubles in Egypt After the capture of Memphis in 671, the new Assyrian administration is said to have been organized within just one month, by the end of Abu (August), according to the Prism S from Nineveh. This inscription is very fragmentary but is probably dated to the end of 671 or even the beginning of 670.61 This fallacious time frame of a single month was no doubt ideological, in order to show that the installation of Assyrians in Egypt was rapid and efficient. The Zincirli stele, composed after the twenty-second of Duʾûzu (July), gives the same impression of rapidity: “Over Egypt, all of it, I appointed anew kings, governors, commanders, custom officers, trustees, (and) overseers … I imposed the tribute and payment of my lordship on them, yearly, without ceasing.”62 Booty was carried off from Egypt at the same time according to the Babylonian Chronicles.63 A small, fragmentary clay tablet described this huge booty: “[eve]ry kind of thing, vast amou[nts] of goods … 50,000 strong horses … 60,000 fattened choice oxen (destined for) [his] prince[ly] banquets.”64 Esarhaddon appointed new officials and administrators over the captured towns of Lower Egypt, and renamed them. His son Ashurbanipal described these events: “He (Esarhaddon) has changed the earlier city names and given them new names. He has appointed his servants to kingship, city mayors, and governors.”65 In reality, the installation of Assyrian administration in Egypt took much longer and was more complicated than Esarhaddon wanted to have it believed



Chapter 9: The End of Esarhaddon’s Reign

113

from his inscriptions. Taharqa had not been captured and still had hold of the country beyond Memphis in Upper Egypt. Although weakened by his loss of the Delta region as well as by the capture of his son, the crown prince, his wives, and other members of his family, he had not been totally defeated.66 He was clearly sufficiently encouraged by the Assyrian king’s internal problems to try to evade Assyria’s control. As the Assyrians did not leave an army behind of sufficient size to hold on to the country, Taharqa was presented with the opportunity to retake Memphis.67 Indeed, the Assyrian administration was present primarily to support the local kings of the Delta, such as Necho I, and to destroy the power of Kush represented by Taharqa.68 Kushite officials were ousted and some—mainly high-ranking court members and artisans—were deported to Nineveh.69

9.6. The Third Campaign against Egypt Although Esarhaddon took the title of “King of kings of Egypt, Pathros, and Kush” (šar šarrāni Muṣur Paturisi u Kūsi),70 he had only conquered Lower Egypt, not Pathros/Paturisi (Upper Egypt) or Kush (Nubia). The main concern of a query to Shamash was the following: “Should the chief eunuch Sha-Nabûshû be sent to Egypt and while performing his mission, would he be attacked by the Egyptians, would Necho and Sharru-lû-dâri, or the Egyptians, or the (other) vassals in Egypt strive and plan to mount a dangerous attack against Sha-Nabû-shû with the intent to kill and to loot him?”71 When this query was written, the threat was the unfaithfulness of the rulers of the Delta and the fact that Taharqa had not yet reconquered Lower Egypt. The chief eunuch ShaNabû-shû was probably appointed to his office in Egypt after the purge of high dignitaries on the fifteenth day of Tebêtu (January) 670, when the previous chief eunuch Ashur-nasir was executed. On the twenty-ninth day of Nisannu (March), an astrological favorable omen was given to Esarhaddon: “[the troops of the king] my lord who are in Egypt will conquer,”72 so that he decided to send an army to deal with the unrest brooding in Egypt. Even if the situation seemed to be well under control, the old fears had not abandoned Esarhaddon completely, nor had his disease. He submitted to a new substitute king ritual, probably on the advice of the diviners. This new ritual, the seventh of his reign, was performed on the fourteenth day of the month of Simânu (June) 669.73 The one-hundred-day ritual period terminated on the fourteenth day of the month of Ulûlu (September) 669. Shortly after the end of this period of withdrawal, the Assyrian king was apparently in good shape because he set out for a third campaign against Egypt. The date chosen for this new campaign indicates that his original plan was to arrive in Egypt after the flood season in order to avoid being swamped in the thick Egyptian muddy

114

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

plains in the unbearable heat of summer. This campaign is only known from the Babylonian Chronicles: “The twelfth year: The king of Assyria marched to Egypt.”74 Why did Esarhaddon undertake this third campaign to Egypt in 669? He probably wanted to demonstrate that he was physically capable of going there, so as not to be robbed of the glory of the conquest accomplished by the chief eunuch in 671. He was undoubtedly in a phase of respite from his illness and he must have felt protected after performing a new substitute king ritual. Maybe he also wanted a temporary escape from the oppressive atmosphere that had pervaded Assyria after the massacre of its high dignitaries. Moreover he had to consolidate his conquest of Egypt, which remained fragile because Taharqa still held the land beyond Memphis and was plotting against the Assyrians. However, Esarhaddon overestimated his strength and was unable to resist the new onslaught of his disease, even though he had taken the precaution of being accompanied by his doctors. His death was only mentioned in the Babylonian Chronicles: “He became ill on the way and died on the thenth day of the month of Arahsamna” (November).75 His body was probably repatriated to Assyria and buried according to royal customs. Esarhaddon must have been around fifty years old when he died. His frequent prayers to the gods to obtain a long reign were not heard.76 However, given his illness and his exhausting twelve-year reign, he had nonetheless reached an unexpected age. Paradoxically, even though he was the least physically able Assyrian king, it was he who succeeded in achieving the largest scale of expansion of the Assyrian Empire. In reality, the difficult political climate he had to face after his grandfather Sargon’s ignominious death and the murder of his father Sennacherib urged him to strengthen the system of internal surveillance and external espionage. His suspicious nature meant that he trusted nobody. His son Ashurbanipal was one of the few people he had confidence in. As soon as he appointed him as crown prince, he entrusted him with the intelligence service at the empire’s northern and eastern borders, and probably also with the management of Babylonian affairs.77

Chapter Ten An Assessment of Esarhaddon’s Reign Esarhaddon’s reign leaves quite a mixed impression because on the one hand, he suffered from severe disabilities and made serious mistakes, yet on the other, he realized some important achievements. To begin with, his father Sennacherib’s murder by his half-brother Urdu-Mullissu represented circumstances that were difficult for him to accept.1 In normal circumstances, he was not destined to reign, for several reasons: he was not, by far, the legitimate successor of his father because he had been imposed as Sennacherib’s crown prince by his mother Naqiʾa in 683.2 Urdu-Mullissu was probably crown prince from 698 to 684. Also, he was Sennacherib’s youngest son. Furthermore, he had a chronic disease, identified as lupus erythematosus diseminatus, mainly characterized by a rash and periods of depression, which forced him to be inactive and to isolate himself. Most of the time, he was under the control of his mother Naqiʾa and he was permanently under the influence of diviners and exorcists.3 At the same time, he succeeded in putting down all the uprisings that sprang up, such as those of the Sealand, Bît-Dakkûri, Bâzu and Shubria, Cilicia and the Cimmerians, Tyre, and Arzâ. He had restored the political and economic order established by his predecessors over the west of the empire, and this provided an important contribution to the empire’s resources. He managed to stabilize the empire by restoring Assyrian control, direct or indirect. Moreover, he succeeded in extending its boundaries thanks to a conquest that all his predecessors had dreamt of: Egypt. Even if it was not Esarhaddon himself, but Ashur-nasir, the chief eunuch, who carried out this conquest, the result was an extension to the empire. In reality, only Lower Egypt had been conquered because the Assyrian army stopped in Memphis. And it proved to be a shortlived conquest, lasting only twenty years, because the Assyrians were not able to keep it in their grasp. Except for Egypt, which remained restless, Esarhaddon left to his successors a stable and peaceful empire. He was also aware of the propaganda value of a large-scale building program. He realized several construction works: first in his capital Nineveh, where he built his palace and rebuilt the armory, also restoring several temples. He also carried out construction activities in other cities of the north such as Assur, Arbela, and Nimrud. In central and southern Mesopotamia, he performed building activities in the cities of Dêr, Cutha, Borsippa, Nippur, and 115

116

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Uruk. However, the priority program for him was to sponsor the rebuilding of Babylon. Several factors explain his decision. He was shocked by the assassination of Sennacherib and wanted to exorcise the past: he decided to rectify the grave sin of his father, who had destroyed Babylon.4 He intended to restore the cosmic order violated by him, thus expecting divine reward for his reconstruction work. He also made a political calculation: as the relationship between Assyria and Babylonia was a complicated one, he was in favor of a reconciliation to simplify the situation. In the end it was a serious political mistake. The fact is that Sennacherib’s understanding of the problem was that the only way to defeat the power of Babylon was to destroy it.5 Conversely, by rebuilding the destroyed city, Esarhaddon was rebuilding, in parallel, both the power of Babylon and its desire to defeat Assyria. Moreover, Assyria failed to benefit from the riches the king used to rebuild Babylon. The rebuilding of Babylon was continued and achieved by Ashurbanipal, Esarhaddon’s son and successor.6 This rebuilding was one of the main reasons for the fall of the Assyrian Empire in 610.7 If Babylon had remained in a state of destruction, Nabopolassar would not have seized power and created the Neo-Babylonian Empire.8 The Median king Cyaxares would probably not have defeated the Assyrian Empire by himself in 610. Even if the restoration of Babylonian power was the main cause of the fall of the Assyrian Empire, there were other reasons, internal and external, which also combined in determining this outcome.9 Some of these reasons were the disproportionate expansion of the empire, which made it difficult to manage, the reduction of war booty, and the decreasing number of deportees and therefore of the workforce.10 Another possible cause was a period of drought.11 Other reasons would have been the lack of integration of the conquered populations, the hostility of the elites, and the succession problems.12 In support of a positive assessment of Esarhaddon must figure the treaty concluded in 676 with Baʾalu, king of Tyre.13 This treaty gave Baʾalu access to all the Levantine ports, with control merely being limited to the presence of an Assyrian official and the imposition of tolls.14 It defined the rights and duties of the Tyrian king, and established a strict control over his activities. It was the first maritime treaty to regulate sea trade along the Levantine coast since the Assyrian Empire had become a maritime power.15 Another positive assessment of Esarhaddon derives from the fact that he had many tablets copied for the Nineveh libraries, which he developed because he was interested in the knowledge of his time. He took care of the education of his scholars as is illustrated by the lists of Nineveh library acquisitions, which were in a wide variety of specialized fields.16 He developed an efficient spy system, inherited from his predecessors. He owed his personal salvation and



Conclusion

117

his political survival to an excellent domestic intelligence network including spies, informants, and professional agents provocateurs.17 The appointment of a crown prince was inaugurated by Tiglath-pileser III who had designated Shalmaneser V as his heir.18 Although mindful of Sennacherib’s difficulties in organizing his succession, in 672 Esarhaddon inaugurated a new format of succession by designating two crown princes. His son Ashurbanipal was crown prince of Assyria and his other son Shamash-shumu-ukîn was crown prince of Babylonia.19 The advantage of having two crown princes would be to ensure an easier governance of Assyria and Babylonia. The disadvantage was the risk of conflict between the two brothers, which actually happened after Esarhaddon’s death. The two-king system worked well for a long period from 669 to 652,20 however, in the long run, several factors provoked a conflict between the two brothers: Ashurbanipal, who was a little younger than his brother, actually occupied a higher rank and he was constantly interfering in Babylonia in place of his brother. This resulted in a civil war between Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shumu-ukîn from 652 to 648.21 The end of Esarhaddon’s reign was very difficult for him because he had to face several conspiracies, occurring moreover in a period when his disease was probably worsening.22 However, even if he was extremely concerned for his safety and his life, he did not immediately take action against the conspirators. Probably under the influence of diviners and exorcists, he chose to perform the substitute king ritual again, only three months after the end of the preceding ritual. It was a measure that effectively removed him from the public eye and thus offered protection against any attempt on his life. Straight after the end of the ritual, he ordered the slaughter of many of his magnates.23 After the purge, the atmosphere of fear and suspicion in Assyria probably became overwhelming. Esarhaddon owed his personal salvation to the strengthening of the security measures operating in the royal palace.24 Moreover, in such a repressive situation, no one dared to revolt anymore. The result was that the whole empire, with the exception of Egypt, was pacified when Esarhaddon died. We must not forget the role of his mother Naqiʾa who helped her son to maintain the empire. In 672, she probably prepared Esarhaddon’s succession, and in 669, she organized oaths (adê) by which the royal family, the magnates and the Assyrians swore loyalty to the new king, her grandson Ashurbanipal.25 In short, Naqiʾa played a significant role during the reigns of three Assyrian kings: Sennacherib her husband, Esarhaddon her son, and Ashurbanipal her grandson.

Notes Notes to Introduction 1. Sargon was not the legitimate successor of King Shalmaneser V, but belonged to the same dynasty because he was Tiglath-pileser III’s son: see Josette Elayi, Sargon II, King of Assyria, ABS 22 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2017), 12–15, 26–28. 2. Josette Elayi, Tiglath-pileser III, Founder of the Assyrian Empire, ABS 31 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2022); Elayi, Sargon II; Elayi, Sennacherib, ABS 24 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018). 3. RINAP 4:84, 33.iii.23′–24′. 4. Paul Garelli, “The Achievements of Tiglath-pileser III: Novelty or Continuity?,” in Ah, Assyria… Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor, ed. Mordechai Cogan and Israel Ephʽal, ScrHier 33 (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1991), 46–51. However, John Nicholas Postgate considered that there was a continuity between the Middle Assyrian and Neo-Assyrian periods: The Land of Assur and the Yoke of Assur: Studies on Assyria: 1971–2005 (Oxford: Oxbow, 2007); Elayi, Tiglath-pileser III. 5. Elayi, Sennacherib, 48–52, 94–100. 6. RINAP 4:333–38. 7. RINAP 4:191, 103; 68, 21. 8. Simo Parpola, “The Royal Archives of Nineveh,” in Cuneiform Archives and Libraries, ed. Klaas R. Veenhof, CRRAI 30 (Leiden: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te İstanbul, 1986), 223–36. 9. Parpola, “Royal Archives,” 225–26. 10. RINAP 4:9–26, 1. 11. RINAP 4:227, 112; 134, 60; 101, 46; 256–58, 126. 12. RINAP 4:200, 104.vii.9–12; 238–43, 116 (with bibliography); 194, 104. 13. See also RINAP 4:1022, inscription on the body of a stone jar, accompanied with a standing lion. 14. PNA 1.1:148–49; RINAP 4: passim. 15. PNA 1.1:150–52 (with bibliography). 16. LAS 2, 382; RINAP 4:5. 17. RINAP 4:201, 104.vii.44–46; 4:106, 48.52. 18. RINAP 4:48, 6.ii′.10′; 4:87, 34.6′. The number of the campaign falls in the gap: 53, 8.i′.12′–23′. 19. RINAP 4:129, 57.viii.9A′–12A′, 9B′–12B′; 4:177, 93.40. 20. RINAP 4:26, 1.vi.75A–75F. 21. SAAS 2:61; Stefan Zawadski, “The Question of the King’s Eponymate in the Latter Half of the Eighth Century and the Seventh Century BC,” in Assyria 1995: Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Symposium of the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, Helsinki, September 7–11, 1995, ed. Simo Parpola and Robert M. Whiting (Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1997), 388. 22. RINAP 4:204, 105.ii.41; 4:210, 105.x.34–36. 23. Grant Frame, Babylonia 689–627 B.C.: A Political History (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1992), 67. 24. RINAP 4:179–181, 97; 4:16, 1.ii.72–74. 25. See ch. 7.6. 26. Antii Laato, “Assyrian Propaganda and the Falsification of History in the Royal Inscriptions

119

120

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

of Sennacherib,” VT 45 (1995): 198–226; Katsuji Sano, “Die Repräsentation der Königsherrschaft in neuassyrischerZeit: Ideologie, Propaganda and Adressaten der Königsinschriften,” Studia Mesopotamica 3 (2016): 215–36. 27. Albert Kirk Grayson, “Königslisten und Chroniken B. Akkadisch,” RlA 6: 86–90; Albert Kirk Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, TCS 5 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2000), 60–87 (no. 1); 125–28 (no. 14); 131–32 (no. 16); Jean-Jacques Glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, WAW 19 (Atlanta, Society of Biblical Literature 2004), 193–203 (no. 16); 203–7 (no. 17); 207–11 (no. 18); 212–15 (no. 20); John A. Brinkman, “The Babylonian Chronicle Revisited,” in Lingering over Words: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran, HSS 37 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 73–104; RINAP 4:6–8; Shigeo Yamada, “Neo-Assyrian Eponym Lists and Eponym Chronicles: Contents, Stylistic Variants and Their Historical-Ideological Background,” Melammu 9 (2018): 75–96. 28. Elayi, Sennacherib, 4. 29. LAS 1–2; PNA 1.1:149–50 (with bibliography); SAA 10; SAA 16; SAA 18. 30. PNA 1.1:148–50 (with bibliography); SAA 2; SAA 4; SAA 6; SAA 7; SAA 9; SAA 12; SAA 16:28–29, no. 29; SAA 18:XXI (Esarhaddon crown prince). 31. SAA 6:38–159. 32. RINAP 4:313–24, 2001–2010; PNA 1.1:149. 33. PNA 1.1:149; RINAP 3.2:339–40, 233 and fig. 30; Elayi, Sennacherib, 138–45 (with bibliography). 34. PNA 1.1:152; 2 Kgs 19:36–37; Isa 37:37–38; Elayi, Sennacherib, 4–5 n. 14; R. J. Van Der Spek, “Berossus as a Babylonian Chronicler and Greek Historian,” in Studies in Ancient Near Eastern World View and Society Presented to Marten Stol on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2008), 277–318; Geert De Breucker, “Berossos between Tradition and Innovation,” in The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture, ed. Karen Radner and Eleanor Robson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 637–57. 35. Elayi, Sennacherib, 173–82. 36. RINAP 4:24–25, 1.vi.28–29. 37. RINAP 4:24, 1.vi.6; 4:25, 1.vi.43. 38. RINAP 4:23–25, 1.v.73b–v.i.1–29; 4:40–41, 3.v.5′–36′; Sylvie Lackenbacher, Le palais sans rival: Le récit de construction en Assyrie (Paris: La Découverte, 1990); Geoffrey Turner, The British Museum’s Excavations at Nineveh, 1846–1855, ed. John Malcolm Russell (Leiden: Brill, 2021) (with bibliography). 39. Numerous papers and blogs have been published but, until now, no scientific publication. See, for example, Cécile Michel, “Les djihadistes de Daesh ont découvert un palais assyrien,” www. scilogs.fr/breves-mesopotamiennes, 30-03-2017; archeoblog 19-03-2017. 40. Albert Kirk Grayson, “Assyria: Sennacherib and Esarhaddon (704–669 B.C.),” in The Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and Other States of the Near East, from the Eighth to the Sixth Centuries B.C., ed. John Boardman et al., 2nd ed., CAH 3.2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 103–41; Frahm, “Sanherib,” RlA 12:12–22; PNA 3.1:1113–27. 41. RINAP 4:4. 42. Henry Cresswick Rawlinson and Edwin Norris, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, vol. 1: A Selection from the Historical Inscriptions of Chaldea, Assyria, and Babylonia (London: Harrison & Sons, 1861); Rawlinson and George Smith, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, vol. 3: A Selection from the Miscellaneous Inscriptions of Assyria (London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1870). 43. RINAP 4:xxv–xxxiii (bibliography). 44. LAS 1–2; SAA 18; Anthony John Spalinger, Esarhaddon and Egypt: An Analysis of the First Invasion of Egypt (Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1974). 45. See Eckart Frahm’s investigation on Sennacherib: “Family Matters: Psycho-Historical Reflections on Sennacherib and His Time,” in Sennacherib at the Gates of Jerusalem: Story, History and Historiography, ed. Isaac Kalimi and Seth Richardson, CHANE 71 (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 163–222. 46. On my conception of history, see Josette Elayi, “Être historienne de la Phénicie ici et maintenant,” Trans 31 (2006): 41–54.

