Download PDF version of SAA 19 introduction - UCL

NOTES
30 The interpretation of the sender is somewhat problematic: if he really was the governor of Calah, then should
we render DUMU either as “(my) son” or “(my) lord”? But cf. Luukko Variation p. 178f and the following note. At any
rate, latently there is a clash between two different principles and the interpretation “(my) lord” may violate the
hierarchy principle according to which the person with the higher status is mentioned first in the letter. On the other
hand, using the phrase ṭuppi PN (as done in no. 13) is the most neutral way to begin a letter.
31 The introductory formula and tone of this letter clearly show that Inurta-ila’i was not subordinate to the palace
scribe.
32 Although I have restored “[to the king, my lord]” to no. 177 r.7, this letter could have been sent alternatively
e.g., to the vizier or to the governor of Calah.
33 See the discussion on no. 99 in the critical apparatus of the letter.
34 Literally, “I would go as substitute (in death) for the king, my lord!”. See nos. 99, 122, 131, 134-142 and 201.
35 Historically, the same clause is already attested in Old Babylonian Mari, then widely used in MB, and its variant
is common in MA letters; for attestations and discussion, see e.g. CAD D 148f (where the lexical section provides
the evidence that the meaning of dina − nu is more or less equal with pu − hu) and Cancik-Kirschbaum, BATSH 4 (1996)
56, 58f.
36 See B. J. Parker, Iraq 59 (1997) 79.
37 With some variation in nos. 48 (Aššur-ila’i, probably from the west); 61 and 63 (Duri-Aššur); 69; 79 (Nabûšumu-iškun);
94 (Nergal-ašared).
38 SAA 15, nos. 155-156, 158, 161-162, 164, 166, 174, 239; except for the last one all appear in the letters from
Il-yada’.
39 Nos. 65, 98, 103-107, 113, 164, 225 and SAA 1 110 (ND 2765; exceptionally after an inserted clause about the
festival celebrated) as well as 99, 134-139 and 202 in NB.
40 In no. 164, the governor of Assur, Aššur-nirka-da’’in, invokes Aššur and Mullissu. These deities are also
mentioned in the greeting formulae of Ṭab-ṣill-Ešarra, likewise governor of Assur, SAA 1 75-80, 82-85, 87-94, 96-97,
102-104, 106-107 and 109; cf. Luukko Variation p. 240 n. 10.
41 Nos. 65 (Nabû-eṭiranni); 98 (Nabû-nammir together with Šamaš-bunaya); 103-105, 107 (all by Nabû-nammir);
106 (Nabû-nammir[?]); 113 (Ašipâ); SAA 1 110 (ND 2765, Marduk-remanni); in NB: 99 (presumably Nabû-nammir,
Šamaš-bunaya and the Babylonians); 134 (Nabû-damiq); 135-137 (all by Nabû-balassu-iqbi); 202 (NN to his
“brother”).
42 E.g. in the letters of SAA 16.
43 No. 158 and SAA 1 32 (ND 2608) and SAA 1 29-31, 33-40 and SAA 5 281.
44 Nos. 8-11.
45 Assurbanipal used the standard formula but blessed his father either by Aššur, Bel and Nabû (SAA 16 14-15 and
17-18) or by Nabû and Marduk (SAA 16 19-20).
46 This cannot of course be confirmed in the case of royal letters whose opening is broken away.
47 See SAA 17 2-3 and fragmentary SAA 17 6. Note, e.g., that Esarhaddon used the opening amat šarri ana when
addressing Babylonians in the seventh century (SAA 18 1-2).
48 Topically, geographically and prosopographically many Nimrud Letters could go either way, i.e., they could be
from the time of Tiglath-pileser III or of Sargon II, see, e.g., how many personal names which occur in these letters
are treated in PNA with the note “reign of Tiglath-pileser III or Sargon II”.
49 In foreign geographical names in this corpus, especially in the case of the cities/towns in the west, it is often
relevant to know when a given locality was subjugated, i.e., paid tribute to the king of Assyria or was annexed to
Assyria.
50 Consider, e.g., no. 165 from Aššur-nirka-da’’in, eponym of the year 720, to Nabû-nammir; the latter was active
during Tiglath-pileser’s late reign (cf. esp. nos. 98 and 104); no. 37 by Šamaš-ahu-iddina is to be dated to
Tiglath-pileser’s reign but the same official also appears in SAA 1 172 (ND 2495); Bel-aplu-iddina is attested in
Tiglath-pileser’s reign (nos. 39 [but see p. lvi above] and 89) but with the present understanding no. 166 r.11 and
perhaps also no. 200 r.6 originate from Sargon’s reign. The short Chapter 12, “Letters from Babylonia” from Sargon’s
reign is slightly problematic since no letters between Assyria and Babylonia can be attributed with certainty to the
years 721-711; see SAA 15, xxxvi (bottom), xxxix and SAA 17, xvi-xviii and passim, although a date in 713 has been
suggested for SAA 17 139 (ibid., xxviii).
51 But 738-734 according to O. Tammuz, SAAB 18 (2009-2010) 191.
52 Governor of Calah between 734 BC and 728 BC, see Grayson, SAAB 7 (1993) 44.
53 In no. 128 Salamu appears in the same context with the Li’tamu tribe; for the Puqudu, cf. also RINAP 1 39:12f,
40:4-7, 47:13 (Tadmor Tigl. Summ. 1, 2 and 7).
54 For Aššur-belu-taqqin, see the section “On Some Influential Figures in the Nimrud Letters”.
55 For the “son of Zerî,” cf. n. 199 (below).
56 GPA 180-200, 203, 205-211, 230 (SAA 1 228), 240 (SAA 1 104), 241 (SAA 1 121), 242 (SAA 5 292), 243 (SAA
5 144), 244 (SAA 5 191), 245 (SAA 1 167).
57 See GPA pp. 1, 3, 255-264. One letter (GPA no. 230), addressed to the governor, was also found at B 50; for a
description, see GPA p. 7.
58 GPA pp. 10f, 21-23. In fact, six or seven of these letters which were unearthed in the Burnt Palace are letters
to the king. Except for GPA 180, from the Governor’s Palace, these letters were re-edited in SAA 1, nos. 104, 121
(by Aššur-bani, governor of Calah), 167 (only a small fragment bearing three lines survives) and SAA 5, nos. 144,
191 (a small fragment with the names or titles of the recipient and sender broken away), 292.
59 Nabû-šumu-iddina’s/Nadinu’s correspondence with Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal is edited as SAA 13 78-123
and three additional fragments ascribed to him were added to SAA 16 (nos. 175-177).
60 GPA 181-187, 203, 206(?) went in the other direction from the king to the governor of Calah, his deputy or his
subordinates.
61 Ahmad and Postgate, Archives from the Domestic Wing of the North-West Palace at Kalhu/Nimrud (Edubba 10,
London 2007) no. 55 (ND 575). For the dates of this archive, see ibid. pp. v-vi.
62 CTN 3, nos. 1-5, 28, 46, and 84.
LXI