Nineveh, Part 1

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13  

1 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003475/]

Several clay cylinders and cylinder fragments from Nineveh and Aššur are inscribed with the earliest known annalistic account of Sennacherib's reign. This inscription includes a short prologue, a lengthy and detailed account of the king's first campaign (late 704–early 702), which was directed against Marduk-apla-iddina II (biblical Merodach-baladan) and his Chaldean and Elamite allies in Babylonia, and a building report describing the large-scale renovations of the "Palace Without a Rival" (the South-West Palace) and various other public works at Nineveh, including the creation of a botanical garden. Although none of the cylinders inscribed with this text are dated, the inscription was probably written early in 702 (Sennacherib's 3rd regnal year). In lieu of a date, the scribe indicated the total number of lines; each copy was inscribed with ninety-four lines of text. The inscription is sometimes referred to as the "First Campaign Cylinder."

Access the composite text [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003475/] or the score [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003475/score] of Sennacherib 1

Sources [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003475/sources]:

Commentary

The so-called "First Campaign Cylinder" is one of the earliest extant texts composed under the auspices of this king. Two versions of the text are presently known. The first is written on cylinders discovered at Aššur and Nineveh, and the second is inscribed on two cylinders found at Tarbiṣu. The prologues and accounts of military narration of both editions are identical (with minor variants), but the building reports deviate: those from Aššur and Nineveh record work undertaken at Nineveh, while those from Tarbiṣu describe the rebuilding of Egalmeslam, the temple of the god Nergal in that city. For this reason, the Tarbiṣu cylinders are edited on their own, in Part 2 (with the other Tarbiṣu inscriptions). That text, however, is used in the reconstruction of the damaged passages in lines 1–62. E. Frahm has suggested that the talented scribe Nabû-zuqup-kēnu was the author of this inscription. For the evidence, see Frahm, ISIMU 6 (2003) pp. 157–160. For other biographical information on Nabû-zuqup-kēnu, see Baker and Pearce, PNA 2/2 pp. 912–913.

Sennacherib's cylinder inscriptions fall into two broad categories: (1) foundation inscriptions with annalistic accounts (text nos. 1–9) and (2) foundation inscriptions with no military narration; these correspond to Grayson's IA1 (and IA2) and IB1 categories respectively (Orientalia NS 49 [1980] pp. 150–153). The first type, the group to which this text belongs, represents the most common type of text attested on clay cylinders from the reign of Sennacherib, while the second type is far less commonly attested. The inscriptions with annalistic narration were inscribed on cylinders deposited in the structure of Egalzagdinutukua (the "Palace Without a Rival"), located in the southwest corner of Kuyunjik, in the structure of the citadel wall, and in the structure of Nineveh's new wall (Badnigalbilukurašušu, "Wall Whose Brilliance Overwhelms Enemies"); at Tarbiṣu, they were deposited in the structure of Egalmeslam. Texts without military narration were probably all written on clay cylinders deposited in the structure of a temple.

There are numerous fragments of clay cylinders inscribed with annalistic accounts and reports of construction of the king's palace. Almost all of these, with a few exceptions (text nos. 5–9), are duplicates of text nos. 1–4. The attribution of many of the fragments can be determined with certainty because there is sufficient textual variation in the content of those four inscriptions; in some cases, especially with text no. 4, line divisions can aid in the attribution of some of the pieces (because each copy of text no. 4 divides the inscription in the exact same manner). Nevertheless, there are a few tiny fragments whose precise identification still remains uncertain. This is particularly true when trying to distinguish some of the small fragments inscribed with text no. 3 and text no. 4. Exemplars whose attribution is not certain have an asterisk (*) following the exemplar number, for example exs. 1* and 2* of this inscription, and these exemplars are listed in a separate catalogue (Catalogue of Uncertain Exemplars), beneath the main catalogue. Assuming ex. 1* is not inscribed with a copy of this text, then that fragment could preserve lines 1–5 of text no. 2, text no. 3, or text no. 4. Ex. 2* is likely an exemplar of this text (rather than of text nos. 2–4), but its attribution is a bit uncertain because there are only traces of signs in lines 1'–6' and 13' and because the readings of several of the signs in lines 7'–12' are not entirely certain.