Notes



121

47. Elayi, Sennacherib, 138–45.

Notes to Chapter 1 1. Elayi, Sennacherib, 11–12. 2. See the n. 39 to the introduction. 3. RINAP 4:183, fig. 5; François Thureau-Dangin and Maurice Dunand, Til-Barsib (Paris: Geuthner, 1936), 151–56 and pls xii–xiii. 4. RINAP 4:324, 2010 and fig. 29; 4:240–42, figs 11–15; SAAS 28:127–28. 5. Monica Rigo, “L’abbigliamento degli Assiri: Una nota sull’abito del re,” in Leggo! Studies Presented to Frederick Mario Fales on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, ed. Giovanni Battista Lanfranchi et al. (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012), 719–24. 6. PNA 1.1:145. 7. Philippe Talon, “Une interprétation ésotérique du nom d’Assarhaddon,” NABU (1999): 3, 62– 63, no. 64. 8. PNA 1.1:145–146, 184. 9. RINAP 4:61, 13.1; 4:151, 74.1; 4:152, 75.1. 10. 2 Kgs 19:37. 11. PNA 1.1:145 (with bibliography). 12. Laura Kataja, “A Neo-Assyrian Document on Two Cases of River Ordeal,” SAAB 1 (1987): 65–68. 13. PNA 1.1:152. 14. RINAP 4:14, 1.i.15–16; 4:11, 1.i.8; Lionel Marti, “‘J’étais le plus jeune de mes frères’: L’avènement héroïque d’Assarhaddon, un jeune homme prédestiné,” in Le jeune héros: Recherches sur la formation et la diffusion d’un thème littéraire au Proche-Orient ancien; Actes du colloque organisé par les chaires d’Assyriologie et des Milieux bibliques du Collège de France, Paris, les 6 et 7 avril 2009, ed. Jean-Marie Durand, Thomas Römer, and Michaël Langlois (Fribourg: Academic Press; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 184–201. 15. Elayi, Sennacherib, 91–92, 111. 16. However, this term is discussed: PNA 1.1:162–63; C. B. F. Walker, “Some Mesopotamian Inscribed Vessels,” Iraq 42 (1980): 85. 17. 2 Kgs 19:37; Isa 37:38. 18. Elayi, Sennacherib, 17, 148–49. 19. SAAS 9:13–16; RINAP 4:321, 2007.1–7; 4:322, 2008.1–7; Sarah C. Melville, “Neo-Assyrian Royal Women and Male Identity: Status as a Social Tool,” JAOS 124 (2004): 44–46; Melville, “Royal Woman and the Exercise of Power in the Ancient Near East,” in Companion to the Ancient Near East, ed. Daniel C. Snell (Oxford: Blackwell, 2005), 219–28; David Kertai, “The Queens of the NeoAssyrian Empire,” AoF 40 (2003): 114–15; SAAS 23:39–49, 52–61, 64–65, 71–85, 189–209, 213–16, 222–23; Elayi, Sennacherib, 15–17, 141–43, 165 and n. 63. 20. RINAP 4:14, 1.ii.12–16. 21. Eckart Frahm, “Family Matters,” 179–81; Elayi, Sennacherib, 13–14. 22. SAA 6:200–201, no. 251; SAAS 23:88–91, 134, 163, 226–27, 229; PNA 3.2:1181. 23. SAAS 9:17–18; SAA 6:125–26, no. 142; PNA 3.1:1115. For a different interpretation, see HansUlrich Onasch, Die assyrischen Eroberungen Ägyptens, ÄAT 27.1 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994), 15. 24. RINAP 4:184, 98.r.17–18; 4:272, 133.28–29. 25. Dominique Charpin, “Histoire politique de la Mésopotamie (2002–1595),” in Mesopotamien: Die altbabylonische Zeit, Dominique Charpin, Dietz Otto Edzard, and Marten Stol (Fribourg: Academic Press; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2004), 188–91. 26. RINAP 4:314, 2001.1–2; 2002.1′–7′. 27. LAS 1, 102–5, no. 129. 28. RINAP 4:114, 53.10′; 4:230, 113.30. 29. RINAP 4:136, 60.29′; 4:230, 113.30.

122

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

30. SAA 16:23, no. 28 (= ABL 308); PNA 3.1:1264. 31. Elayi, Sennacherib, 18. 32. Elayi, Sargon II, 28–29. 33. ARAB 2.761; PNA 3.1:1116; Ali Yaseen Ahmad and Albert Kirk Grayson, “Sennacherib in the Akitu House,” Iraq 61 (1999): 187–89. 34. Eckart Frahm, Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften, AfO.B 26 (Vienna: Institut für Orientalistik, 1997), 3. 35. Elayi, Sennacherib, 173–182. 36. LAS 1:188–89, no. 246.10–12; LAS 2:229–38. 37. RINAP 4:190, 102.r.1′–2′. 38. RINAP 4:14, 1.ii.18–19; 4:59, 12.4; 4:100, 45.i.1–2. 39. RINAP 4:197, 104.ii.49–iii.1–4; 4:61, 13.1–3. 40. RINAP 4:264, 129.23–24. 41. RINAP 4:179–86, 97–98; 4:190–91, 102; 4:191–92, 103; 4:292, 1008.1′–9′ (possibly of Esarhaddon); Anne-Marie Maïla-Afeiche, Le site de Nahr el-Kalb, Bulletin d’Archéologie et d’Architecture Libanaise Hors-Série V (Beirut: Ministère de la culture, Direction Générale des Antiquités, 2009), 243–50, no. 17. 42. RINAP 4:186, 99.r.50–51. 43. RINAP 4:190, 101.r.6′–7′; 4:106, 48.45–46. 44. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.32. 45. RINAP 4:47, 6.i′.2′–3′; 4:53, 8.ii′.10′–11′. 46. RINAP 4:13, 1.i.66–67. 47. RINAP 4:187, 99.1–4. It is the only mention of the revenge for the murder of his father. 48. RINAP 4:264, 129.7. 49. RINAP 4:166, 83.1–3; 4:182, 98.16–17. 50. Bustenay Oded, War, Peace, and Empire: Justification for War in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1992); Antii Laato, “Assyrian Propaganda and the Falsification of History,” VT 45 (1995): 200. 51. RINAP 4:78, 31.r.8–9. 52. RINAP 4:14, 1.ii.11. 53. RINAP 4:184, 98.r.13. 54. RINAP 4:83, 33.ii.10–11. 55. Elayi, Tiglath-pileser III, 67–68. 56. John Nicholas Postgate, “The Invisible Hierarchy: Assyrian Military and Civilian Administration in the Eight and Seventh Centuries BC,” in Postgate, Land of Assur and the Yoke of Assur: Studies on Assyria; 1971–2005 (Oxford: Oxbow, 2007), 331–360; Robin Archer, “Chariotry to Cavalry: Developments in the Early First Millennium,” in New Perspectives on Ancient Warfare, ed. G. Garrett Fagan and Matthew Trundle, History of Warfare 59 (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 57–80. 57. RINAP 4:161, 79.4–10. 58. RINAP 4:287, 1003.i.5′–6′ (possibly an inscription of Esarhaddon). 59. RINAP 4:24, 1.vi.24–26. 60. RINAP 4:14, 1.ii.2–4. 61. RINAP 4:31, 2.iii.45–46 and 30. 62. RINAP 4:99, 44.10–12. 63. RINAP 4:154, 77.3–4. 64. RINAP 4: 124, 57.ii.35–iii.1–2. 65. RINAP 4:104, 48.1–13. 66. RINAP 4:345–47 (index of divine names). 67. RINAP 4:136, 60.26′–28′. 68. RINAP 4:185, 98.r.30–35. 69. RINAP 4:85, 33.iv.11′.12′. 70. RINAP 4:25, 1.vi.55–57. 71. RINAP 4:208, 105.vii.42–viii.21.



Notes

123

72. RINAP 4:58, 12.1′–4′. 73. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.30–39; 4:105, 48.14–21. 74. RINAP 4:262, 128.12–13. 75. RINAP 4:45, 5.i.12′–13′. 76. See above, ch. 1 n. 41. 77. RINAP 4:13, 1.i.6 and 67. 78. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.22–25. 79. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.28–29; 4:106, 48.45–46; 4:185, 98.r.31–32. 80. RINAP 4:32, 2.iii.55–56. 81. ARAB 2.238. 82. Karen Radner, “An Assyrian View on the Medes,” in Continuity of Empire (?), Assyria, Media, Persia, ed. Giovanni Battista Lanfranchi, Michael Roaf, and Robert Rollinger, HANEM 5 (Padova: S.a.r.g.o.n., 2003), 38–40, 58. 83. Josette Elayi, “Assarhaddon et la conquête de l’Égypte,” in Dieux, rois et capitales dans le Proche-Orient ancien: Compte rendu de la LXVe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Paris, 8–12 juillet 2019), vol. 2, ed. Marine Béranger, Francesca Nebiolo, and Nele Ziegler, CRRAI 11, PIPOAC 5 (Leuven: Peeters, forthcoming), 1121–31. 84. RINAP 4:126, 57.iv.36–37; 4:197, 104.iii.30–31; 4:205, 105.iv.25–26; 4:213, 106.iii.25–26; 4:237, 114.iv.10–11. 85. RINAP 4:126, 57.v.24–25. 86. RINAP 4:136, 60.20–21. 87. Ariel M. Bragg, Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der neuassyrischen Zeit, vol. 1, Die Levante, RGTC 7.1 (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2007), 221–22. 88. RINAP 4:23, 1.v.73–75.

Notes to Chapter 2 1. The period of Esarhaddon crown prince is related to the events of Sennacherib’s reign, already analyzed in my previous book, but focusing on Sennacherib: Elayi, Sennacherib, 138–52. Therefore, it will be less developed here and be focused on Esarhaddon. 2. RINAP 4:61, 13. 3. RINAP 3.2:399–40, 233 and fig. 30. 4. SAA 6:XXVII–XXXIV. 5. SAA 12:XV and n. 10; 109, no. 88. The copyist has omitted ilāni. 6. Elayi, Tiglath-pileser III, 166–72. 7. Andrew Knapp, Royal Apologetic in the Ancient Near East, WAWSup 4 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2015), 302–4. See also Barbara Nevling Porter, Images, Power, Politics: Figurative Aspects of Esarhaddon’s Babylonian Policy (691–669 B.C.) (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1993), 14–16. 8. SAA 6:XXVII–XXXIV; no. 85, 100, 103, 130. See Elayi, Sennacherib, 139–40. 9. SAAS 9:22–23. 10. SAA 6:40, 37.r.7; 41–42, 39.16; 42–43, 40.r.4; 43–44, 41.r.5. Nergal-shumu-ibni was restored on the basis of SAA 6:150, 186.7′, dated to 683. 11. See my discussion in Elayi, Sennacherib, 140. 12. PNA 2.2:956; SAA 6:XXXII–XXXIV and n. 59. 13. SAA 9:LXXII; Simo Parpola, “Neo-Assyrian Treaties from the Royal Archives of Nineveh,” JCS 39 (1987): 164–70. 14. SAA 6:XXXIII–XXXIV, 100, 109.6; 100–101, 110.7; Grayson, Assyrian and Baby­lonian Chronicles, 82, ch. 1, iii.38 (eighteen or twenty-eight). 15. SAA 6:101–2, 111.9. 16. SAA 12:104–8, no. 86. 17. SAA 12:XV and n. 10, and 109, no. 88; RINAP 3.2:339–40, no. 233 and fig. 30. 18. SAA 10:266–67, 328.15–18; Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 86, ch. 1, iv.30–31. 19. RINAP 4:11, 1.i.8–16; Hayim Tadmor, “Autobiographical Apology in the Royal Literature,” in

124

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

History, Historiography and Interpretation: Studies in Biblical Cuneiform Literature, ed. Tadmor and Moshe Weinfeld (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1983), 56–57; Tomoo Ishida, “The Succession Narrative and Esarhaddon’s Apology: A Comparison,” in Cogan and Eph‘al, Ah, Assyria…, 166–73. 20. Frederick Mario Fales, “Critique of Variants and the Titulary of Sennacherib,” in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions: New Horizons in Literary, Ideological and Historical Analysis, ed. Frederick Mario Fales (Rome: Istituto per l’Oriente, 1981), 225–58; Marti, “‘J’étais le plus jeune,’” 198–201. 21. Frahm, Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften, 4; SAAS 9: 91. 22. SAA 4:XXIX. According to Wilfred G. Lambert, Babylonian Oracle Questions, MC (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2007), 8–10, there were two groups of diviners at the Assyrian court, those of inferior rank who addressed Shamash alone and those of superior rank who addressed Shamash and Adad. 23. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.13–14. 24. RINAP 4:13, 1.i.61–62. 25. Amitai Baruchi-Unna, “Reporting the Content of Divine Positive Response (annu kēnu) in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions,” in “Now It Happened in Those Days,” Studies in Biblical, Assyrian, and Other Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Mordechai Cogan on His 75th Birthday, vol. 1, ed. Amitai Baruchi-Unna et al. (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2017), 362–65. 26. Eleanor Robson, “Empirical Scholarship in the Neo-Assyrian Court,” in Die Empirische Dimension Altorientalischer Forschungen, ed. Gebhard J. Selz and Klaus Wagensonner (Münster: LIT, 2011), 618. 27. 1 Kgs:1–2; 2 Sam 2–20; Ishida, “Succession Narrative,” 166–73. 28. Hildegard Lewy, “Nitokris-Naqiʾa,” JNES 11 (1952): 271–72; Julian E. Reade, “Was Sennacherib a Feminist?” in La femme dans le Proche-Orient antique, ed. Jean-Marie Durand, CRRAI 33 (Paris: ERC, 1986), 142; Albert Kirk Grayson, “Assyrian Civilization,” in Boardman, Assyrian and Babylonian Empires, 121. 29. SAAS 9:22–29. 30. SAA 9:XLIII and n. 206. Naqiʾa married Sennacherib in the decade 720–710 BCE, possibly around 712: Frahm, Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften, 4. 31. Elayi, Sargon II, King of Assyria, 25–32. 32. SAA 9:XLII–XLIV (with bibliography). 33. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.17–19. 34. SAA 2:LXXII; 18, no. 3; Parpola, “Neo-Assyrian Treaties from the Royal Archives of Nineveh,” 164 and 180; Simonetta Ponchia, “The Neo-Assyrian adê Protocol and the Administration of the Empire,” in From Source to History: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Worlds and Beyond, Dedicated to Giovanni Battista Lanfranchi, AOAT 412 (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2014), 501–25. 35. SAA 2:18, no. 3, l. 5. 36. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.20–22. 37. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.28–29. 38. LAS 2, 285. 39. SAA 10:266, 326.o.15–18. 40. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.30–31; SAA 9:LXXII. 41. SAAS 7:14–34. 42. SAA 10:109; René Labat, “Asarhaddon et la ville de Zaqqap,” RA 53 (1959): 113–18; Simo Parpola, “The Murderer of Sennacherib,” in Death in Mesopotamia, ed. Bendt Alster, CRRAI 26 (Copenhagen: Akademisk, 1980), 179 n. 41; SAAS 7:89–95. 43. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.35–37. 44. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.38–40. 45. Knapp, Royal Apologetic, 321–26; Frame, Babylonia 689–627 B.C., 63–64; Benno Landsberger and T. Bauer, “Zu neuveröffentlichen Geschichtsquellen der Zeit von Asarhaddon bis Nabonid,” ZA 37 (1927): 69; Wolfram Von Soden, Herrscher im alten Orient, Verständliche Wissenschaft 25 (Berlin: Springer, 1954), 118. 46. SAAS 9:24–25; Labat, “Asarhaddon et la ville de Zaqqap,” 113–18. 47. Erle Leichty, “Esarhaddon’s Exile: Some Speculative History,” in Studies Presented to Robert



Notes

125

D. Biggs, ed. Martha T. Roth, Walter Farber, and Matthew W. Stolper, AS 27 (Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2007), 189–91; Mordechai Cogan, “Sennacherib and the Angry Gods of Babylon and Israel,” IEJ 59 (2009): 164–82. 48. RINAP 4:12, 1.i.41–43. 49. Mogens Trolle Larsen, “Unusual Eponymy-Datings from Mari and Assyria,” RA 68 (1974): 22; C. H. W. Johns, Assyrian Deeds and Documents Recording the Transfer of Property, Including the SoCalled Private Contracts, Legal Decisions and Proclamations Preserved in the Kouyunjik Collections of the British Museum Chiefly of the 7th Century B.C. (Cambridge: Deighton Bell, 1898–1923), no. 213; Frame, Babylonia 689–627 B.C., 63. 50. Hildegard Lewy, “Nitokris-Naqiʾa,” JNES 11 (1952): 272–77. 51. Riekele Borger, review of Benno Landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila an König Asarhaddon, BiOr 29 (1972): 34–35. 52. Reade, “Was Sennacherib a Feminist?,” 142–45; SAAS 9:25–28. See Elayi, Sennacherib, 145, 165–66 (with bibliography). 53. SAAS 9:28–29 (with bibliography). 54. RINAP 4:13, 1.i.50–52. 55. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 81, ch. 1, iii.34–36. 56. RINAP 4:13, 1.i.56–57.

Notes to Chapter 3 1. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 82, ch. 1, iii.38. 2. RINAP 4:13, 1.i.63. 3. RINAP 4:13, 1.i.73. 4. RINAP 4:14, 1.i.80–81. 5. RINAP 4:14, 1.i.82–83. 6. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 8, ch. 1, iii.36–37. 7. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.42. 8. Jana Peçirková, “Assyria under Sennacherib,” ArOr 61 (1993): 10. 9. RINAP 4:14, 1.i.87–ii.1–3. 10. 2 Kgs 19.36–37; Isa 37.37–38. 11. SAAS 9:28–29. 12. Francis Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne (Paris: Laffont, 2001), 82. 13. RINAP 4:103, 47.4′–5′. 14. RINAP 4:105, 48.16. 15. RINAP 4:14, 1.ii.2–5. 16. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.30–32. 17. RINAP 4:96, 41. 18. SAA 2:22–23, no. 4; Simo Parpola, “Neo-Assyrian Treaties from the Royal Archives of Nineveh,” JCS 39 (1987): 161–89. 19. SAA 2:22, no. 4.r.7′. 20. SAA 2:22, no. 4.r.17′. 21. RINAP 4:14, 1.ii.8–11. 22. Hayim Tadmor, Benno Landsberger, and Simo Parpola, “The Sin of Sargon and Sennacherib’s Last Will,” SAAB 3 (1989): 3–51; Frederick Mario Fales, “The Road to Judah: 701 B.C.E. in the Context of Sennacherib’s Political-Military Strategy,” in Kalimi and Richardson, Sennacherib at the Gates, 225–32; Elayi, Sargon II, 210–17. 23. Tadmor, Landsberger, and Parpola, “Sin of Sargon,” 3–51. 24. Tadmor, Landsberger, and Parpola, “Sin of Sargon,” 51. 25. Elayi, Sennacherib, 43, 150. 26. ARAB 2.795. 27. Friedrich Schmidtke, Asarhaddons Statthalterschaft in Babylonien und seine Thronbesteigung in Assyrien 681 v. Chr., AOTU 1.2 (Leiden: Brill, 1916), 105, with earlier literature; Benno

126

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Landsberger and T. Bauer, “Zu neuveröffentlichen Geschichtsquellen der Zeit von Asarhaddon bis Nabonid,” ZA 37 (1927): 65–69; Hans Hirschberg, Studien zur Geschichte Esarhaddons König von Assyrien (Ohlau in Schlesien: Eschenhagen, 1932); Wolfram Von Soden, Herrscher im alten Orient, Verständliche Wissenschaft 25 (Berlin: Springer, 1954), 118–26; Parpola, “Murderer of Sennacherib,” 171–82; Oded Tammuz, “Punishing a Dead Villain: The Biblical Accounts of the Murderer of Sennacherib,” BN 157 (2013): 101–5 (with bibliography). 28. ABL 1091; Parpola, “Murderer of Sennacherib,” 172–75; SAA 18:82, no. 100. 29. Elayi, Sennacherib, 149–51 (with bibliography). 30. Mordechai Cogan, “Sennacherib and the Angry Gods of Babylon and Israel,” IEJ 59 (2009): 170–72. 31. Sharif Bujanda Viloria, “Regicidio e intrigas de harén: Las muertes de Ramsés III y de Senaquerib, fuentes antiguas, perspectivas modernas,” Fuentes Humanisticas 29.51 (2015): 109–21. 32. Peçirková, “Assyria under Sennacherib,” 10. 33. Elayi, Sennacherib, 153–71. 34. Tadmor, Landsberger, and Parpola, “Sin of Sargon,” 33. 35. Eckart Frahm, “Nabû-zuqup-kenu, das Gilgamesch-Epos und der Tod Sargons II.,” JCS 51 (1999): 85–86 (with bibliography). 36. RINAP 3.2:198, 146.10–13; 3.2:200, 147.10–13; 3.2:330, 230.13b–14a; Victoire Moinard, Les mauvais traitements envers les dieux en Mésopotamie au premier millénaire av. J.-C. (Saarbrücken: Éditions universitaires européennes, 2006), 72–74. 37. ARAB 2.649. 38. RINAP 4:236, 114.i.23–ii.5; Stephanie Dalley, “The Language of Destruction and Its Interpretation,” BaM 36 (2005): 275–85. 39. RINAP 4:236, 114.ii.6–8. 40. Moinard, Les mauvais traitements envers les dieux, 65–75. 41. Mordechai Cogan, “Omens and Ideology in the Babylon Inscription of Esarhaddon,” in History, Historiography and Interpretation: Studies in Biblical and Cuneiform Literatures, ed. Hayim Tadmor and Moshe Weinfeld (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1983), 76–87. 42. RINAP 4:195, 104.i.19–20; 4:231–236, 114.i.7–8.

