The cuneiform inscriptions and the Old Testament - The Search For ...

14 THE CUNEIFORM INSCRIPTIONS AND THE 0. T.
are to regard this as the proper emendation, with Well-
hausen, for the traditional NaOdQax or Mecsgax, comp. the
yigdax/] of Josephus). It is probable that we have, here
a reference to the God Asur and that the final ax {ay)
is to be regarded as an agglutination of some sort. At
any rate we have evidence here of an Assyrian God ASur,
who at the same time appears as the Assyrian supreme
deity, not of a god Nisruk, as many have assumed, myself
among the rest. The name of the divinity, which, it was
supposed, was thus pronounced, ought rather to be read
as la and is identical with the divine name 'Aoq in Damas-
cius (see above Vol. I, p. 12); accordingly it has nothing
to do with the above.—J. Haldvy and F. Delitzsch are of
opinion that the name in question is a corruption of that
of the Assyrian god N u s k u.
Adrammelech and Sharezer ("1^X1.2^) [his sons] slew him
with the sword. About Adrammelech see the remarks on chap.
XVII. 31, Vol. I p. 276 foil. Sharezer, Assyrian Sar-usur,
is the ultimate abbreviation of a fuller form A§ur (Bil,
Nirgal)-sar-usur i. e. "Asur (Bel, Nergal) protect the
king!"—see Assyrisch. Babyl. Keilinsch. p. 128, No. 11;
p. 156, No. 66. We have a similarly abbreviated name
in Abal-usur "protect the son" II Rawl. 63. III. 9,
employed in this shortened form by the Assyrians them-
330 selves*. Regarding the case simply as it stands, we have,
therefore, no reason to suppose that it was the Biblical
historian who In the first instance contracted the name in
this fashion (see Assyr. Babyl. Keilinsch. p. 156). Our
judgment, however, becomes considerably modified when
we glance at the corresponding account of Abydenus con-
* [Comp. the illustrations given in Vol. I, p. 45— Transl.]