The provenance of ex. 1 is not known, but according to records in the British Museum this cylinder was purchased from I. Géjou. S. Smith (Senn. p. 2) proposed that it came from the same location as BM 103000 (text no. 17 ex. 1), which E.A.W. Budge (By Nile and Tigris 2 p. 23) states "was found in a chamber built in the wall (or perhaps it was sunk in the actual wall), close to one of the human-headed bulls of one of the gates of Nineveh, and the bull near which it was placed must have been removed before it could be extracted from the wall." Although the building report describes work on Sennacherib's "Palace Without a Rival," it should not be assumed that ex. 1 was deposited in the structure of that building because several clay prisms and cylinders containing building reports recording work performed at Nineveh (for example, ex. 11) were discovered at Aššur. E. Frahm (Sanherib p. 42 and ISIMU 6 [2003] p. 131) tentatively suggests the possibility that ex. 1 originates from Area SH, an area located north of Kuyunjik and close to the western wall, and a location at which many inscribed cylinders and prisms were found or are thought to have been discovered.

Ex. 2 (Ki 1902-5-10,1) may have been picked up by a guard in Area SH; see Frahm, ISIMU 6 (2003) p. 132. Based on their museum number, exs. 3, 6, 8, and 10 could come from the same cylinder, but without any physical joins. R. Borger (BAL² p. 64) listed Th 1905-4-9,64 as an exemplar of this text, but that fragment is an exemplar of text no. 4 and is therefore edited with that inscription.

The master text is ex. 1, with some restorations from exs. 2, 4, 6–7, and 11; line 95 is a conflation of exs. 1 and 6. A score of the inscription is presented on the CD-ROM. The damaged passages in lines 5–15 are restored from the two cylinders discovered at Tarbiṣu. For a combined score of lines 1–62 of the Nineveh and Tarbiṣu recensions of the "First Campaign Cylinder," with detailed textual commentary, see the edition in Frahm, ISIMU 6 (2003) pp. 134–151.

Bibliography

2 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003476/]

Three badly damaged cylinders, all presumably from Nineveh, are inscribed with a text that duplicates material from two well-known inscriptions, text no. 1 and text no. 3. This foundation inscription with annalistic narration includes a short prologue, an abbreviated report of Sennacherib's first campaign (against Marduk-apla-iddina II and his Chaldean and Elamite allies), an account of his second campaign (a military expedition against the Kassites and Yasubigallians, and the land Ellipi), and a building report describing the large-scale renovations of the "Palace Without a Rival" (the South-West Palace) and various other public works at Nineveh, including the creation of a botanical garden. Two of the exemplars preserve a date and both were inscribed in the second half of the eponymy of Nabû-lēʾi, governor of the city Arbela (702); copies of text no. 3 were made at the same time. In addition, the scribe indicated the total number of lines; each copy was inscribed with seventy-one lines of text.

Access the composite text [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003476/] or the score [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003476/score] of Sennacherib 2

Sources [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003476/sources]:

Commentary

This badly damaged inscription duplicates (with orthographic variation) text no. 3 lines 1–56 (the prologue, the military narration, and the first part of the building report) and text no. 1 lines 79–94 (the second part of the building report and concluding formulae). Despite the fact that some copies were written at the same time as the following text, this inscription was probably composed shortly before text no. 3. This is suggested by the fact that it duplicates text found in text no. 1. Note that the extant copies of both text nos. 2 and 3 were inscribed in the Elamite month Sibūti, the seventh month in the Elamite calendar and the equivalent of Araḫsamna (VIII). See the on-page note to line 72 for further information on the use of Elamite months in the dating of Assyrian royal inscriptions. As E. Frahm (Sanherib p. 46) has pointed out, two inscriptions were simultaneously in circulation during the second half of 702: text no. 2 and text no. 3.