Notes to Chapter 4 1. Lionel Marti, “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins,” JA 298 (2010): 495–515. 2. SAA 10:XIII–XIV; SAAS 19:70–103; Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Babylonian Liver Omens: Chapters manzâzu, padânu and pântâkalti of the Babylonian Extispicy Series Mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library, CNI 25 (Copenhagen: Carsten Niebuhr Institute, 2000); Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Secrets of Extispicy: The Chapter Multâbiltu of the Babylonian Extispicy Series and Niṣirti bârûti Texts Mainly from Aššurbanipal’s Library, AOAT 326 (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2005). 3. SAA4; SAA 8; Erica Reiner, “The Uses of Astrology,” JAOS 105 (1985): 589–95; Hermann Hunger and David Pingree, Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia, HdO 44 (Leiden, 1999); David Brown, Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, CM 18 (Groningen: Styx, 2000); John M. Steele, Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers, Archimedes (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2000), 21–83; Steele, A Brief Introduction to Astronomy: Middle East (London: Saqi, 2008); Steele, “The Early History of the Astronomical Diaries,” in Keeping Watch in Babylonia: The Astronomical Diaries in Context, ed. Johannes Haubold, John M. Steele, and Kathryn Stevens, CHANE 100 (Leiden: Brill, 2019), 19–52; Francesca Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). 4. A. Leo Oppenheim, “Divination and Celestial Observation in the Last Assyrian Empire,” Centaurus 14.1 (1969): 97–135; LAS 2, xii. 5. Pierre Villard, “Les guérisseurs à la cour néo-assyrienne,” in Médecine et médecins au ProcheOrient ancien: Actes du Colloque international organisé à Lyon les 8 et 9 novembre 2002, edited by Laura Battini and Pierre Villard, BARIS 1528 (London: Hedges, 2006), 139–60. 6. SAA 4:XXX–XXXV.



Notes

127

7. Erle Leichty, The Omen Series Šumma Izbu, TCS 4 (Locust Valley, NY: Augustin, 1970). 8. Sally M. Freedman, If a City Is Set on a Height: The Akkadian Omen Series Šumma Alu ina Mēlê Šakin, Volume 1: Tablets 1–21, OPSNKF 17 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 1998); Volume 2: Tablets 22–40, OPSNKF 19 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2006). 9. SAA 10:37–38, no. 51 (= ABL 618; LAS 1, 42–43, no. 66). 10. SAA 10:18–19, no. 23.r.3 (= ABL 37). 11. SAA 10:8–10, no. 8.r.22 (= ABL 519). 12. SAA 4:68–69, no. 62; see, e.g., Erich Ebeling, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur religiösen Inhalts, WVDOG 28 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1919); WVDOG 34 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1923), 423. 13. SAA 4:104, no. 89.1. 14. SAA 4:100, no. 84. r.19–22. 15. SAA 4:XL–XLVI, “The Liver and Its Parts.” 16. RINAP 4:107, 48.73–78; Baruchi-Unna, “Reporting the Content,” 355–56. 17. Hayim Tadmor, Benno Landsberger and Simo Parpola, “The Sin of Sargon and Sennacherib’s Last Will,” SAAB 3 (1989): 3–52. 18. RINAP 4:235–36, 114.7–9. 19. RINAP 4:106, 48.58–59; Mordechai Cogan, “Omens and Ideology in the Babylon Inscription of Esarhaddon,” in Tadmor and Weinfeld, History, Historiography and Interpretation, 76–87. 20. LAS 2, xviii–xx; SAA 4:XXX–XXXV. 21. Ulla Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination, CNI 19 (Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 1995), 54–55. 22. SAA 4:181–83; 461; LAS 1, 122–23, no. 166.r.5–12. 23. LAS 2, xv–xxi. 24. SAA 10:XIII–XXIV; Laurie E. Pearce, “The Scribes and Scholars of Ancient Mesopotamia,” CANE 4:2275; SAA 19:68–122. 25. Réka Esztári and Adám Vér, “The Voices of Ištar: Prophetesses and Female Ecstatics in the Neo-Assyrian Empire,” in Religion and Female Body in Ancient Judaism and Its Environments (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2015), 28–29. 26. SAA 10:131, no. 171 (= ABL 954). 27. SAA 10:139, no. 177 (= LAS 1, 80–83, no. 116). 28. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 57. 29. Simo Parpola, “The Forlorn Scholar,” in Language, Literature, and History: Philological Studies Presented to Erica Reiner, ed. Francesca Rochberg-Halton, AOS 67 (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1987), 257–78; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 63; SAA 16:82, no. 89.9–11 (= CT 53 14). 30. SAA 10:232, no. 294.17 (= ABL 1285); SAA 1:33, no. 43 and 159, no. 196 (= LAS 1, 51 and 143). 31. LAA 2, xv–xxi; SAA 10:XXIV–XXVII; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 59. However, David Brown (Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, 49–51 and n. 154) does not agree with the existence of two separate circles. 32. SAA 10:51–52, no. 69.r.11–12 (= CT 53 146). 33. SAA 10:179–180, no. 227.r.16 (= ABL 358). 34. SAA 10:44, no. 60.15–17 (= ABL 688; LAS 1, 26–27, no. 39). 35. Esztári and Vér, “Voices of Ištar,” 29. 36. Albert Kirk Grayson, “Königslisten und Chroniken. B. Akkadisch,” RlA 6 (1980): 119–20; Pierre Villard, “Quelques notes sur le clergé d’Assur à la fin de l’époque néo-assyrienne,” Akh Purattim 2 (2007): 333. 37. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 61 n. 1; Elayi, Sennacherib, 163. 38. LAS 2, xix; Cynthia Jean, “Le petit monde des exorcistes de Ninive,” Iraq 66 (2004): 77–81; SAAS 17; PNA 1.1:37–38; Elayi, Sennacherib, 163. 39. SAA 10:XXVI, table I. 40. PNA 1.2:38–40 (with bibliography). 41. Pierre Villard, “Allusions littéraires et jeux de lettrés dans les rapports de devins d’époque

128

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

néo-assyrienne,” in Intellectual Life of the Ancient Near East, ed. Jiři Prosecky, CRRAI 43 (Prague: Oriental Institute, 1998), 431–32; SAA 8:96–97, no. 160–163 (four astrological reports). 42. SAA 10:152–83, no. 185–232. 43. SAA 10:157, no. 192; 162, no. 200; 163–64, no. 202. 44. SAA 10:154, no. 187. 45. SAA 4:160–61, no. 149. 46. SAA 10:156, no. 191.r.2. 47. SAA 10:152–53, no. 185. 48. SAA 10:171, no. 216; SAA 8:96, nos. 160–161. 49. SAA 10:182, no. 229. 50. Marti, “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins,” 504–5. 51. PNA 2.1:577–79; SAA 10:7–27, no. 1–38 (= LAS 1, 2–19; LAS 2, 3–33). 52. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 128. 53. SAA 10:18–19, no. 23; Marti, “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins,” 509–12. 54. SAA 10:54, no. 72 and 37–38, no. 51. 55. SAA 8:50, no. 83. 56. SAA 10:4–6, no. 1–3; PNA 2.2:911–913. 57. SAA 10:234, no. 294.r.21 (not dated); PNA 1.1:38. 58. PNA 1.2:254–55; SAA 10:30–47, no. 39–66; SAA 8:47–57, no. 80–99. 59. SAA 10:30, no. 39; 42–43, no. 58 (= ABL 604; LAS 1, 24–25, no. 34). 60. SAA 8:49, no. 82.r.9; 50, no. 83.r.4; 56, no. 96.r.8; 51, no. 86.r.5; 52, no. 88.r.4. 61. SAA 10:37–38, no. 51; 41, no. 56; 42–43, no. 58; 44, no. 60; 44–45, no. 61, not dated, therefore addressed to Esarhaddon or Ashurbanipal. 62. SAA 10:41–42, no. 57 (= ABL 691; LAS 1, 28–29, no. 40); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 59, 61, 63–65, 68. 63. PNA 2.2:794–796; SAA 10:49–61, no. 67–83. 64. SAA 8:50, no. 83 (= RMA 55). 65. SAA 10:54, no. 72; SAA 8:50, no. 83; Marti, “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins,” 511–12. 66. PNA 1.1:95–96. 67. SAA 10:64–83, no. 84–108. 68. Frederick Mario Fales and Liane Jakob-Rost, “Neo-Assyrian Texts from Assur: Private Archives in the Vorderasiatisches Museum of Berlin I,” SAAB 5 (1991): 16.r.8 (657); Vincent Scheil, “Passim. III. Un contrat assyrien,” RA 22 (1925): 145, 6, 8, 16 (648). 69. SAA 7:154–55, no. 148.ii.1 (not dated). 70. SAA 10:64, no. 84.2 (676); SAA 8:60, no. 100 (676); SAA 8:60–61, no. 101.r.9 (672); SAA 8:61– 62, no. 102.1.s.5 (669). 71. PNA 1.2:338–39 (with bibliography); Elayi, Sennacherib, 163. 72. SAA 10:86–88, no. 109 (= ABL 1216); Parpola, “Murderer of Sennacherib,” 179 n. 41. See also SAA 10:95, no. 114 (= RMA 274; ABL 895). 73. SAA 10:89–90, no. 111 (= CT 54 22; ABL 1237); SAA 4:38–40, no. 33–34. 74. SAA 10:86–88, no. 109; SAAS 7:89–95; Parpola, “Murderer of Sennacherib,” 179–82. 75. SAA 10:94–95, no. 113; SAAS 7:138; PNA 2.2:339 (with bibliography). 76. SAA 10:95, no. 114 (not dated); 100, no. 120 (not dated); 99, no. 119 (not dated). 77. SAA 10:95, no. 114 (= RMA 274: ABL 895); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 69. 78. PNA 2.2:733–34 (with bibliography); SAA 10:151–83, no. 185–232; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 57, 62. 79. SAA 10:136, no. 173 (= ABL 421; LAS 1, 80–81, no. 114). 80. PNA 2.2:721–25 (with bibliography); SAA 10:185–211, no. 233–272; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 60. 81. SAA 10:188, no. 235.r.4–9 (= ABL 379; LAS 1, 148–49, no. 198). 82. LAS 2, 195–196.r.8. 83. PNA 2.2:851–52 (with bibliography); SAA 10:213–23, no. 273–288.



Notes

129

84. PNA 3.2:1402–3 (with bibliography); SAA 10: 225–35, no. 289–295; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 62. 85. SAA 10:202, no. 256 (= ABL 11; LAS 1, 122–123, no. 164). 86. SAA 10:176–77, no. 224 (= ABL 657; LAS 1, 88–89, no. 120). 87. SAA 10:235, no. 295. 88. SAA 10:231–34, no. 294 (= ABL 1285); Parpola, “Forlorn Scholar,” 257–78. 89. PNA 2.2:855–57 (with bibliography); SAA 10:237–45, no. 296–307. 90. PNA 3.2:1410–12 (with bibliography); SAA 10:239, no. 297. 91. PNA 2.1:509 (with bibliography); SAA 10:267, no. 330. 92. PNA 3.2:1396–98 (with bibliography); SAA 10:274–77, no. 338–344; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 57. 93. SAA 5:126, no. 155.2 (=ABL 976). 94. PNA 2.2:908–10 (with bibliography); SAA 10:277–78, no. 345–346. 95. PNA 2.2:738–40. 96. SAA 10:282, no. 347 (= ABL 337; LAS 1, 224–27, no. 278). 97. SAA 10:296–97, no. 359 (= ABL 746; LAS 1, 218–10, no. 275); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 61, 65, 69 and n. 1. 98. For example SAA 10:307–11, no. 371–375. 99. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 61, 63; LAS 2, 449–50. 100. Elayi, Sennacherib, 4–5 n. 14. 101. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 59, 61, 65; SAA 8:178–81, no. 316–322 (seven astrological reports). 102. PNA 1.2:261; SAA 8:99–102, no. 168–174 (seven astrological reports). 103. PNA 1.1:115–19; 60–62; 2.2:794–96, 835–36, 836–37; 3.2:1229 (with bibliography); KochWestenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 66. 69; SAA 8:159–65, no. 288–299; 203–7, no. 356–368; 237– 45, no. 416–436; 254–55, no. 449–453; 271–73, no. 491–497. 104. SAA 8:193–94, no. 338; 195, no. 342; see SAAS 19:103 (Asharêdu the older: thirteen astrological reports; Asharêdu the younger: twenty astrological reports: SAA 8:183–201, no. 323–355; there were at least three different men active in Babylonia at that time: SAAS 9:6). 105. PNA 1.2:320–21, 323–25; 2.1:632–35 (with bibliography); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 58, 61, 66, 69; SAA 8:256–62, no. 456–468; 300, no. 551; 305, no. 567. 106. PNA 1.1:132 (with bibliography); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 57. 107. PNA 2.1:610–11; 2.2:934–35; 3.2:1280–82, 1300–1301 (with bibliography); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 56–58, 60, 72. 108. PNA 2.1:575; 2.2:788–92, 884–88 (with bibliography); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 72 (with bibliography). 109. PNA 1.2:249, 336; 2.2:726, 861–62; 3.2:1431 (with bibliography); Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 66, 68–69, 70, 72; Esztári and Vér, “Voices of Ištar,” 31. 110. PNA 1.1:59; 1.2:253; 2.1:568; 2.2:766; 3.2:1416; Esztári and Vér, “Voices of Ištar,” 22–23, table 2. 111. LAS 2, xvii–xxi; SAA 4:XXX–XXXV. 112. PNA 1.2:146. 113. RINAP 4:14, 1.ii.5–6; 4:13, 1.i.62. 114. RINAP 4:106, 48.55–56. 115. RINAP 4:121, 57.ii.5–11; 4:124, 57.ii.14–26; 4:125, 57.iii.42–iv.6; 4:196–197, 104.ii.28–41– iii.8–16; 4.237, 114.iii.16–24; 4.246, 116.r.9–10. 116. PNA 1.2:338–39 (with bibliography). 117. Oppenheim, “Divination and Celestial Observation,” 97–135. 118. SAA 10:32–33, no. 42. 119. RINAP 4:24, 1.vi.2. 120. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 67 (with bibliography). 121. Marti, “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins,” 505–6. 122. Dominique Charpin, Lire et écrire à Babylone (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 2008), 31–60.

130

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

123. Alasdair Livingstone, “Assurbanipal: Literate or Not?,” ZA 97 (2007): 98–118, https://doi. org/10.1515/ZA.2007.005; Irène J. Winter, “Sennacherib’s Expert Knowledge: Skill and Mastery as Components of Royal Display,” in Proceedings of the 51st Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale: Held at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, July 18–22, 2005, ed. Robert D. Biggs, Jenny Myers and Martha T. Roth (Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2008), 333–38. 124. SAA 10:235, no. 295. 125. SAA 10:42–43, no. 58; Marti, “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins,” 507; Philippe Talon, “The Use of Glosses in Neo-Assyrian Letters and Astrological Reports,” in Semitic and Assyriological Studies Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and Colleagues (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003), 648–65. 126. SAA 8:193–94, no. 338. 127. SAA 10:44, no. 60; Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 59. 128. SAA 2:33, no. 6, §10, 116–117; Esztári and Vér, “Voices of Ištar,” 30–31. 129. RINAP 4:107, 48.72–78. 130. SAAS 9:42, 58–59. 131. SAA 4:162–63, no. 151; 192–94, no. 190–191. 132. SAA 9:9, no. 1.8; 34, no. 5; SAAS 9:28; Esztári and Vér, “Voices of Ištar,” 22; SAAS 7:24–25; PNA 1.1:59. 133. SAA 9:14, no. 2.1; 34–35, no. 5.2.1. 134. SAA 10:86–88, no. 109.13′–15; René Labat, “Asarhaddon et la ville de Zaqqap,” RA 53 (1959): 113–18; Parpola, “Murderer of Sennacherib,” 179; SAAS 7:79–95; PNA 1.2:338–39, 361. 135. SAA 10:14–15, no. 17; SAAS 9:73–75. 136. SAA 10:175–76, no. 223; PNA 1.1:138–140. 137. SAA 10:118, no. 154; 313; SAAS 9:54–57. 138. SAA 13:66–67, no. 76–77; SAAS 9:44–46. 139. SAA 13:126, no. 154; PNA 1.2:361; SAAS 9:75–76. 140. SAA 16:64, no. 65 and 77, no. 81; SAAS 23:44. 141. James V. Kinnier Wilson, “An Introduction to Babylonian Psychiatry,” in Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on His Seventy-Fifth Birthday April 21, 1965, ed. Hans G. Güterbock and Thorkild Jacobsen, AS 16 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965), 289–98; SAAS 9:84–86. 142. SAA 10:162–63, no. 200–201; 194, no. 244; 239, no. 297. 143. SAA 4:192–94, no. 190.2–4; 191–193; SAAS 9:82–84.

Notes to Chapter 5 1. RINAP 4:215, 104.iv.33–47. 2. RINAP 4:196, 104.ii.1–8; 4:245, 116.18′–19′. 3. Anne Renée Castex and Bruno Gombert, “La prise et la destruction de Babylone en 689 avant notre ère,” Hypothèses (2013): 296; RINAP 4:196, 104. ii.6–7 (note). 4. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 131, ch. 16, 1–4. 5. Landsberger and Bauer, “Zu neuveröffentlichten Geschichtsquellen,” 65; Peter Machinist, review of Death in Mesopotamia, ed. Bendt Alster, JAOS 104 (1984): 570; Frame, Babylonia 689–627 B.C., 70; Knapp, Royal Apologetic, 323. 6. Mordechai Cogan, “Omens and Ideology in the Babylon Inscription of Esarhaddon,” in Tadmor and Weinfeld, History, Historiography and Interpretation, 82–83; Matthijs J. de Jong, “‘Fear Not, O King!’ The Assyrian Prophecies as a Case for a Comparative Approach,” JEOL 38 (2003–2004): 115. 7. John A. Brinkman, “Through a Glass Darkly: Esarhaddon’s Retrospects on the Downfall of Babylon,” JAOS 103 (1983): 36. 8. Brinkman, “Esarhaddon’s Retrospects,” 35, 41. 9. RINAP 4:200–201, 104.vi.5–15. 10. RINAP 4:131–32, 58.v.7–vi.1–5. 11. Moinard, Les mauvais traitements envers les dieux, 74–77. 12. BM 91027; RINAP 4:231–37, 114; see also figs. 7–10. 13. Benno Landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila an König Asarhaddon, MKNAW, N.R. 28,



Notes

131

no. 6 (Amsterdam: Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij, 1965), 18–20; Cogan, “Omens and Ideology,” 85–87. 14. RINAP 4:106, 48.52. 15. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 82, ch. 1, iii.38; Cogan, “Omens and Ideology,” 86. 16. RINAP 4:196, 104.ii.23–24; 4:201, 104.vii.44–46; 4:202, 105; 4:225, 111. See also 4:231, 114. 4:243, 116 (Babylon B: Bab. B) had probably the same dating (4:245, 116.20′), but the colophon where there could have been the second dating by the year of accession is lacking. 17. Frame, Babylonia 689–627 B.C., 67; RINAP 4:6 and 202, 105; and possibly also 193, 104; 4:211, 106; 4:219, 108. 18. RINAP 4:213, 106.iii.29–39. 19. Cogan, “Omens and Ideology,” 87. 20. Hayim Tadmor, “The Inscriptions of Nabunaid: Historical Arrangement,” in Güterbock and Jacobsen, Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger, 351–53. 21. Mordechai Cogan, “Tendentious Chronology in the Book of Chronicles,” Zion 45 (1980): 165–72 (Hebrew). 22. Barbara Nevling Porter, “What the Assyrians Thought the Babylonians Thought about the Relative Status of Nabû and Marduk in the Late Assyrian Period,” in Parpola and Whiting, Assyria 1995, 253–60. 23. Porter, Images, Power, and Politics, 94–95. 24. RINAP 4:119–29, 57.viii.9A′–12A′, 9B′–12B′. 25. RINAP 4:15–16, 1.ii.40–64. 26. RINAP 4:18. 1.iii.62–70. 27. SAA 10:295–96, no. 358.r.10. 28. RINAP 4:198, 104.iii.41–42. 29. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 83, 103. 30. RINAP 4:197, 104.ii.41–44. 31. RINAP 4:221, 109.iv.2–5. 32. RINAP 4:107, 48.75–78. 33. RINAP 4:107, 48.79–80. 34. RINAP 4:104, 48.8; J. Tammi Schneider, An Introduction to Ancient Mesopotamian Religion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 58–59; SAACT 4. 35. RINAP 4:108, 48.80–81. 36. RINAP 4:32, 2.iv.20; 4:39, 3.iv.19′. 37. RINAP 4:55–56, 9.i′.1′–17′–ii′.1′–21′. 38. RINAP 4:72, 26.1–2; 4:91, 37.r. 7–11; 4:93, 39.r. 24′; 4:147, 70.1–3, 71.1–3. 39. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 84–85, ch. 1, iv.19–22; 27–28. 40. RINAP 4:282–83, 141.1–2; David Kertai, The Architecture of Late Assyrian Royal Palaces (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). 41. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.35–39; 4:32, 2.iv.25–31; Erle Leichty, “Esarhaddon’s ‘Letter to the Gods,’” in Cogan and Eph‘al, Ah, Assyria…, 53. 42. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.44–45. 43. Cogan, “Omens and Ideology,” 80–82. 44. RINAP 4:221, 109.iv.7′–11′. 45. RINAP 4:197, 104.iii.17–21; 4:237, 114.iv.1–4; 4:246, 116.r.10–11. 46. RINAP 4:213, 106.iii.7–8. 47. Cogan, “Omens and Ideology,” 80–84. 48. RINAP 4:213, 106.iii.5. 49. RINAP 4:198, 104.iii.45–47. 50. RINAP 4:230, 113.24–26. 51. RINAP 4:221, 109.iv.12′–15′; Brinkman, “Esarhaddon’s Retrospects,” 38–40. 52. RINAP 4:221, 108.iv.16′–21′. 53. SAA 13:XIII and 7–8, no. 7.r. 6, 9. See CAD, s.v. abūbu.

132

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

54. RINAP 4:136, 60.31′–32′; they were maybe comparable to the silver and bronze representations of the Taban and Diyala Rivers attested in the early second–millennium year formulas of Belakum, king of Eshnuna: Henri Frankfort, Seton Lloyd, and Thorkild Jacobsen, The Gimil-Sin Temple and the Palace of the Rulers at Tell Asmar, OIP 43 (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1940), 181, no. 77 and 193, no. 119. See also RINAP 4:196, 104.41. 55. RINAP 4:251, 120.1–9. 56. RINAP 4:197, 104.iii.23–24; 4:237, 114.iv.14–15. 57. RINAP 4:197, 104.iii.31–34; PNA 3.2:1402–3; 2.2:910–911. 58. RINAP 4:108, 48.87–90; Porter, “What the Assyrians Thought” 257–59. 59. RINAP 4:207, 105.vi.27–32. 60. RINAP 4:114, 53.13′; 4:113, 52, 11′; 4:198, 104.iv.19; 4:108, 48.92; 4:230, 113.20; 4:112, 51.iv.10; 4:108, 48.91; 4:300, 1015.vi.2. 61. RINAP 4:136, 60.31′–32′. 62. SAA 13:134, no. 161 (= ABL 471). See Michael P. Streck, Der Wiederaufbau Babylons unter Asarhaddon und Assurbanipal in Briefen aus Ninive (Berlin: Akademie, 2002). 63. SAA 13:135, no. 162 (= ABL 120); 139–140, no. 168 (= ABL 119). 64. SAA 13:136–38, no. 163, 164, 166 (= ABL 1219, CT 53 60, CT 53 846). 65. SAA 13:144–45, no. 174 (= ABL 498). 66. SAA 13:148–49, no. 179 (= ABL 968). 67. SAA 13:139–40, no. 168 (= ABL 119). 68. RINAP 4:199, 104.v.10–12; 4:208, 105.vii.12–15; Brinkman, “Esarhaddon’s Retrospects,” 40– 42; Cogan, “Omens and Ideology,” 80–82. 69. RINAP 4:199, 104.v.21–28. 70. RINAP 4:199, 104.v.35–38. 71. RINAP 4:200–201, 104.vii.4–18. 72. Porter, Images, Power, and Politics, 47. 73. RINAP 4:97, 43.12–16. 74. RINAP 4:167, 84.4–5; 4:168, 85.5; 4:169, 86.5. 75. RINAP 4:108, 48.90. 76. SAA 13:XIII, 39–40, no. 39; 97–98, no. 127; SAA 10:284–85, no. 349; 295–96, no. 358; 303–4, no. 368. 77. RINAP 4:65–66, 18.6′–7′; 4:105, 48.37–38. 78. RINAP 4:108–9, 48.94–96. 79. RINAP 4:207, 105.19–26. 80. RINAP 4:137, 61.42′–45′; 4:113, 52.1′–13′. 81. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 103, 495. 82. LAS 2, 32; followed by Wilfred G. Lambert, “Esarhaddon’s Attempt to Return Marduk to Babylon,” in Ad bene et fideliter seminandum: Festgabe für Karlheinz Deller zum 21. Februar 1987, ed. Gerlinde Mauer and Ursula Magen (Kevalaer; Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1988), 157–74. 83. RINAP 4:137, 61.42′–45′; 4:299–302, 1015 and 1016; Lambert, “Esarhaddon’s Attempt,” 158–67. 84. SAA 13:150, no. 180.r.12′–13′. 85. RINAP 4:248–49, 118 and fig. 16. The tablet containing a copy of an inscription dedicated to Marduk (4:295–96, 1011) is probably not to be attributed to Esarhaddon, but rather to Ashurbanipal or Sennacherib. 86. RINAP 4:98–100, 44; 4:100–101, 45. 87. SAA 13:150, no. 181.5–9. 88. SAA 13:147–48, no. 178. 89. SAA 13:148–49, no. 179. 90. SAA 13:149–51, no. 181. 91. SAA 10:283–84, no. 348. 92. SAA 10:283–84, no. 348.22–25. 93. Porter, Images, Power, and Politics, 44.



Notes

133

94. RINAP 4:23–24, 1.v.54–82. 95. See the cubit of Nippur, graduated specimen of an ancient measure, dated to the third millennium: James Ritter, “Metrology, Writing and Mathematics in Mesopotamia,” Acta historiae rerum naturalium nec non technicarum 3 (1999): 215–41. 96. See above, Introduction. 97. RINAP 4:24–25, 1.vi.28–29. 98. RINAP 4:25, 1.vi.48–53. 99. RINAP 4:22–23, 1.v.47–48; 4:33, 2.iv.42–43; 4:39, 3.iv.37–38. 100. RINAP 4:56, 10.7–8. 101. RINAP 4:64–65, 17. 102. RINAP 4:60, 12.21–24. 103. RINAP 4:108, 48.92–93. 104. RINAP 4:69–70, 23.1–3. 105. RINAP 4:118, 55.1′–6′. 106. RINAP 4:119–29, 57. 107. RINAP 4:125, 57.iii.34. 108. RINAP 4:131, 58.iii.15–17. 109. RINAP 4:126, 57.iv.39. 110. RINAP 4:128, 57.vii.25. 111. RINAP 4:134–44, 60–66. 112. RINAP 4:117, 54.r.16–24; 4:158, 78.7–10; 4:161, 79.8–10. 113. RINAP 4:164, 81.3–7; 4:165, 82.2–5. 114. RINAP 4:166–68, 83.1–3; 4:84, 85. 115. RINAP 4:169–70, 87.1–14. 116. RINAP 4:176, 93.22–30; 4:177, 94.1–6; 4:178, 95.1–10; 4:178–79, 96.1–4. 117. RINAP 4:284–85, 1001. 118. SAA 10:284–85, no. 349.r.17–18. 119. SAA 10:303–4, no. 368. 120. RINAP 4:286, 1002; SAA 10:300–302, no. 364. 121. RINAP 4:259, 127.15′–20′; SAA 10:300–302, no. 364. 122. RINAP 4:262, 128.15–22. 123. RINAP 4:265, 130.29–32; 4:267, 131.10–15; Donald E. McCown, Richard C. Haines, and D. P. Hansen, Nippur I: Temple of Enlil, Scribal Quarter, and Soundings (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967). 124. RINAP 4:270, 132.1–6. 125. RINAP 4:272, 133.30–33. 126. RINAP 4:274, 134.11–15; 4:276, 135.11–15; 4:278, 137.11–17; 4:280, 138.1–4; 4:281, 139.1–11; SAA 10:284–85, no. 349. 127. RINAP 4:316, 2003.ii.1′–21′–v.1′–8′; 4:318, 2004.12′–15′. 128. SAAS 9:38–42. 129. For earlier periods, see, e.g., William W. Hallo, “Royal Inscriptions of Ur: A Typology,” HUCA 33 (1962): 1–43. 130. RINAP 4:61, 13.1–5, r.1′–6′; 4:62, 14.1′–8′. 131. Mario Liverani, “‘I Constructed Palaces throughout My Country’: Establishing the Assyrian Provincial Order; The Motif and Its Variants,” RA 106 (2012): 181–91. 132. SAA 13:XIII–XV (with bibliography); 36–37, no. 34; 111, no. 140. 133. SAA 13:55, no. 61; 160, no. 188.r.8–19. 134. SAA 10:12–13, no. 13. 135. SAA 2:44–45, no. 6.§ 35. 136. RINAP 4:136, 60.27′–28′; SAAS 9:51–52.

134

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Notes to Chapter 6 1. See ch. 3.3. 2. RINAP 4:185, 98.r.33–34. 3. RINAP 4:264, 129.14. 4. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.40; Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 82, ch. 1, iii.39–47. 5. Paul Sanlaville, “Considérations sur l’évolution de la basse Mésopotamie au cours des derniers millénaires,” Paléorient 15 (1989): 5–27; Sanlaville and Rémi Dalongeville, “L’évolution des espaces littoraux du golfe Persique et du golfe d’Oman depuis la phase finale de la transgression post-glaciaire,” Paléorient 31 (2005): 10–11 (map), 19; Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 793 (map). 6. Elayi, Sargon II, 135–36, 138; Sennacherib, 46–48, 91–92. 7. RINAP 3.2:150, 109.1–7; Frahm, Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften, 146, 196. 8. PNA 2.2:906 (with bibliography). 9. SAA 13:128, no. 157.16′. 10. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.41–42. 11. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.41. 12. RINAP 4:36, 3.i.20′; 4:75, 30.9′; 4:77, 31.3′; 4:79, 32.ii.3′. 13. Frame, Babylonia 689–627 B.C., 60–61; PNA 2.2:961 (with bibliography). 14. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.47–49. 15. RINAP 4:15, 1.ii.51–52. 16. RINAP 4:75, 30.5′–6′. 17. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 82, ch. 1, iii.41. 18. RINAP 4:16, 1.ii.55–57; 4:36, 3.i.20′–22′; 4:75, 30.7′. 19. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 82, ch. 1, iii.42. 20. RINAP 4:16, 1.ii.61–64; 4:30, 2.ii.30–34; 4:47, 6.ii.6′–9′; 4:75, 30.11′–12′. 21. RINAP 4:77, 31.8′. 22. RINAP 4:77, 31.7′. 23. SAAS 12:37–40. 24. Elayi, Sennacherib, 136–37. 25. PNA 1.1:139; Riekele Borger, Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, Königs von Assyrien, AfO.B 9 (Graz, 1956), Klch. A:16; Nin. A iii 40; Nin. B i 55; AsBb E 4; Frt. A:16; Grayson, “Assyria: Sennacherib and Esarhaddon (704–669 B.C.),” 124. 26. RINAP 4:17–18, 1.iii.39; 4:77, 31.14′. 27. RINAP 4:155, 77.16; 4:158, 78.15; 4:161, 79.15; 4:175, 93.7. 28. RINAP 4:155, 60.3′. 29. Nadav Naʾaman, “The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire,” ZDPV 120 (2004): 61–67 and fig. 1 (with bibliography). 30. Benjamin Mazar, “Yurza: The Identification of Tell Jemmeh,” PEQ 84 (1952): 48–51, followed by Nadav Naʾaman, “The Brook of Egypt and Assyrian Policy on the Border of Egypt,” Tel Aviv 6 (1979): 68–90; G. W. Van Beek, “Jemmeh, Tell,” in NEAEHL 2:672. 31. Pierre Briant, État et pasteurs au Moyen-Orient ancien (Paris: Maison des sciences de l’homme; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 153–76. 32. Naʾaman, “Boundary System,” 62; Nadav Naʾaman, “Siruatti the Meʾunite in a Second Inscription of Tiglath-pileser III,” NABU (1997): 139, 150. 33. RINAP 4:78, 32.15′. 34. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.40; 4:29, 2.i.59; 4:76, 30.16′. 35. RINAP 4:37, 3.ii.13′. 36. RINAP 4:76, 30.18′–19′; 4:135, 60.1′. 37. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.43–55; 4:29, 2.ii.1–15; 4:37, 3.15′–26′; 4:42, 4.i′.2′–10′; 4:155, 77.18–20; 4:158, 78.17–19; 4:161, 79.17–19; 4:175, 93.8–9; 4:181, 97–98.19–24. 38. Askold I. Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, OBO 127 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993), 57–94; 181–253, no. 8–252; SAA 4:4, no. 1; Jussi Aro, “Remarks on the Practice of



Notes

135

Extispicy in the Time of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal,” in La divination en Mésopotamie ancienne et dans les régions voisines, CRRAI 14 (Strasbourg, 1965): 116–17. 39. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.43–46; Ivantchik, Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, 60–63. 40. RINAP 4:76, 31.19′. 41. RINAP 4:181, 98.24. 42. John Daniel Bing, “A History of Cilicia during the Assyrian Period” (PhD diss., Indiana University Bloomington, 1969), 216–17; André Lemaire, “Recherches de topographie historique sur le pays de Qué (IXe–VIIe siècles av. J.–C.),” Anatolia Antiqua 1 (1991): 274; Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, 58–59; RlA 4 (1972–1975), 500–501, s.v. Hupišna (possibly to be identified with Greek Kybistra). 43. SAA 4:16–18, no. 14. 44. Afif Erzen, Kilikien bis zum ender der Perserherrschaft (Leipzig: Noske, 1940); Bing, “History of Cilicia”; Paolo Desideri and Anna M. Jasink, Cilicia: Dall’ età di Kizziwatna alla conquista macedone (Turin: Le lettere, 1990); Olivier Casabonne, La Cilicie à l’époque achéménide (Paris: de Boccard, 2004), 21–49, 67; Elizabeth French, “Cilicia,” in The Philistine and Other “Sea Peoples” in Text and Archaeology, ed. Ann E. Killebrew and Gunnar Lehmann, ABS 15 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013), 479–83. 45. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.48–49. 46. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.50–51. 47. Elayi, Sargon II, 87–90. 48. Elayi, Sennacherib, 100–102. 49. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.52–53; 4:29, 2.ii.8–11; 4:37, 3.ii.21′–24′; 4:42, 4.i′.7′–9′. 50. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.54–55; 4:29, 2.ii.12–15; 4:37, 3.ii.25′–26′; 4:42, 4.i′.9′–10′. 51. Elayi, Sennacherib, 137. 52. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 83, ch. 1, iv.2. 53. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.62–63; 4:30, 2.ii.34–36; 4:51, 7.i′.3′–4′. 54. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 83, ch. 1, iv.2. 55. PNA 1.2:281. 56. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 83, ch. 1, iv.3. 57. RINAP 4:48, 6.ii.10′. 58. RINAP 4:16, 1.ii.65–67. 59. Josette Elayi, The History of Phoenicia (Atlanta: Lockwood, 2018), 166–69. 60. John David Hawkins, “Some Historical Problems of the Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions,” AnSt 29 (1979): 153–57, who proposed to identify Sanda-uarri with Azitawada; Lemaire, “Recherches de topographie historique,” 275. 61. RINAP 4:16, 1.ii.68–70; Lionel Marti, “Deux têtes coupées en cinq mois: La prise de Sidon par Assarhaddon,” in Phéniciens d’Orient et d’Occident: Mélanges Josette Elayi, ed. André Lemaire (Paris: Maisonneuve, 2014), 13–15. 62. RINAP 4:16, 1.ii.72–73; see Elayi, History of Phoenicia, 167–68; Marti, “Deux têtes coupées en cinq mois,” 13–30. 63. RINAP 4:146–48, 70–71. 64. RINAP 4:17, 1.iii.1–7; Bagg, Die Levante, 49, 171; Juan Antonio Belmonte, “Cuatro estudios sobre los dominios territoriales de las ciudades–estado fenicias,” CAM 9 (2003): 94. 65. RINAP 4:17, 1.iii.12–13. 66. Josette Elayi, “Tyr et Sidon, deux cités phéniciennes rivales,” Trans 49 (2017): 91–101; SAA 2:36, no. 6, §17. 67. RINAP 4:28–29, 2.i.38–42. 68. Alberto R. W. Green, “Esarhaddon, Sanduarri, and the Adon Papyrus,” in Inspired Speech, Prophecy in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honour of Herbert B. Huffmon, ed. John Kaltner and L. Stulman (London: T&T Clark, 2008), 88–95; Josette Elayi, Byblos, cite sacrée (8e–4es. av. J.-C.) (Paris: Peeters, 2009), 87–89. 69. RINAP 4:29, 2.i.48–49. 70. Elayi, Sennacherib, 53–61.

136

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

71. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 83, ch. 1, iv.6–7. 72. RINAP 4:17, 1.iii.32–33; Hayim Tadmor, “An Assyrian Victory Chant and Related Matters,” in From the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea: Studies on the History of Assyria and Babylonia in Honor of A. K. Grayson, ed. Grant Frame, PIHANS 101 (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 2004), 269–72. 73. Tadmor, “Assyrian Victory Chant,” 272. 74. RINAP 4:17, 1.iii.34–35. 75. François Thureau-Dangin, “Tell Ahmar,” Syria 10 (1929): 191–92; François Thureau-Dangin and Maurice Dunand, Til-Barsip (Paris: Geuthner, 1936), 151–52; Ivantchik, Cimmériens au ProcheOrient, 78–79; Barbara Nevling Porter, “Assyrian Propaganda for the West: Esarhaddon’s Stelae for Til Barsip and Samʾal,” in Essays on Syria in the Iron Age, ed. Guy Bunnens, ANES Suppl. 7 (Leuven: Peeters, 2000), 143–76; Barbara Nevling Porter, “The Importance of Place: Esarhaddon’s Stelae at Til Barsip and Samʾal,” in Historiography in the Cuneiform World, CRRAI 45/1 (Bethesda, MD: CDL, 2001), 373–89. 76. RINAP 4:179–80 (with bibliography). 77. Peter A. Miglus, “Die Stelen des König Asarhaddon von Assyrien: Sieges-denkmäler oder ein politisches Vermächtnis?” BaM 31 (2000): 195–211. 78. RINAP 4:181, 98.25. 79. Israel Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria: Politics and Propaganda,” JCS 57 (2005): 106–8. 80. RINAP 4:87, 34.12′–14′. 81. SAA 2:XIX, 24–27, no. 5; Elayi, Histoire de la Phénicie, 181–82; Borger, Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, 107–9, §69.4; Giovanni Pettinato, “I rapport politici di Tiro con l’Assiria alla luce del ‘trattato tra Asarhadon e Baal,” RSF 3 (1975): 145–60; SAA 2, s.v. “Baʾalu”; Massimo Botto, Studi storia sulla Fenicia l’VIII e il VII secolo a.c. (Pisa: Università degli studi di Pisa, 1990), 212–16. 82. SAA 2:24–27, no. 5.r.iii.4 and 29′; George Smith, Assyria from the Earliest Times (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1875), 134; Albert Ten Eyck Olmstead, History of Palestine and Syria to the Macedonian Conquest (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1931), 483; Ernst Friedrich Weidner, “Der Staatsvertrag Assurniräris VI von Assyrien mit Matiʾilu von Bit-Agusi,” AfO 8 (1932–1933): 32–33; SAA 2:xxix; Françoise Briquel-Chatonnet, Les relations entre les cités de la côte phénicienne et les royaumes d’Israël et de Juda (Leuven: Peeters, 1992), 204–6. 83. Elayi, Byblos, cité sacrée, 87–90; Pettinato, “I rapporti politici di Tiro,” 151–53, III, l.12. 84. SAA 2:25, no. 5.r.iii.7. 85. SAA 2:25, no. 5.r.17′. 86. SAA 2:25, no. 5.r.19′–23′. For the meaning of paqādu, whose reading is slightly uncertain, see Borger, Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, 108, § 69.r.iii.18; CAD, s.v. “paqādu.” 87. Elayi, Byblos, cité sacrée, 87–89. 88. On the paradeisos, see, e.g., Mohamed A. Dandamaev, “Royal paradeisoi in Babylonia,” in Orientalia J. Duchesne-Guillemin Emerito Oblata (Leiden: Brill, 1984), 113–17; Pierre Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2002), 442–43, 943 (with bibliography). 89. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 83, ch. 1, iv.5–6. 90. RINAP 4:31, 2.iii.9–36; 4:35, 2.vi.44A–45A, 44B–45B. 91. RINAP 4:53, 8.i′.12′. 92. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.53; Mario Liverani, “The Sargon Geography and the Late Assyrian Mensuration of the Earth,” SAAB 13 (1999–2001): 70–74 and fig. 10. Bâzu has sometimes been identified with the area of the Strait of Hormuz: Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 2, 274. 93. RINAP 4:31, 2.iii.9–14; 4:38, 3.iii.13′–16′. 94. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.53–56; 4:43, 4.ii.25′–29′; 4:53, 8.i′.12′–15′. 95. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.60. 96. RINAP 4:20–21, 1.iv.62–69; 4:53, 8.i′.19′–22′. See Liverani, “Sargon Geography,” 70–74 and fig. 10. 97. RINAP 4:155, 77.24–25; 4:159, 78.22–23; 4:161, 79.22–23; 4:175, 93.12–13.



Notes

137

98. RINAP 4: 31, 2.iii.25–31. 99. RINAP 4:31, 2.iii.32–36. The province of Bâzu is not listed by Karen Radner, “Provinz. C. Assyrien,” RlA 11:42–68. 100. RINAP 4:135, 60.4′–5′. 101. RINAP 4:105, 48.28–29. 102. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 483–85. 103. RINAP 4:87, 34.7–8. 104. ARAB 2.41, 81, 92; PNA 3.2:1390. 105. ARAB 2.54, 96–99, 102; Elayi, Sargon II, 190–94. 106. CAD, s.v. “berû”; Jeremy Black, Andrew R. George, and John Nicholas Postgate, A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, SANTAG 5 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000), s.v. “berû(m)III.” 107. Daniel T. Potts, “Dilmun: Where and When?,” Dilmun 2 (1983): 15–19; Potts, The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990); Geoffrey Bibby, Looking for Dilmun (London: Stacey, 2001) (with bibliography); Potts, “Revisiting the Snakes Burials of the Late Dilmun Building Complex on Bahrain,” AAE 18 (2007): 55–74 (with bibliography); Steffen Terp Laursen, The Royal Mounds of Aʾali, Bahrain: The Emergence of Kingship in Early Dilmun (Denmark: Moesgard Museum, 2017). 108. Abdullah H. Masry, Prehistory in Northern Arabia: The Problem of Interregional Interaction (London: Kegan Paul, 1997), vi; Harriet Crawford, Dilmun and Its Gulf Neighbours (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 38–48; Peter Roger Stuart Moorey, Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: The Archaeological Evidence (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), 47–48, 88. 109. Jean-Jacques Glassner, “Inscriptions cunéiformes de Failaka,” in Failaka: Fouilles françaises 1984–1985, ed. Jean-François Salles, TMO 9 (Lyon: Maison de l’Orient, 1983), 31–50; Salles and Yves Calvet, Failaka: Fouilles françaises 1984–1985, TMO 12 (Lyon: Maison de l’Orient, 1986); RlA 6:395; Salles and Calvet, Failaka: Fouilles françaises 1984–1985, 119, 126. 110. ARAB 2.438; Jean-François Salles, “La circumnavigation de l’Arabie dans l’Antiquité,” in L’Arabie et ses mers bordières: I Itinéraires et voisinages; Séminaire de recherche 1985–1986, ed. Salles et al., TMO 16 (Lyon: Maison de l’Orient, 1988); Jesper Eidem and Flemming Højlund, “Trade or Diplomacy? Assyria and Dilmun in the Eighteenth Century BC,” WA 24 (1993): 441–48; Daniel Potts, “Distant Shores: Ancient Near East Trade with South Asia and Northeast Africa,” CANE 3:1452–55; Himanshu Prabha Ray, The Archaeology of Seafaring in Ancient South Asia, CWA (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 85. 111. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 84, ch. 1, iv.14–15. 112. RINAP 4:105, 48.41; on the province of Nippur, see Radner, “Provinz. C. Assyrien,” 65, no. 75; SAA 18:87, no. 105.r.9–11 (= CT 54, 5). 113. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 83, ch. 1, iv.10. 114. ARAB 2.26; Andreas Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons II. Aus Khorsabad (Göttingen: Cuvillier, 1993), 441, 465; RlA 8 (1993–1997), 42–52; RlA 12 (2009–2011), 51–61. John Garstang and O. R. Gurney, The Geography of the Hittite Empire (London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, 1959), 47; Simo Parpola and Michael Porter, The Helsinki Atlas of the Near East in the Neo-Assyrian Period (Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2001), 17; J. D. Hawkins, “The Political Geography of North Syria and South-East Anatolia in the Neo-Assyrian Period,” in Neo-Assyrian Geography, ed. Mario Liverani, Quaderni di Geografia Storica 5 (Rome, 1995), 90, finds it best placed in the plain of Elbistan. 115. ARAB 2.26, 60; SAAS:47, 60; Elayi, Sargon II, 111–12. 116. Andreas Müller-Karpe, “Auf dem Rücken der Berge: Die Kappadokische Mauer in Anatolien,” AW 40.4 (2009): 21; Karen Radner, “Tabal and Phrygia: Problem Neighbours in the West,” in Assyrian Empire Builders, http://tinyurl.com/SBL1722h. 117. Elayi, Sennacherib, 104–6. 118. There is only a letter sent by Nabû-shumu-iddina to the king, concerning six “Melidian” (ša KUR.me-lid-a-a) horses and mules that arrived at Nineveh: SAA 13:81, 98.r.1–3. 119. SAA 4:1–6, no. 1, 3; 11–13, no. 8, 9, 11. The dates of these reports, based on lunar eclipses, are debated: Albert Schott and Daniel Schlumberger, “Vier Briefe Mâr-Ištars an Asarhaddon über

138

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Himmelserscheinungen der Jahre-670 bis-668,” ZA 47 (1941–1942): 101, 127; LAS 2, 269; Benno Landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila an König Asarhaddon (Amsterdam, 1965), 301–75. 120. Hassan Rezvani and Kourosh Roustaei, “A Preliminary Report on Two Seasons of Excavations at Kul Tarike Cemetery, Kurdistan, Iran,” IrAnt 2 (2007): 139–84; Bahman Kargar and Ali Binandeh, “A Preliminary Report of Excavations at Rabat Tepe, Northwestern Iran,” IrAnt 44 (2009): 113–29; Yousef Hassanzadeh, “Qalʻe Bardine, a Mannean Local Chiefdom in the Bukân Area, NorthWestern Iran,” AMIT 41 (2009): 269–82; Hassanzadeh and H. Mollasalehi, “New Evidence for Mannean Art: An Assessment of Three Glazed Tiles from Qalaichi (Izirtu),” in Elam and Persia, ed. Javier Alvarez-Mon and Mark B. Garrison (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2011), 407–17. 121. Elayi, Sargon II, King of Assyria, 129–36. 122. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.26–33. 123. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.59–60; 4:29–30, 2.ii.20–23; 4:37, 3.ii.30′–31′. For the date, see SAA 4:LIX– LX; Manfred Dietrich, “Neue Quellen zur Geschichte Babyloniens (II),” Die Welt des Orients 4 (1978): 235. 124. Yusif Bahlul Yusifov, “On the Scythians in Mannea,” in Societies and Languages of the Ancient Near East: Studies in Honour of I. M. Diakonoff (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1982), 348–56; Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, 78–80, 94 (with bibliography); Véronique Schiltz, Les Scythes et les nomades des steppes: VIIIe siècle avant J.-C.-Ier siècle après J.-C., L’Univers des formes 39 (Paris: Gallimard, 1994). 125. SAA 4:38, no. 33; Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, 94. 126. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 82. 127. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.32–34; 4:32, 2.iv.1–20. 128. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.35–39. 129. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.46–52; 4:32, 2.iii.53–61. 130. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.56–58. 131. Karen Radner, “An Assyrian View of the Medes,” in Lanfranchi, Roaf, and Rollinger, Continuity of Empire, 37–64. 132. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.56–58; 4:29, 2.ii.16–19; 4:37, 3.ii.27′–29′; 4:155, 77.28; 4:159, 78.25–27; 4:161– 62, 79.25–26; 4:176, 93.14. 133. SAA 4:46–47, no. 41; Friedrich Wilhelm König, Alteste Geschichte der Meder und Perser (Leipzig, 1934), 29–50; René Labat, “Kaštariti, Phraorte et les débuts de l’histoire mède,” JA 249 (1961): 2. 134. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 83, ch. 1, iv.9. 135. RINAP 4:228, 112.iv.8–17. 136. SAAS 12:33–40; Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 84, ch. 1, iv.11–13. 137. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.31–32; SAA 4:84, no. 74.4. 138. Elayi, Sennacherib, 51. 139. RINAP 4:181, 97.20; SAA 4:89–90, no. 79. 140. John A. Brinkman, A Political History of Post-Kassite Babylonia 1158–722 B.C., AnOr 43 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1968), 265–85; Brinkman, Prelude to Empire: Babylonian Society and Politics, 747–626 B.C., OPSNKF 7 (Philadelphia: Babylonian Section of the University Museum, 1984); Edward Lipiński, The Arameans: Their Ancient History, Culture, Religion, OLA 100 (Leuven: Peeters, 2000), 409–89; Frederick Mario Fales, “Arameans and Chaldeans: Environment and Society,” in The Babylonian World, ed. Gwendolyn Leick (New York: Routledge, 2007), 288–98. 141. ARAB 1.239; Françoise Briquel-Chatonnet, Les Araméens et les premiers Arabes: Des royaumes araméens du IXe siècle à la chute du royaume nabatéen, Encyclopédie de la Méditerranée 29 (Aix-en-Provence: Édisud, 2004), 9–17. 142. John A. Brinkman, “Reflections on the Geography of Babylonia (1000–600 B.C.),” in Liverani, Neo-Assyrian Geography, 26–27. 143. RINAP 4:18, 1.iii.71–73; PNA 1.2:315–16; 352–53. 144. RINAP 4:77, 31.11′. 145. Israel Ephʽal, The Ancient Arabs: Nomads on the Borders of the Fertile Crescent 9th–5th Centuries B.C. (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1972), 91–93; Ephʽal, “‘Arabs’ in Babylonia in the Eighth Century



Notes

139

B.C.,” JAOS 4 (1974): 108–15; Robert G. Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam (London: Routledge, 2001); Jan Retsö, The Arabs in Antiquity: Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayyads (New York: Routledge, 2003); Briquel-Chatonnet, Les Araméens et les premiers Arabes, 27–34; Norbert Nebes and Peter Stein, “Ancient South Arabian,” in The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia, ed. Roger D. Woodard (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 145–78; Elayi, Sargon II, 194–96. 146. Frederick Mario Fales, “Moving around Babylon: On the Arameans and Chaldean Presence in Southern Mesopotamia,” in Babylon: Wissenskultur in Orient und Okzident, ed. Eva Cancik-Kirchbaum, Margarete Ess, and Joachim Marzahn, Topoi 1 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008), 97. 147. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 61–63 (with bibliography). 148. Alois Musil, Arabia Deserta: A Topographical Itinerary (New York, 1927), 532–53; Ephʽal, Ancient Arabs, 120–21 and map 241 (with bibliography); RINAP 3.2:152, no. 111. 149. Ephʽal, Ancient Arabs, 121–22. 150. RINAP 4:19, 1.iv.1–5; 4:30, 2.ii.46–50. 151. PNA 1.1:111; Elayi, Sennacherib, 123 and n. 71. 152. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 61–63. 153. RINAP 4:19, 1.iv.10–14; 4:180, 97.7–12. 154. RINAP 4:30, 2.ii.60–62. 155. RINAP 4:30–31, 2.iii.1–3. 156. RINAP 4:19, 1.iv.19; 4:31, 2.iii.4; 4:78, 31.r.8; PNA 2.1:495. 157. RINAP 4:78, 32.r.6–7. 158. RINAP 4:19, 1.iv.26–29. 159. PNA 2.1:468, 495; 3.2:1302. 160. RINAP 4:88–89, 34.r.1–4.

Notes to Chapter 7 1. Hans-Ulrich Onasch, Die Assyrischen Eroberungen Ägyptens (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994), 16–30; Robert G. Morkot, The Black Pharaohs: Egypt’s Nubian Rulers (London: Rubicon, 2000), 262–72; Marc Van De Mieroop, A History of Ancient Egypt (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011), 290–95; Mattias Karlsson, Egypt between Kush and Assyria: The Perspective of Tanutamani, King of Kush (Uppsala: Uppsala universitet, 2018), 45–49. 2. Elayi, History of Phoenicia, 163–65. 3. Anthony Spalinger, “The Foreign Policy of Egypt Preceding the Assyrian Conquest,” CdÉ 53/105 (1978): 22–47; Josette Elayi, “Assarhaddon et la conquête de l’Égypte,” in Dieux, rois et capitales dans le Proche-Orient ancien, vol. 2, ed. Marine Béranger, Francesca Nebiolo, and Nele Ziegler, CRRAI 11, PIPOAC 5 (Leuven: Peeters, 2021), 1121–31. 4. RINAP 4:135, 60.7′–8′. 5. RINAP 4:185–186, 98.r.45–47. 6. Mattias Karlsson, “Egypt and Kush in Neo-Assyrian Letters and Documents,” SAAB 24 (2018): 37–61. 7. Elayi, History of Phoenicia, 166–69. 8. Anthony Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egypt: An Analysis of the First Invasion of Egypt,” Or 43 (1974): 299. 9. RINAP 4:77–78, 31.r.2; 4:155, 77.15–17. 10. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 84, ch. 1, iv.16 and 219. 11. RINAP 4:7. And not 673: Danʾel Kahn, “The Assyrian Invasions of Egypt (673–663 B.C.) and the Final Expulsion of the Kushites,” SAK 34 (2006): 252. 12. Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 252 and n. 3. 13. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 126, ch. 14, 20 and 219. 14. Gerhard Fecht in Raymond O. Faulkner, “The Battle of Qadesh,” MDAIK 16 (1958): 116–19; Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egypt,” 300–301; Morkot, Black Pharaohs, 264–65; Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 252.

140

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

15. Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egyp,” 300–301. 16. SAA 4:98–102, no. 84–87. 17. Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egypt,” 301; SAA 4:98–100, 84. 18. Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egypt,” 300–301; K. A. Kitchen, The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100–650 B.C.), 2nd ed. (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1996), 458; Morkot, Black Pharaohs, 264; Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 252. 19. Eph‘al, Ancient Arabs, 137–42; Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 100–101. 20. Ephraim A. Speiser, “Hurrians and Subarians,” JAOS 68 (1948): 1–13; Abraham Malamat, “Cushan Rishathaim and the Decline of the Near East around 1200 B.C.,” JNES 13 (1954): 240; Bradley J. Parker, The Mechanics of Empire: The Northern Frontier of Assyria as a Case Study in Imperial Dynamics (Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2001), 230–46; Stefan Nowicki, “Was Esarhaddon Considered to Be a God?,” ArOr 83 (2015): 225–26. 21. Amir Harrak, Assyria and Hanigalbat (Hildesheim: Olms, 1987), 219–28; Nowicki, “Was Esarhaddon Considered to Be a God?,” 218, 225. 22. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 84, ch. 1, iv.19–20. 23. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 127, ch. 14, 24. 24. RINAP 4:82, 33.ii.3. 25. Leichty, “Esarhaddon’s ‘Letter to the Gods,’” 53 and n. 4. 26. SAA 4:22–24, no. 18 (19 damaged). 27. Leichty, “Esarhaddon’s ‘Letter to the Gods,’ ” 55. 28. RINAP 4:79–86, 33. 29. Leichty, “Esarhaddon’s ‘Letter to the Gods,’ ” 52–54. 30. Elayi, Sargon II, 139–47. 31. Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 101–2, 111. 32. A. Leo Oppenheim, “Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian Empires,” in Propaganda and Communication in World History I, ed. Harold D. Lasswell, Daniel Lerner, and Hans Speier (Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1999), 126; Leichty, “Esarhaddon’s ‘Letter to the Gods,’ ” 53 and n. 5. There are two letters suggesting that Esarhaddon continued looking for his brother Urdu-Mullissu: SAA 18:100; SAA 13:111. 33. RINAP 4:81–82, 33.i.17–19. 34. RINAP 4:82, 33.i.29–32. 35. RINAP 4:83, 33.ii.10–11. 36. Leichty, “Esarhaddon’s ‘Letter to the Gods,’ ” 54; Nowicki, “Was Esarhaddon Considered to Be a God?,” 224–28. 37. RINAP 4:83, 33.ii.32–35. 38. RINAP 4:84, 33.iii.24′. 39. RINAP 4:85, 33.iii.32′–33′. 40. RINAP 4:85, 33.iv.9′–10′. 41. Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria” 109–11. 42. Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 102. 43. Christina Barcina, “The Display of Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty at Kalḫu as a Means of Internal Political Control,” Antiguo Oriente 14 (2016): 21–22. 44. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 127, ch. 14; Karen Radner, “The Trials of Esarhaddon: The Conspiracy of 670 BC,” Isimu 6 (2003): 167–68. 45. RINAP 4:87, 34.1′–11′. 46. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 127, ch. 14, 23. 47. Josette Elayi, L’Empire assyrien: Histoire d’une grande civilisation de l’Antiquité (Paris: Perrin, 2021), 222 n. 70. 48. PNA 1.2:273; Herodotus, Hist. 1.103.3. 49. SAA 4:6–7, no. 4; 42–43, no. 39. 50. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.37–39. 51. RINAP 4:87, 34.13′–14′. 52. RINAP 4:87, 34.6′–13′.



Notes

141

53. Elayi, History of Phoenicia, 183–85; RINAP 4:190–91, 102. 54. RINAP 4:291–92, 1007; Mordechai Cogan, “The Assyrian Stela Fragment from Ben-Shemen,” in Treasures on Camels’ Humps: Historical and Literary Studies Presented to Israel Eph‘al, ed. Mordechai Cogan and Danʾel Kahn (Jerusalem: Magnes, 2008), 66–69. 55. RINAP 4:135, 60.7′; 4:87, 34.14′. 56. RINAP 4:76, 30.7′–8′. 57. RINAP 4:76, 30.r.1′–11′. 58. RINAP 4:135, 60.10′. 59. On Tartessos see, e.g., Arcadio del Castillo, “Tarshish in the Esarhaddon Inscription and the Book of Genesis,” BeO 222,.46/4 (2004): 193–206. 60. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 83. 61. RINAP 4:135, 60.9′–11′. 62. RINAP 4:193, 103.30–35; PNA 1.2:370. 63. RINAP 4:23, 1.57. 64. Porter, “Assyrian Propaganda for the West,” in Porter, Trees, Kings, and Politics, 59–79; Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 106–9; Roche, “Les reliefs assyriens de Nahr el-Kalb,” in Le Site de Nahr el-Kalb, ed. Anne-Marie Maïla-Afeiche (Beirut: Minstère de la culture, Direction Générale des Antiquités, 2009), 243–50; RINAP 4:291, 1007–1008. 65. RINAP 4:185, 98.r.40–42; 4:192, 103.7–9. 66. RINAP 4; LAS 2, xxviii–xxix nn. 7–10; SAA 4:98–104, no. 84–88; SAA 10:136–37, no. 174; SAA 16:52–57, no. 59–61; Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 85–86, ch. 1, iv; 126–27, ch. 14. 67. Jozeff M. A. Janssen, “Que sait-on actuellement du pharaon Taharqa?,” Bib 34 (1953): 23–43; Danʾel Kahn, “Taharqa, King of Kush and the Assyrians,” JSSEA 32 (2004): 109–18; Kim Ryholt, “The Assyrian Invasion of Egypt in Egyptian Literary Tradition,” in Assyria and Beyond: Studies Presented to Mogens Trolle Larsen, ed. Jan G. Dercksen, PIHANS 100 (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 2004), 483–510. 68. SAA 4:94–109, no. 81–93. 69. SAA 4:98–99, no. 84; Morkot, Black Pharaohs, 266–67. 70. Israel Eph‘al, “On Warfare and Military Control in the Ancient Near Eastern Empires: A Research Outline,” in Tadmor and Weinfeld, History, Historiography, and Interpretation, 98–99; Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 99. 71. RINAP 4:185, 98.r.36–37; 4:87, 34.15′–18′; Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 252 n. 6. 72. RINAP 4:90, 36.4′–15′; Eph‘al, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 109 n. 38; Moshe Elat, “The Economic Relations of the Neo-Assyrian Empire with Egypt,” JAOS 98 (1998): 20–34. 73. RINAP 4:54, 8.ii.20‘–28‘; Ariel M. Bagg, Die Orts- and Gewässernamen der neuassyrischen Zeit. Teil 2: Zentralassyrien und benachbarte Gebiete: Ägypten und die arabische Halbinsel, RGTC 7.2 (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2017), 256; 7/2–2, 382. 74. SAA 10:136–37, no. 174.10–15. 75. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 171–73. 76. SAA 2:45, no. 6.419–421. 77. SAA 10:243, no. 304; 257, no. 318; 262, no. 325. 78. Parpola, “Murder of Sennacherib,” 172 n. 2. 79. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 85, ch. 1, iv.23–27; RINAP 4:185, 98.r.37b–43a. 80. René Labat, “Le sort des substituts royaux en Assyrie au temps des Sargonides,” RA 40 (1945–1946): 123–41; John Gray, “Royal Substitution in the Ancient Near East,” PEQ 84 (1955): 180–82; Gabriel Germain, “Le songe de Xerxès et le rite babylonien du substitut royal (Étude sur Hérodote, VII 12–18),” REG 69/326–328 (1956): 303–13; Jean Bottéro, “Le substitut royal et son sort en Mésopotamie,” Akkadica 9 (1978): 2–24; Alexandre Tourraix, “L’image du roi et son double: Rituel babylonien, succession achéménide et historiographie grecque,” in Images et représentations du pouvoir et de l’ordre social dans l’Antiquité, ed. Michel Molin (Paris: de Boccard, 2001), 101–8; Claus Ambos, “Rites of Passage in Ancient Mesopotamia: Changing Status by Moving through Space: bīt rimki and the Ritual of the Substitute King,” in Approaching Rituals in Ancient Cultures,

142

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

ed. Claus Ambos and L. Verderame (Pisa: Serra, 2013), 39–54; Kiril Mladenov, “The Conquest of Egypt and the Substitute King Rituals of Esarhaddon in 671,” CRRAI 60 (21–25 July 2014, Warsaw). 81. SAA 10:254, no. 314; LAS 1, 192–193, no. 249 (= ABL 594); LAS 2, xxviii n. 9. 82. LAS 2, xxviii–xxix n. 7–10. 83. RINAP 4:87–88, 34.r.1–19. 84. SAA 10:286–287, no. 351.r.11 (= ABL 629); Labat, “Le sort des substituts royaux,” 130; M. Rahim Shayegan, Aspects of History and Epic in Ancient Iran: From Gaumāta to Wahnām (Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies, 2012), ch. 3. 85. SAAS 11:62–63, 74; PNA 1.1:203. 86. Hayim Tadmor, “The Role of the Chief Eunuch and the Place of Eunuchs in the Assyrian Empire,” in Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East, ed. Simo Parpola and Robert M. Whiting, CRRAI 47.2 (Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2002), 608–11; SAAS 11:74; SAA 4:102–4, no. 88; PNA 3.2:1227. 87. Wilfred G. Lambert, “Booty from Egypt,” JJS 33 (1982): 61–70. 88. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 84, ch. 1, iv.16; 127, ch. 14.25. 89. Wilfred G. Lambert, “A Part of the Ritual for the Substitute King,” AfO 18 (1957–1958): 109– 12, col. B, ll. 12, 19, 27, 33; Lambert, “The Ritual for the Substitute King: A New Fragment,” AfO 19 (1959–1960): 119. 90. Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egypt,” 307–20; Tadmor, “Assyrian Victory Chant,” 273–76; Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 254 n. 15; see however RINAP 4:44, 5–9; Israel Eph‘al, “Stages and Aims in the Royal Historiography of Esarhaddon,” Orient 49 (2014): 61–62; Karlsson, “Egypt and Kush in Neo-Assyrian Letters and Documents,” 37–61. 91. LAS 2, xxix and n. 10; SAA 10:286–89, no. 351–352; Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 174; see, however, Ambos, “Rites of Passage,” 45 and n. 15. 92. RINAP 4:68, 20.4; 4:135, 60.8′b; 4:182, 98.16–17. 93. Van De Mieroop, History of Ancient Egypt, 293–94.

Notes to Chapter 8 1. Elayi, Tiglath-pileser III, 166–72. 2. Elayi, Sargon II, 4. 3. Elayi, Sennacherib, 138–45. 4. PNA 2.2:956; SAA 6:XXXII–XXXIV and n. 59. 5. Julian E. Reade, “Was Sennacherib a Feminist?,” in La femme dans le Proche-Orient antique, ed. Jean-Marie Durand, CRRAI 33 (Paris: ERC, 1986), 139–45. 6. SAA 2:37–38, no. 6, § 20. 7. Joannès, Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 156; PNA 3.1:1138–39. 8. RINAP 4:230, 113, 30–32. 9. Donald John Wiseman, “The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon,” Iraq 20 (1958): 1–99. 10. For an overview of the discussions, see Jacob Lauinger, “Some Preliminary Thoughts on the Tablet Collection in Building XVI from Tell Tayinat,” JCSMS 6 (2011): 5–14; Lauinger, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty at Tell Tayinat: Text and Commentary,” JCS 64 (2012): 87–123. 11. Ernest Friedrich Weidner, “Assurbânipal in Assur,” AfO 13 (1939–1940): 204–18 (VAT 11543); Eckart Frahm, Historische und historisch-literarische Texte, WVDOG 121 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009), 135–36, 255 (VAT 12374; 9424); SAA 2:77–79, no. 14 is probably a draft of the Esarhaddon’s treaty inscription: Barcina, “Display of Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty,” 23 n. 51. 12. Radner, “Provinz. C. Assyrien,” 61. 13. Timothy P. Harrisson and James F. Osborne, “Building XVI and the Neo-Assyrian Sacred Precinct at Tell Taynat,” JCS 64 (2012): 125–43; Lauinger, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty,” 87–123. 14. SAA 2:28, no. 6, § 1. 15. Kazuko Watanabe, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents Reconsidered in Light of the Tayinat Version,” Orient 49 (2014): 145–70. 16. SAA 2:XXIX; Lauinger, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty,” 90.



Notes

143

17. RINAP 4:20, 1.iv.32–52. 18. SAA 2:XXIX–XXXI. 19. SAA 10:7–8, no. 5–7; Frederick Mario Fales, “After Taʾyinat: The New Status of Esarhaddon’s Adê for Assyrian Political History,” RA 106 (2012): 138; Barcina, “Display of Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty,” 13–14. 20. SAA 2:32, no. 6, § 7; 58, no. 6, § 107. 21. SAA 10:152, no. 185.7–12. 22. SAA 2:XXXVI; 28, no. 6.i–iv. 23. Barcina, “Display of Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty,” 37–38. 24. Fales, “After Taʾyinat,” 153. 25. Watanabe, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents,” 147–51. 26. SAA 2:30, no. 6, § 3. 27. SAA 2:30–31, no. 6, § 4. 28. SAA 2:44, no. 15, § 34. 29. Watanabe, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents,” 149–50. For translations, see also http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/saa02/pager, SAA 2, nos. 6 and 15. 30. SAA 2:46, no. 6, § 45. 31. SAA 2:49, no. 6, § 55. 32. SAA 2:50, no. 15, § 57; Watanabe, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents,” 150. 33. SAA 2:39, no. 6, § 24; Kazuko Watanabe, “Aššurbanipal and His Brothers Considered from the References in Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents,” Orient, Suppl. 1 (2019): 255. 34. Watanabe, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents,” 164–15. 35. RINAP 4:179–181, 97; Jutta Börker-Klähn, Altvorderasiatische Bildstelen und vergleichbare Felsreliefs II (Mainz: von Zabern, 1982), no. 219; Watanabe, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents,” 168, figs 1–3. 36. SAA 2:44–45, no. 6, § 35. 37. Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 223; Fales, “After Taʾyinat,” 148; Dominique Charpin, “Tu es de mon sang,” Les alliances dans le Proche-Orient ancien (Paris: Collège de France, 2019), 110–16; Watanabe, “Aššurbanipal and His Brothers,” 237–57. 38. SAA 2:28–31, no. 16, § 1, 4, 5. 39. Bernhard Lang, The Hebrew God: Portrait of an Ancient Deity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 39; Watanabe, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents,” 164. 40. PNA 3.2:1214–19. 41. PNA 1.1:159–71; RINAP 4:176, 93.25; 4:178, 95.1–10. 42. Elayi, Tiglath-pileser III, 162. 43. Elayi, Sargon II, 182–90; Elayi, Sennacherib, 44–48, 90–94, 125–31. 44. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 86, ch. 1, iv.33. 45. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 127, ch. 14, 34–35. 46. SAA 2:62–64, no. 8. 47. Daniel Arnaud, Assurbanipal roi d’Assyrie (Paris: Fayard, 2007), 37–40. 48. RINAP 5.1:306–307, 23.108–110. 49. Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 238–39. 50. Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 246–48.

Notes to Chapter 9 1. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.18–23. 2. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.24–25. 3. RINAP 4:23, 1.v.54–73; 4:46, 6.vi.6′–15′ (the last seven Cypriot kings are in the lack). 4. RINAP 4:23, 1.v.73–82. 5. Edward Lipiński, On the Skirts of Canaan in the Iron Age: Historical and Topographical Researches (Leuven et al., 2006), 195; Éric Gubel, “By the rivers of Amurru. Notes de topographie historique du Akkar - II,” in Tiro, Cartagine, Lixus: Nuove acquisizioni … in onore di M. G. Amadasi

144

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Guzzo, ed. Gilda Bartoloni et al. (Rome, 2010), 119; Nina Jidejian, Baalbek: Héliopolis, cité du soleil (Beirut, 1999); Josette Elayi, “Les sites phéniciens de Syrie au Fer III/Perse: Bilan et perspectives de recherche,” in Essays on Syria in the Iron Age, ed. Guy Bunnens (Louvain: Peeters, 2000), 335–36. 6. Edward Lipiński, “The Cypriot Vassals of Esarhaddon,” in Cogan and Eph‘al, Ah, Assyria…, 63. 7. Lipiński, “Cypriot Vassals of Esarhaddon,” 58–64. 8. RINAP 4:9, 1; Lipiński, “Cypriot Vassals of Esarhaddon,” 64. 9. H. Jacob Katzenstein, The History of Tyre, from the Beginning of the Second Millenium B.C.E. until the Fall of the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 539 B.C.E. (Jerusalem: Ben Gurion University of the Negev, 1973), 262–65, 292. 10. Elayi and Elayi, Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord, 109–10. 11. Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, 73–74. 12. Elayi, Sargon II, 87–94, 96–98, 100–102. 13. SAA 4:15–16, no. 13; Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, 73. 14. Ivantchik, Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient, 194–96, no. 14. 15. RINAP 4:135, 60.9′–11′. 16. Elayi, Sargon II, 72–78, 237. 17. Josette Elayi and Antoine Cavigneaux, “Sargon II et les Ioniens,” OrAnt 18 (1979): 65–66; Elayi, Sargon II, 72–78. 18. RINAP 4:23, 1.v.60. 19. Elayi and Elayi, Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord, 169. 20. Robert H. Pfeiffer, State Letters of Assyria: A Transliteration and Translation of 355 Official Assyrian Letters Dating from the Sargonid Period (722–625 B.C.) (New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society, 1935), 104–5, no. 37; Elayi and Elayi, Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord, 107–11. 21. Bing (History of Cilicia, 140) considered Itti-shamash-balâtu to be an Assyrian official in charge of Arwad. 22. Katzenstein, History of Tyre, 279 n. 98 (with bibliography). 23. Strabo, Geogr. 16.753–754; Lucretius, Rer. nat., 6.890–891; Pliny, Nat. 2.227; 5.128; Elayi and Elayi, Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord, 18–20. 24. SAA 4:104–5, no. 89.2–5. 25. RINAP 5.1:236, no. 11.ii.63–64; Elayi and Elayi, Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord, 107; ARAB 2.780; Maximilian Streck, Assurbanipal und die letzten Assyrischen Könige bis zum Untergange Niniveh’s II (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1916), 18–19, II, 63–64; Botto, Studi storia sulla Fenicia, 220–21, no. 40. Prisma Rassam and prisma A, col. II, 63–64. 26. SAA 16:113–14, no. 127.6–8 (= ABL 992). 27. SAA 16:114, no. 127.r.12–14 (= ABL 992); 114–15, no. 128.r.10′–12′ (= CT 53 16). 28. SAA 16:113, no. 127.r.15–21 (= ABL 992). 29. Elayi and Elayi, Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord, 15–29; Josette Elayi and Mohamed Rafai Haykal, Nouvelles découvertes sur les usages funéraires des Phéniciens d’Arwad (Paris: Gabalda, 1996), 22–23, 122–23; Michel Al-Maqdissi, “Chronique des activités archéologiques en Syrie (I),” Syria 70 (1993): 448–53. 30. SAA 16:113–14, no. 127.r.15–16 (= ABL 992). 31. SAA 16:113–14, no. 127.e.24–25 (= ABL 992). 32. Josette Elayi, “Les cités phéniciennes et l’Empire assyrien à l’époque d’Assurbanipal,” RA 77 (1953): 50–53; Elayi and Elayi, Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord, 110–15. 33. Lambert, “Part of the Ritual for the Substitute King,” 109–12: 12, 15, 22, 27, 33; Lambert, “Ritual for the Substitute King,” 119. 34. Tamara M. Green, The City of the Moon God: Religious Traditions of Harran, RGRW 114 (Leiden: Brill, 1992); Andrew R. George, House Most High: The Temples of Ancient Mesopotamia, MC 5 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1993), 99. 35. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 172–73. 36. SAA 10:136–37, no. 174.10–15. 37. SAA 16:53, no. 59.r.2′–5′; 54–56, no. 60–61; PNA 3.1:1093. See Esztári and Vér, “Voices of Ištar,” 31–32.



Notes

145

38. SAA 10:143, no. 179.r.4–5. 39. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 173–74. 40. SAA 16:52–56, no. 59–61. 41. SAA 16:54, no. 60.10; SAAS 7:133–50; Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 173–75. 42. SAA 10:142–44, no. 179; 311–12, no. 377; SAA 16:52–58, no. 59–62; SAAS 7. 43. Pierre Villard, “Quelques aspects du renseignement militaire dans l’Empire néo-assyrien,” HIMA 3 (2016): 87–97. 44. Eckart Frahm, “Hochverrat in Assur,” in Assur-Forschungen: Arbeiten aus der Forschungsstelle “Edition literarischer Keilschrifttexte aus Assur” der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, ed. Stefan M. Maul and N.ils P. Heessel (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2010), 89–139; Eckart Frahm, A Companion to Assyria (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, 2017), 187. 45. SAA 16:56, no. 60.s.3; PNA 2.3:861. 46. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 86, ch. 1, iv.29. 47. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 127, ch. 14, 27. 48. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 174–75. 49. SAA 6:230, no. 286.r.11; SAAS 2:68, 97. 50. Mogens Trolle Larsen, “Unusual Eponymy-Datings from Mari and Assyria,” RA 68 (1972): 15–24; SAAS 2:67–68. 51. Karen Radner and Frederik Mario Fales, “The Assyrian and Aramaic Texts from Tell Shiukh Fawqani,” in Tell Shiukh Fawqani 1994–1998, ed. Luc Bachelot and Frederick Mario Fales, HANEM 6.2 (Padova: S.a.r.g.o.n., 2005), 595–694. 52. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 175. 53. SAAS 7:147–48; SAAS 11:62–63, 74; Tadmor, “Role of the Chief Eunuch,” 608–11; SAA 4:102–4, no. 88; PNA 3.2:1227. 54. SAA 10:311–312, no. 377; LAS 1, 232. 55. Josette Elayi, “Assarhaddon et la conquête de l’Égypte,” in Dieux, rois et capitales dans le Proche-Orient ancien, vol. 2, ed. Marine Béranger, Francesca Nebiolo, and Nele Ziegler, CRRAI 11, PIPOAC 5 (Leuven: Peeters, 2021), 1121–31. 56. RINAP 4:186, 98.r.50–52; Porter, Images, Power, Politics, 119–53. 57. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 176. 58. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 176. Another less likely interpretation is that they had managed to flee abroad, like the murderers of Sennacherib. 59. Frahm, “Hochverrat in Assur,” 94. 60. SAA 9:8, no. 1.vi.19–30. 61. Anthony Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egypt: An Analysis of the First Invasion of Egypt,” Or 43 (1974): 307–20; Tadmor, “Assyrian Victory Chant,” 273–76; Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 254 and n. 15. See however RINAP 4:44, 5–9. 62. RINAP 4:186, 89.r.46–49. 63. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 86, ch. 1, iv.28. 64. RINAP 4:1305, 1019.26–42. However, it may be an account of a campaign of Esarhaddon or Ashurbanipal to Egypt. On the booty, see Lambert, “Booty from Egypt?.” 65. Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 254. 66. Ephʽal, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 102. 67. Kahn, “Taharqa, King of Kush,” 109–28; Van De Mieroop, History of Ancient Egypt, 292–93. 68. Spalinger, “Esarhaddon and Egypt,” 316–24. 69. Morkot, Black Pharaohs, 269–71. 70. RINAP 4:227, 112.i.3–4; Ephʽal, “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria,” 102. 71. SAA 4:102–4, no. 88.r.6–9. See Kahn, “Assyrian Invasions of Egypt,” 256. 72. SAA 8:281, no. 505.r.9. For another less likely dating, see Morkot, Black Pharaohs, 276–77. 73. LAS 2, XXIX n. 11; Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 176 n. 87. 74. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 86, ch. 1, iv.30; 127, ch. 14, 28. 75. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 86, ch. 1, iv.31; 127, ch. 14, 29. 76. RINAP 4:200, 4.vi.16–33. 77. SAA 16:XXVII–XXVIII.

146

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Notes to Conclusion 1. Elayi, Sennacherib, 145–52. 2. Elayi, Sennacherib, 138–45. 3. Marti, “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins,” 495–515. 4. Tadmor, Landsberger, and Parpola, “Sin of Sargon,” 3–52. 5. Elayi, Sennacherib, 125–31. 6. Arnaud, Assurbanipal roi d’Assyrie; RINAP 5.1:27, no. 41–42, 1.vii.1′–25′; 5.1:51, no. 2.vii.4′–8′. 7. I thank Alain G. Elayi for having suggested this idea to me. 8. Francis Joannès, “La stratégie des rois néo-babyloniens contre l’Assyrie, de 616 à 606 av. J.-C.,” in Les armées du Proche-Orient ancien (IIIe–Ier millénaire av. J.-C.), ed. Philippe Abrahami and Laura Battini (Oxford: Hedges, 2008), 207–8. 9. Mario Liverani, “The Fall of the Assyrian Empire: Ancient and Modern Interpretations,” in Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History, ed. Susan E. Alcock (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 374–89. 10. Josette Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 263–68. 11. Adam W. Schneider, “‘No Harvest Was Reaped’: Demographic and Climatic Factors in the Decline of the Neo-Assyrian Empire,” Climatic Change 127 (2014): 435–46, https://doi.org/10.1007/ s105843-014-1269-y; Arkadiusz Sołtysiak, “Drought and the Fall of Assyria: Quite Another Story,” Climatic Change 136 (2016): 389–94, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1676-3. 12. Stefan Zawadzki, “Chronology of the Last Days of the Assyrian Empire,” ZA 85 (1995): 67–73. 13. Elayi, History of Phoenicia, 169–70. 14. Pettinato, “I rapporti politici di Tiro,” 145–60; SAA 2:24–27, no. 5. 15. Josette Elayi, “Terminologie de la mer Méditerranée dans les Annales assyriennes,” OrAnt 23 (1984): 75–92. 16. Koch-Westenholz, Mesopotamian Astrology, 55–57. 17. Frahm, “Hochverrat in Assur”; Villard, “Quelques aspects du renseignement militaire,” 94– 95. 18. RINAP 4:22, 1.v.18–23. 19. RINAP 4:230, 113.30–32; Lauinger, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty,” 87–123; Barcina, “Display of Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty,” 23. 20. Arnaud, Assurbanipal roi d’Assyrie, 37–40; Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 232–39. 21. Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 246–48. 22. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 165–84; Frahm, “Hochverrat in Assur,” 89–139. 23. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, 86, ch. 1, iv.29. 24. Radner, “Trials of Esarhaddon,” 176. 25. SAA 16:XXVII–XXVIII; Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 230. 26. SAAS 9:13–16; Elayi, L’Empire assyrien, 238.

Selected Bibliography Barcina, Christina. “The Display of Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty at Kalḫu as a Means of Internal Political Control.” Antiguo Oriente 14 (2016): 11–51. Baruchi-Unna, Amitai. “Reporting the Content of Divine Positive Response (annu kēnu) in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions.” Pages 341–65 in “Now, It Happened in Those Days”: Studies in Biblical, Assyrian, and Other Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Mordechai Cogan on His 75th Birthday, vol. I. Edited by Amitai Baruchi-Unna et al. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2017. Bing, John Daniel. “A History of Cilicia during the Assyrian Period.” PhD diss., Indiana University, 1969. Bottéro, Jean. “Le substitut royal et son sort en Mésopotamie.” Akkadica 9 (1978): 2–24. Brinkman, John A. “Through a Glass Darkly: Esarhaddon’s Retrospects on the Downfall of Babylon.” JAOS 103 (1983): 35–42. Cogan, Mordechai. “Omens and Ideology in the Babylon Inscription of Esarhaddon.” Pages 76–87 in History, Historiography and Interpretation: Studies in Biblical and Cuneiform Literatures. Edited by Hayim Tadmor and Moshe Weinfeld. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1983. ———. “Sennacherib and the Angry Gods of Babylon and Israel.” IEJ 59 (2009): 164–82. Cole, Steven W., and Peter Machinist. Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Priests to Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. SAA 13. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1998. De Jong, M. J. “‘Fear Not, O King!’ The Assyrian Prophecies as a Case for a Comparative Approach.” JEOL 38 (2003–2004): 113–21. Elayi, Josette. “Assarhaddon et la conquête de l’Égypte.” Pages 1121–31 in Dieux, rois et capitales dans le Proche-Orient ancien, Vol. 2. Edited by Marine Béranger, Francesca Nebiolo, and Nele Ziegler. CRRAI 11. PIPOAC 5. Leuven: Peeters, 2021. ———. L’Empire assyrien: Histoire d’une grande civilisation de l’Antiquité. Paris: Perrin, 2021. ———. Sargon II, King of Assyria. ABS 22. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2017. ———. Sennacherib, King of Assyria. ABS 24. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018. ———. Tiglath-pileser III, the Founder of the Assyrian Empire. ABS 31. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2022. ———. “Tyr et Sidon, deux cités phéniciennes rivales.” Trans 49 (2017): 91–101. Elayi, Josette, and Antoine Cavigneaux. “Sargon II et les Ioniens.” OrAnt 18 (1979): 59–75. Elayi, Josette, and Alain G. Elayi. Arwad, cité phénicienne du nord. Pendé: Gabalda, 2015. Ephʽal, Israel. “Esarhaddon, Egypt, and Shubria: Politics and Propaganda.” JCS 57 (2005): 99–111. ———. “Stages and Aims in the Royal Historiography of Esarhaddon.” Orient 49 (2014): 51–68. Esztári, Réka, and Ádám Vér. “The Voices of Ištar: Prophetesses and Female Ecstatics in the Neo-Assyrian Empire.” Pages 3–39 in Religion and Female Body in Ancient Judaism and Its Environments. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2015.

147

148

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Fales, Frederick Mario. “After Taʼyinat: The New Status of Esarhaddon’s Adê for Assyrian Political History.” RA 106 (2012): 133–58. ———. “Moving around Babylon: On the Arameans and Chaldean Presence in Southern Mesopotamia.” Pages 91–111 in Babylon: Wissenskultur in Orient und Okzident. Edited by Eva Cancik-Kirchbaum, Margarete Ess, and Joachim Marzahn. Topoi 1. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008. Frahm, Eckart. “Hochverrat.” Pages 89–139 in Assur-Forschungen. Edited by Stefan Mario Maul and N. Heessel. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2010. Green, Alberto R. W. “Esarhaddon, Sanduarri, and the Adon Papyrus.” Pages 88–95 in Inspired Speech, Prophecy in the Ancient Near East. Essays in Honor of Herbert B. Huffmon. Edited by John Kaltner and L. Stulman. London: T&T Clark, 2008. Ishida, Tomoo. “The Succession Narrative and Esarhaddon’s Apology: A Comparison,” Pages 166–73 in Ah, Assyria… Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor. Edited by Mordechai Cogan and Israel Ephʼal. ScrHier 33. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1991. Ivantchik, Askold I. Les Cimmériens au Proche-Orient. OBO 127. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht; Fribourg: Presses Universitaires, 1993. Jean, Cynthia. “Le petit monde des exorcistes de Ninive.” Iraq 66 (2004): 77–81. Kahn, Danʼel. “The Assyrian Invasions of Egypt (673–663 B.C.) and the Final Expulsion of the Kushites.” SAK 34 (2006): 251–67. ———. “Taharqa, King of Kush and the Assyrians.” JSSEA 32 (2004): 109–28. Karlsson, Mattias. Egypt between Kush and Assyria: The Perspective of Tanutamani, King of Kush. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet, Institutionen för lingvistik och filologi Länna, 2018. Koch-Westenholz, Ulla. Mesopotamian Astrology: An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 1995. Kwasman, Theodore, and Simo Parpola. Legal Transactions of the Royal Court of Nineveh. Part I: Tiglath-pileser III through Esarhaddon. SAA 6.1. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1991. Lambert, Wilfred G. “Esarhaddon’s Attempt to Return Marduk to Babylon.” Pages 157– 74 in Ad bene et fideliter seminandum, Festschrift K. Deller. Edited by Gerlinde. Mauer and Ursula Magen. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1988. Lauinger, Jacob. “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty at Tell Tayinat: Text and Commentary.” JCS 64 (2012): 87–123. Leichty, Erle. “Esarhaddon’s Exile: Some Speculative History,” Pages 189–91 in Studies Presented to Robert D. Biggs. Edited by Martha T. Roth, Walter Farber, and Matthew W. Stolper. AS 27. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2007. ———. “Esarhaddon’s ‘Letter to the Gods.’ ” Pages 52–57 in Ah, Assyria... Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor. Edited by Mordechai Cogan and Israel Ephʼal. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1991. ———. The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria (680–669 BC). RINAP 4. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2011. Lemaire, André. “Recherches de topographie historique sur le pays de Qué (IXe–VIIe siècles av. J.-C.).” Anatolia Antiqua 1 (1991): 267–75. Lipiński, Edward. “The Cypriot Vassals of Esarhaddon.” Pages 58–64 in Ah, Assyria… Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented



Bibliography

149

to Hayim Tadmor. Edited by Mordechai Cogan and Israel Ephʽal. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1991. Liverani, Mario. “The Fall of the Assyrian Empire: Ancient and Modern Interpretations.” Pages 374–89 in Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History. Edited by Susan E. Alcock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. ———. “‘I Constructed Palaces throughout My Country’ Establishing the Assyrian Provincial Order: The Motif and Its Variants.” RA 106 (2012): 181–91. Luukko, Mikko, and Greta Van Buylaere. The Political Correspondence of Esarhaddon. SAA 16. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2002. Marti, Lionel. “Deux têtes coupées en cinq mois: La prise de Sidon par Assarhaddon.” Pages 13–30 in Phéniciens d’Orient et d’Occident: Mélanges Josette Elayi. Edited by André Lemaire, Bertrand Dufour, and Fabian Pfitzmann. CIPOA 2. Paris: Maisonneuve, 2014. ———. “‘J’étais le plus jeune de mes frères’: L’avènement héroïque d’Assarhaddon, un jeune homme prédestiné.” Pages 184–201 in Le jeune héros: Recherches sur la formation et la diffusion d’un thème littéraire au Proche-Orient ancien. Edited by Jean-Marie Durand, Thomas Römer, and Michaël Langlois. OBO 250. Fribourg: Academic Press; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. ———. “L’empereur assyrien et ses devins.” JA 298 (2010): 495–515. Naʼaman, Nadav. “The Brook of Egypt and Assyrian Policy on the Border of Egypt.” Tel Aviv 6 (1979): 68–90. Nowicki, Stefan. “Was Esarhaddon Considered to Be a God?” ArOr 83 (2015): 217–32. Parpola, Simo. “The Forlorn Scholar.” Pages 257–78 in Language, Literature, and History: Philological and Historical Studies Presented to Erica Reiner. Edited by Francesca Rochberg-Halton. AOS 67. New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1987. ———. Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. 2 vols. AOAT 5. Kevalaer: Butzon and Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1970–1983. ———. “The Murderer of Sennacherib.” Pages 171–82 in Death in Mesopotamia. Edited by Bendt Alster. CRRAI 26. Copenhagen: Akademisk, 1980. Pearce, Laurie E. “The Scribes and Scholars of Ancient Mesopotamia.” CANE 4:2265–78. Pettinato, Giovanni. “I rapporti politici di Tiro con l’Assiria alla luce del ‘trattato tra Asarhadon e Baal.’” RSF 3 (1975): 145–60. Porter, Barbara Nevling. “Assyrian Propaganda for the West Esarhaddon’s Steles from Til Barsip and Samʼal.” Pages 59–79 in Trees, Kings, and Politics: Studies in Assyrian Iconography. Edited by Barbara Nevling Porter. OBO 197. Fribourg: Presses Universitaires; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003. ———. “What the Assyrians Thought the Babylonians Thought about the Relative Status of Nabû in the Late Assyrian Period.” Pages 253-260 in Assyria 1995. Edited by Simo Parpola and Robert M. Whiting. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1997. Radner, Karen. “An Assyrian View of the Medes.” Pages 37–64 in Continuity of Empire (?), Assyria, Media, Persia. Edited by Giovanni Battista Lanfranchi, Michael Roaf, and Robert Rollinger. HANEM 5. Padova: S.a.r.g.o.n., 2003. ———. “The Trials of Esarhaddon: The Conspiracy of 670 BC.” Isimu 6 (2003): 165–84. Reade, Julian E. “Was Sennacherib a Feminist?” Pages 139–45 in La femme dans le Proche-Orient antique. Edited by Jean-Marie Durand. CRRAI 33. Paris: ERC, 1986.

150

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Reynolds, Frances. The Babylonian Correspondence of Esarhaddon. SAA 18. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2003. Rigo, Monica. “L’abbigliamento degli Assiri: Una nota sull’abito del re.” Pages 719–24 in Leggo! Studies Presented to Frederick Mario Fales on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. Edited by Giovanni Battista Lanfranchi, Daniele Morandi Bonacossi, Cinzia Pappi, and Simonetta Ponchia. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012. Ryholt, Kim. “The Assyrian Invasion of Egypt in Egyptian Literary Tradition.” Pages 483–510 in Assyria and Beyond: Studies Presented to Mogens Trolle Larsen. Edited by J. G. Dercksen. PIHANS 100. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 2004. Schmidtke, Friedrich. Asarhaddons Statthalterschaft in Babylonien und seine Thronbesteigung in Assyrien 681 v. Chr. AOTU 1.2. Leiden: Brill, 1916. Spalinger, Anthony. Esarhaddon and Egypt: An Analysis of the First Invasion of Egypt. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Istitute, 1974. Streck, Michael P. Der Wiederaufbau Babylons unter Asarhaddon und Assurbanipal in Briefen aus Ninive. Berlin: Akademie, 2002. Tadmor, Hayim. “The Role of the Chief Eunuch and the Place of Eunuchs in the Assyrian Empire.” Pages 608–11 in vol. 1 of Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East. Edited by Simo Parpola and Robert M. Whiting. 2 vols. CRRAI 47. Helsinki: NeoAssyrian Text Corpus, 2002. Tadmor, Hayim, Benno Landsberger, and Simo Parpola. “The Sin of Sargon and Sennacherib’s Last Will.” SAAB 3 (1989): 3–51. Talon, Philippe. “Une interprétation ésotérique du nom d’Assarhaddon.” NABU (1999): 3, 62–63, no. 64. Tammuz, Oded. “Punishing a Dead Villain: The Biblical Accounts of the Murderer of Sennacherib.” BN 157 (2013): 101–5. Villard, Pierre. “Les guérisseurs à la cour néo-assyrienne.” Pages 139–60 in Médecine et médecins au Proche-Orient ancien: Actes du Colloque international organisé à Lyon les 8 et 9 novembre 2002. BARIS 1528. London: British Archaeological Reports, 2006. ———. “Quelques aspects du renseignement militaire dans l’Empire néo-assyrien.” HIMA 3 (2016): 87–97. ———. “Quelques notes sur le clergé d’Assur à la fin de l’époque néo-assyrienne.” Akh Purattim 2 (2007): 321–34. Watanabe, Kazuko. “Aššurbanipal and His Brothers Considered from the References in Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents.” Pages 237–57 in Prince of the Orient: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Memory of H .I. H. Prince Takahito Mikasa. Edited by Ichiro Nakata, Yoshihiro Nishiaki, Takahiro Odaka, Masamichi Yamada, and Shigeo Yamada. Orient Supplement 1. Tokyo: Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan, 2019. ———. “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath: Documents Reconsidered in Light of the Tayinat Version.” Orient 49 (2014): 145–70.

Index Ancient Personal Names Aba-Enlil-dari, high official at the court of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon 42 Abdâ, governor of Assur and conspirator 110 Abdimilkot. See Abdi-Milkûti Abdi-Milkûti, king of Sidon (ca. 677) 4, 69, 70, 71, 84 Abî-Baʾal, king of Samsimurruna 106 Abî-râmu, grand vizier and eponym in 677 58 Adad-shumu-usur, scribe and chief exorcist 36–38, 41, 45 Adasi, king of Assyria (ca. 1700) 11 Adon, unidentified western king, 70 Admêsu, Cypriot king of Tamassos 106 Ahât-abîsha, prophetess 42, 44 Ahhêshaia, astrologer from Uruk 42 Ahî-Milki, king of Arwad 106 Ahiqar. See Aba-Enlil-dari 42 Akbaru, king of Ilpiatu 74 Akkullânu, astrologer and priest of the Ashur temple 39–40 Ammi-nabdi, king of Beth-Ammon 106 Apkallatu, queen of the Arabs 80 Aplâia, astrologer from Borsippa 20, 42 Aplâia, priest of Nabû and Nanaia from Babylonia 45 Arrâbu, exorcist from Nippur 42 Asharêdu, astrologer 42, 44 Ashpa-bara, son of Taltâ 79 Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria (668–627) 11–12, 20–21, 30, 33, 36–41, 43, 45, 50, 56, 60–61, 79, 83, 88–89, 92, 94–95, 98–102, 105–9, 112, 114, 116–17 Ashur-etel-ilâni-mukîn-apli, name of Esarhaddon 19 Ashur-ilî-muballissu, son of Sennacherib 10

Ashur-nâdin-shumi, king of Babylon (700–694) 10, 19–20, 97 Ashur-nasir, chief eunuch, commander of the army 17, 94, 110–11, 113, 115 Ashurnasirpal II, king of Assyria (883–859) 15, 37, 60 Ashur-shumu-ushabshi, son of Sennacherib 10 Asuhîli, king of Arzâ 66–67, 84 Atar-ili, governor of Lahiru and eponym in 673 3 Baʾal I. See Baʾalu Baʾalu, king of Tyre (ca. 677–671) 70–73, 83–84, 89–90, 105–6, 116 Babu-shumu-iddina, astrologer from Nimrud 42 Balasî, astrologer from Nineveh 36–37, 39, 42, 44 Balâssu, tribal leader of Bît-Dakkûri under Tiglath-pilerser III 69 Bammâia, astrologer 39, 42 Banbâ, second vizier and eponym in 676 73 Bartuta, Scythian king 89 Baslu, queen of Ihilum in northeastern Arabia 74 Bayâ, prophetess 42 Bêl-bâni, king of Assyria (ca. 1700–1691) 11 Bêl-iqîsha, king of Gambulu 15, 79 Bêl-leʾi, Babylonian exorcist and astrologer 36, 42 Bêl-nasir, haruspex 42 Bêl-upahhir, Babylonian astrologer 42 Bêl-ushezib, Babylonian scholar 48 Bêl-ushezib, Babylonian scholar, probably from Nippur, active in Nineveh 23, 37, 40, 42, 43, 45 Berossus, Babylonian priest (late fourth century BCE) 4

151

152

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Binzûki, a ruler from the Levantine coast(?) 90 Bûdi-il, king of Bît-Ammon 106 Bunnannû, a Gambulian, father of Bêliqîsha 79 Burdada. See Bur-Dadi Bur-Dadi, Median city-lord of Karzitali 99 Bususu, Cypriot king of Nuria (classical Marion) 106

Humbares, Median city-ruler of Nahshimarti 99

Ekishtûra, Cypriot king of Idalion 106 E-parna, Median city-lord 78 Erêsu, Cypriot king of Soloi 106 Erîba-Marduk, king of Babylon 61 Erishum I, Babylonian king (ca. 1974– 1935) 59 Esharra-hammat, wife of Esarhaddon 4, 11, 48, 88

Iaʾlu. See Iataʾ Iapaʾ, queen of Dihrâni in northeastern Arabia 74 Iataʾ, king of the Arabs, son of Hazail 14, 80–81 Iaʾutâ. See Iatâʾ Idibiʾilu, Arab sheikh at the border of Egypt in the reign of Tiglath-pileser III 66 Ikausu, king of Ekron 106 Ikkalû, Ikkilû. See Yakinlu Ikkâru, physician 41 Ik-Teshub, king of Shubria 86–87 Ilu-maʾadi, a man from Simirra 108 Iqbi-dammiq, author of a query to Shamash 45 Ishkallu, ruler of Tabal 76 Ishpakâia, Scythian chieftain 77, 89 Issâr-bêlî-daiʾʾni, prophetess 42 Issâr-nâdin-apli, foreman of the scribal college of Arbela in the reign of Ashurbanipal 42 Issâr-shumu-êresh, chief scribe 34, 37–40, 45, 52, 99 Itti-Adad-anênu, governor of Megiddo 50 Itti-shamash-balâtu, Assyrian official active in northern Phoenicia 107–9 Itûandar, Cypriot king of Paphos 106

Gabbu-ilâni-eresh, chief scribe of Ashurnasirpal II 37

Josephus, Jewish historian (first century CE) 4

Habaziru, king of Puda in northeastern Arabia 74 Habîsu, king of Qadabaʾ 74 Hatarna, Median city-ruler of Sikris 99 Hazail, king of the Arabs 80–81 Herodotus, Greek historian (fifth century) 89 Hezekiah, king of Judah (719–699) 49 Humban-haltash II, king of Elam (681–675) 66, 78 Humban-menânu, king of Elam (692– 689) 31

Kalizi, scribe 42 Kanûnâiu, chief judge, eponym in 671 111 Kashtaritu, Median city-lord of Karkashshi 78–79, 89 Kênî, scribe and astrologer 41–42 Kirûa, city-lord of Illubru in Cilicia 68 Kîsu, king of Haldisu in northeastern Arabia 74 Kudurru, Babylonian diviner 42, 109 Kudurru, tribal leader of Bît-Dakkûri 76

Cyaxares, king of the Medes 116 Dâdâia, exorcist from Nineveh 40, 45 Dâdî, priest of Ishtar 45 Daltâ. See Taltâ Damâsu, king of Curium 106 Damqî, substitute king, son of the chief temple administrator of Akkad 94 Damûsu, Cypriot king of Qarti-hadasti 106 Damysos. See Damûsu Deioces, first Median king 78

Laialê, king of Iadiʾ 15, 74



Index

Larkutla, city-ruler of Mazamua 99 Lûli, king of Tyre and Sidon during Sennacherib’s reign 70 Lû-shakin, accused in a lawsuit and witness of a transaction in Nineveh 40 Madyas, Scythian king 89 Mamitiarshu, Median city-lord 78 Manasseh, king of Judah (687–642) 1, 106 Mansâku, king of Magalani in Arabia 74 Marduk-apla-iddina II. See Merodachbaladan II Marduk-eriba, dispatch to Babylon 52 Marduk-shâkin-shumi, chief exorcist 38, 41, 106 Marduk-shâpik-zêri, Babylonian astrologer 42 Marduk-sharru-usur, dispatch to Babylon 52 Marduk-shumu-usur, chief diviner in Nineveh 38, 41, 92 Mâr-Issâr, scholar, Assyrian agent in Babylonia 41, 50, 55–57, 60 Mattan-Baʾal III, king of Arwad (ca. 673) 106–7 Merodach-baladan II, king of Babylonia (721–710, 703) 64–65 Midas, eighth-century king of Phrygia 106 Midas, seventh-century king of Phrygia 67–68, 106 Milki-ashapa, king of Byblos (ca. 673) 105 Mitinti, king of Ashkelon 90, 106 Mugallu, ruler of Melid 76, 79 Mulissu-kabtat, prophetess 42 Munnabitu, astrologer 42 Musûri, king of Moab 106 Nabonidus, king of Babylon (555–539) 49 Nabopolassar, king of Babylon (626–605) 116 Nabûa, foreman of the scribal college of Assur 42 Nabû-ahhê-eriba, astrologer 34, 36–37 Nabû-ahhê-iddina, astrologer from Dilbat 42

153

Nabû-bani-ahhê, official associated with the city of Kabsu 55 Nabû-bêlu-usur, governor of Dûr-Sharukkin, eponym in 672 3, 100 Nabû-bessunu, Assyrian official 55 Nabû-iqbi, astrologer from Cutha in the reign of Ashurbanipal 42 Nabû-iqisha, astrologer from Borsippa 42 Nabû-killanni, chief cupbearer 110 Nabû-nâdin-shumi, chief exorcist 39, 41 Nabû-nâsir, exorcist in Nineveh 41 Nabû-nâsir, king of Babylon (747–734) 4 Nabû-rêhtu-usur, scholar 42, 110 Nabû-shallim, tribal leader of Bît-Dakkûri 69, 76 Nabû-sharru-usur, governor of Marqasi, eponym in 682 24 Nabû-sharru-usur, rab mūgi (chief of the contingent?) 107 Nabû-sharru-usur, son of Sennacherib 10 Nabû-shumu-iddina, chief of the “collegium of ten” scribes from Nineveh 42 Nabû-shumu-ishkun, officer who is said to have saved Ahiqar 42 Nabû-shumu-lishir, Babylonian priest 45 Nabû-shumu-lishir, exorcist 45 Nabû-zêr-kitti-lîshir, governor of the Sealand, son of Marduk-apla-iddina 28, 50, 64–66 Nabû-zeru-iddina, chief chanter 41 Nabû-zeru-leshir, chief scribe, father of the chief scribe Issâr-shumu-erêsh 37–39 Nabû-zuqup-kênu, scribe from Nimrud in the reigns of Sargon II and Sennacherib 37 Naʾid-Marduk, governor of the Sealand 50, 65–66 Naqiʾa, mother of Esarhaddon 4, 6, 9, 11, 21–24, 27, 30, 40, 44–45, 47–48, 61, 93, 97–98, 101–2, 115, 117 Nasiru, Babylonian scribe 42 Nazi-Maruttash, king of Babylon (1324–1298) 61 Necho I, king of Sais (ca. 672–665) 83, 113

154

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Nergal-sharrani, temple functionary 45 Nergal-sharru-usur, third man and dispatch to Babylon 52 Nergal-shumu-ibni, son of Sennacherib 10, 20, 97–98 Niharu, king of Gaʾuani in Arabia 74 Nikkal-iddin, governor of Ur 65–66 Pedubastis II, king of Tanis (eighth or seventh century BCE) 85 Pemu, king of Heliopolis 85 Phraortes, king of Media 78 Pilagurâ, Cypriot king of Kitrusi 106 Protothyes. See Bartuta 89 Qanâ, king of Dilmun 74 Qaʾush-gabri, king of Edom 106 Raimâ, mother of Sennacherib 11 Ramateia, Median city-lord of Urakazabarna 78–99 Rashil, official overseeing the reconstruction of Babylon 54 Rîsu, Cypriot king of Salamis 106 Rusâ II, king of Urartu 86 Sanda-uarri, king of Kundu and Sissû 69–71 Sargon II, king of Assyria (722–705) 1, 5, 11–13, 19, 21, 29–31, 33, 37, 48, 74–76, 79, 83, 86, 97, 102, 106–7, 114 Sasî, pretender to the throne of Assyria 109–12 Seʾmadi, village manager of the crown prince Esarhaddon 20 Sennacherib, king of Assyria (705–681) 1, 4–6, 9–15, 17, 19–25, 27–31, 33, 37, 40, 42–43, 47–48, 51–52, 63, 65–66, 68, 70, 75–76, 79–80, 83, 97–99, 102, 108–9, 111, 114–17 Shadditu, daughter of Sennacherib and sister of Esarhaddon 11 Shalmaneser I, king of Assyria (ca. 1263–1234) 59 Shalmaneser III, king of Assyria (858–824) 17 Shalmaneser V, king of Assyria (726–722) 22, 97, 102, 117 Shamash-ibni, tribal leader of BîtDakkûri 50, 68–69, 76

Shamash-mêtu-uballit, son of Esarhaddon 11 Shamash-shumu-ukîn, son of Esarhaddon, king of Babylon (667–648) 4, 11, 20, 30, 38, 55, 89, 94, 98–99, 101–2, 105, 117 Shamshi-Adad I, king of Assyria (ca. 1808–1776) 59 Sha-Nabû-shû, chief eunuch, eponym in 658 76, 79, 94, 111, 113 Shapiku, astrologer from Borsippa 42 Sharrat-shamshi, daughter of Esarhaddon 11 Sharru-lû-dâri, king of Ashkelon, son of Rukibtu 113 Sherua-etirat, daughter of Esarhaddon 11 Shidir-parna, Median city-lord 78 Shoshenq, Egyptian, possibly husband of Shadditu 11 Shuma-iddin, governor of Nippur 40, 54, 56–57, 76 Shumaya, scribe 42 Sil-Bêl, king of Gaza 106 Sîn-nâdin-apli, eldest son of Esarhaddon 11, 38, 98 Sinqîsha-âmur, prophetess 42 Siruatti, Meʼunite chieftain in the reign of Tiglath-pileser III 66 Solomon, king of Israel and Judah (ca. 970–931) 21 Tabî, scribe from Nineveh 57 Tabnû, judge from Nineveh 42 Tab-sil-Marduk, astrologer from Kar Mullissu 42 Tabûa, king of the Arabs in the reigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon 80 Taharqa, pharaoh of Egypt (689–664) 72, 83, 85, 89–91, 94–95, 113–14 Taltâ, king of Ellipi 79 Teʾelhunu. See Apkallatu Teushpa, Cimmerian ruler 67 Tiglath-pileser I, king of Assyria (1114–1076) 79 Tiglath-pileser III, king of Assyria (745–727) 1, 5, 15, 19, 69, 83–84, 97, 102, 117 Tunî, city-ruler of Ellipi 99

Index



Uabu, king of the Arabs 14, 81 Ummanigash. See Humban-haltash II, king of Elam Unasagusu, Cypriot king of Lidir 106 Uppis, Median city-lord of Partakka 78 Urdu-ahheshu, scholar 53–54 Urdu-Ea, chief chanter 36, 41 Urdu-Gula, exorcist and deputy chief physician 36–39, 41, 44 Urdu-Mullissu, son of Sennacherib 10, 20, 22, 28, 30–31, 88, 97–98, 111, 115 Urdu-Nanâia, chief physician in Nineveh 12, 41, 45, 93 Urkittu-sharrat, prophetess 42 Ursa/Ursaya. See Rusâ Urtaku, king of Elam 78–79 Ushanahunu, crown prince of Egypt 71 Ushpia, king of Assyria, one of the seventeen kings “who lived in tents” 59 Yakinlu, king of Arwad (ca. 670–660) 106–9 Zakiru, Babylonian astrologer 42 Zakûtu 4, 11. See also Naqiʾa Zanasana, city-lord of Partukka in Media 78 Divine Names Abtagigi 58 Adad 16, 21, 34, 50 Amurru 53, 55, 58 Anshushu 58, 155 Anu 16, 54–55 Asalluhi 16 Ashur 10, 13–14, 16, 18, 22, 28, 30–31, 40, 48, 50–51, 55, 59, 61, 63, 65, 69, 80, 85, 87–88, 100–101 Bêl 21, 41, 47, 53–54, 65, 68. See also Marduk Bêlet-Bâbili 53 Bêlet-ilî 16 Bêl-Marduk 53, 55, 57 Bêl-sarbi 60 Bêltiya 53 Ea 15–16, 28, 53 Enlil 16, 51, 53–54

155

Erra 65 Gula 36–39, 41, 44, 60 Ishtar 16, 27, 55, 58, 61 of Arbela 21, 45, 59, 112 of Nineveh 21, 45, 58 Kubaba 100 Kusu 16 Mandânu 53 Marduk 3, 16–17, 22–23, 30–31, 47–48, 50–56, 86–88. See also Bêl Mullissu 22, 45, 58 Nabû 16, 21–22, 28, 41, 45, 52, 57, 60, 65, 68, 94, 98–99 Nanâya 45, 61 Nergal 16, 60 Ningirima 16 Ningal 16, 58 Ninurta 59 Nusku 59, 109 Sebitti 16 Shamash 11, 16, 21–22, 34, 38, 44–45, 50, 55, 58, 61, 64–65, 67, 76–79, 85–86, 89, 91, 101, 106–7, 113 Sîn 11, 16, 21–22, 58, 61, 65, 92, 98, 110 Tashmêtu 16, 53, 55 Yahweh 30, 101 Zarpanitu 16, 31, 53–54, 100 Modern Personal Names Budge, E. A. Wallis 5 Cogan, Mordechai 49, 51 Fecht, Gerhard 84 Frahm, Eckart 5, 98 Grayson, Albert Kirk 5 Ishida, Tomoo 21 Ivantchik, Askold I. 67 Knapp, Andrew 19 Koch-Westenholz, Ulla 42 Landsberger, Benno 31 Lauinger, Jacob 99 Leichty, Erle 5, 29, 52 Lemaire, André 67 Maul, Stefan 5

156

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Melville, Sarah C. 21, 61 Miglus, Peter 5 Parpola, Simo 5, 21, 23, 29, 30, 37, 41, 56, 98 Rawlinson, Henry Cresswick 5 Salih, Layla 5 Spalinger, Anthony 85 Tadmor, Hayim 71 Villard, Pierre 78 Watanabe, Kazuko 5, 29 Weidner, Ernst Friedrich 98 Wiseman, Donald John 5, 98 Place Names Akkad 35, 41–42, 51, 60, 93 Amanus Gates 67 Amanus Mountains 67 Amathus 106 Anatolia 67, 79, 100 Anchiale 68 Aphek 92 Arbela 42, 44, 59, 115 Arslantepe 76 Arwad 69, 73, 105–9 Arzâ 64, 66–67, 69, 84, 115 Ashkelon 90, 106 Assur 2, 17, 22, 28, 35, 41–42, 47, 49–50, 55–56, 59, 61, 70, 98–99, 108, 110, 115 Azerbaijan 77 Babylon 1, 3, 7, 10, 19, 30–31, 47–49, 52, 54–58, 60–61, 64–65, 68–69, 97, 102, 107, 116 Beth-Ammon 106 Baalbek 106 Bab-marrat 54 Bahrain 73, 75 Baltil (Assur) 11, 15, 28, 50, 55 Barnaki 78 Bâs 60 Bâzu 73–75, 115 Ben Shemen 89 Bît-Dakkûri 50, 68–69, 75–76, 115 Bît-Hamban 77, 89 Bît-Yakin 64, 66, 75. See also Sealand Borsippa 41–42, 56–57, 60, 68–69, 76, 115 Brook of Egypt 64, 66

Bubê 55 Bulgar Malden 68 Byblos 69, 72–73, 106 Carchemish 53, 100 Chaldea 50, 68 Cilicia 67, 69, 90, 115 Cilician Gates 67–68 Cilicia Pedias 67 Cilicia Traccheia 67 Cutha 42, 57, 60, 115 Damascus 80 Dasht-i-Kavir 78 Dedan oasis 80 Delta, Nile 92, 113 Dêr 55, 60, 115 Dilmun 74–75 Duma oasis 80 Dur-Sharrukin 3 Elam 31, 60, 65–66, 77–80 El-Ghâb 13 Ellipi 77, 79, 99 Egypt 1, 4, 6–7, 14, 17, 30, 51, 64, 66, 69, 71, 73–74, 83–85, 88–92, 94–95, 105, 109–15, 117 Euphrates River 52, 64, 75–76, 92, 111 Ereğli 67 Failaka 75 Gambulu 15, 77, 79 Hanibalgat 27 Harrân 24, 61, 91–93, 109–12 Hilakku 67–68 Hîra 80 Hubushna 67 Iadiʾ 15, 74 Iadnana 90, 106–7 Illubru 68 Ionia 90, 107 Ishhupri 92 Israel 2, 13, 89 Ituʾu 60 Jezirah 79 Judah 1, 30, 49, 106 Kammanu 76 Karduniash 51–52. See Babylon

Karkashshi 78–79 Kar Mullissu 42 Khorsabad 2, 12 Kition 106–7 Konya Plain 67 Kul Tarike 77 Kummuhu 76 Kunalua. See Tell Tayinat Kundu 69 Kurdistan 77 Kush 14, 51, 74, 83, 91, 95, 113 Kuyunjik 2, 12 Lake Urmia 67 Lake Van 67, 79, 85 Larsa 55 Levant 83, 91 Lydia 67 Magan 74 Maʾarubbu 70 Medina 80 Megiddo 3, 50, 59 Melid 75–76, 79 Meluhha 74 Memphis 51, 90–95, 112–15 Mihrânu 78 Mitanni 27 Mount Amanus 58, 60 Mount Araru 55 Mount Bikni 78 Mount Hazû 73–74 Mount Lebanon 18, 58–59, 73, 105 Mount Sirâra 18, 58, 59, 105 Nahr el-Kalb 2, 13, 90 Nahr es-Simerian 106 Nimrud 12, 37, 42, 45, 59–61, 98–99, 115 Nippur 40, 42, 54, 56, 60–61, 69, 75–76, 115 Orontes River 13 Persian/Arabian Gulf 64, 73–75 Phoenicia 69–70, 72–73, 83, 105 Phrygia 67, 76, 106 Pitânu. See Barnaki Qalaat Bahrain 75 Qalaichi Tepe 77 Qale Bardine 77

Index

157

Qaqun 13, 89–92 Qedar, Arabian kingdom 80 Que 67–68 Rabat Tepe 77 Saba, Arabian kingdom 80 Samsimurruna 106 Sarepta 70 Sealand 28, 50, 64–65, 69, 102, 115. See also Bît-Yakin Shamêlê 84 Sha-pî-Bêl 79 Shubria 1, 16, 51, 85–88, 98, 115 Sidon 4, 18, 51, 69–73, 84, 90, 106 Simyra 69, 72, 107–8 Sinai Desert 85 Sippar-Aruru 55 Sippar 19, 54, 76, 78, 101 Sissû 69 Sumer 35 Tabal 67–68, 76, 109 Tabbet al-Hammam 106 Tadmor 80 Tarbisu 2, 59–61, 102 Tarsis-Tartessos. See Tarsus Tarsus 68, 90, 107 Tartessos 90 Taurus Mountains 67–68 Tell Khazneh 75 Tell Nebi Yunus 2, 5, 9, 58 Tell Qarnum 108 Tell Said 75 Tell Tayinat 98–99 Têma 80 Tigris River 28, 79 Tîl-Ashurri 78 Til Barsip 4, 9, 13, 67, 71, 90, 101, 111 Til-Garimmu 76 Tul Karm 89 Tyre 69–72, 83–84, 89, 90–93, 105–7, 109, 115–16 Uppume 14, 85–87 Ur 65 Urartu 67, 77, 85–88 Uruk 41–42, 51, 55, 60–61, 85, 116 Ushu 72 Wâdî Sirhân 80

158

Esarhaddon, King of Assyria

Wâdî Tumilat 85

Gutians. See Manneans

Zagros 1, 77–79 Zincirli 9, 13, 71, 90, 101, 111–12 stele 9, 71, 90, 112 Zire 69

Hatti, twenty-two kings of 18, 58, 70, 90, 105 Hebrew Bible 4, 10–11, 28, 64 House of Succession 12, 19, 22, 38, 60

Subjects adê 65, 87, 99, 100, 102, 110, 117 Akîtu festival 91 Akîtu temple 20, 59, 97 Apology of Esarhaddon 27 Arabs/Arabia 14, 74, 77, 79–81 Arameans 79 Archimedes screw 15 Ashur temple 31, 40, 61 astrology 13, 23, 33, 39, 40 Babylonian Chronicles 25, 28, 47, 51, 64–65, 68–69, 71, 73, 75–76, 78, 84–85, 88, 91, 94, 102, 110, 114

Jonah, tomb of 5, 9 Kition stele 107 Kushites 83 lamentation 33 Letter to Ashur 85–86 literacy 38, 43 Manneans 40, 77–78, 89 Medes 17, 51, 77–79, 89, 100 Neo-Babylonian Empire 70 New Year festival 40, 47. See also Akîtu festival

Cimmerians 67, 69, 77–79, 89, 106, 115

Papyrus of Adon 70 paradeisos 73 Philistines 72, 106

divination 12, 21, 33–36, 43, 51, 93

Qaqun stele 89, 92

Esagil 17, 31, 35, 47, 49–50, 52–56 Esarhaddon Chronicle 4, 84–85, 88, 102, 110 Etemenanki 53–54 exorcism 33 extispicy 23, 33–36, 42, 50, 59 Ekur, temple of Enlil 53, 61 Elamites 10, 60, 78–79 El-Ghâb stele 91 Enūma Anu Enlil 36, 42–43 Eanna, temple of Ishtar 61

Saites 83 Sapardeans 78 Scythians 77, 79, 89 Seleucid king list 42 Story of Ahiqar 42 substitute king ritual 38, 94, 109–11, 113–14, 117 Šumma âlu 33 Šumma izbu 33, 39, 44

Flood monster 52

Tablet of Destinies 99, 101