E. Frahm (Sanherib pp. 45–46) proposed the non-physical join between Rm 2,95+ and BM 123412 since the surface of both pieces is very worn in exactly the same manner (thus making the inscription difficult to read) and since at least one piece of each sub-exemplar was discovered by R.C. Thompson in the vicinity of the Ištar temple at Nineveh. After careful re-examination of the fragments in the British Museum, Frahm's conjectured join is accepted here. Frahm also raises the possibility that exs. 2 and 3 come from the same cylinder. J.A. Brinkman kindly re-examined A 16937 and A 16940 and he could not find any convincing evidence to support a view that these fragments could not belong to one and the same cylinder; Brinkman notes that the height of the signs, the vertical spacing between the lines, and the curvature are roughly the same on both fragments. Since the non-physical join between exs. 2 and 3 is tentative, it is best to edit them individually.

In addition to the three certain exemplars of this inscription, there are thirteen cylinder fragments that may preserve copies of this text. These are edited as text no. 1 ex. 1* and text no. 3 exs. 1*–12*. See the catalogues and commentaries of those texts for further details.

The master text of lines 1–50 and 59–71 is ex. 1, with some restorations from exs. 2 and 3, and that of lines 51–58 is ex. 3. A score of the inscription is presented on the CD-ROM. The restorations in lines 1–56 are are based on text no. 3 and those in lines 57–71 are based on text no. 1. Note that lines 34–43 also duplicate text no. 1 lines 63–72.

Bibliography

3 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003477/]

One complete clay cylinder and several fragments of clay cylinders are inscribed with an inscription that is a near duplicate of text no. 2. The prologue and military narration (which contains accounts of Sennacherib's first two campaigns) are identical to the previous inscription (with one minor omission and minor orthographic variations). The building report, however, deviates from that text, as it omits the passage recording the roofing of the palace, the construction of an ornate portico (a bīt-ḫilāni), and the lining of the walls of the palace with sculpted orthostats, as well as the passage stating that the gods were invited into the "Palace Without a Rival" upon its completion. The complete cylinder (ex. 1) was inscribed at the same time as several copies of text no. 2, in the second half of the eponymy of Nabû-lēʾi, governor of the city Arbela (702). The scribe also indicated the total number of lines; each copy was inscribed with sixty-three lines of text. The inscription is commonly referred to as the "Bellino Cylinder." The name derives from Karl Bellino's hand-drawn facsimile of the complete cylinder (ex. 1) that C.J. Rich, the Resident in Baghdad for the East India Company, purchased at Nineveh in 1820; that copy was published in 1850 by G.F. Grotefend, who had received the copy in 1820 (just before Bellino died). In older literature, this inscription is very occasionally referred to as "Cylinder A."

Access the composite text [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003477/] or the score [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003477/score] of Sennacherib 3

Sources [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003477/sources]:

Commentary

The birth of the study of Sennacherib's inscriptions began in 1820, when C.J. Rich visited Mosul and acquired what he described as "a small earthen vase covered with cuneiform writing" (= ex. 1). Shortly thereafter, K. Bellino, his secretary, made a facsimile of the text, which he sent to G.F. Grotefend, a man who by that time had already made several breakthroughs in the decipherment of Persian cuneiform. Thirty years later, Grotefend published Bellino's copy in Abhandlungen der Königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Hist.-phil. Klasse 4 (after p. 206). As for the cylinder itself, Rich brought it back to England. In 1825, Mrs. Rich sold it, along with numerous other objects and manuscripts, to the British Museum. Those purchased objects formed the "R[ich]" collection; for details on the R[ich] collection, see Stolper, Studies Larsen pp. 516–517 and Reade in Searight, Assyrian Stone Vessels p. 108.

An old, yellow paper label attached to ex. 1 states that the clay cylinder was "From Nineveh." E.A.W. Budge (By Nile and Tigris 2 p. 25) and others (Frahm, Sanherib pp. 29 and 46) have suggested that the piece originates from Nebi Yunus, where locals had already dug deep into the mound, exposing the foundation of a palace of Sennacherib there. Ex. 1*, which also is part of the R[ich] collection, may have been acquired at the same time as ex. 1, in 1820, and may come from a similar provenance as the complete cylinder (ex. 1). Exs. 7* and 11*–12*, however, do not come from Nineveh, but originate from Aššur.

In addition to the three certain exemplars of this inscription, there are fourteen cylinder fragments that may preserve copies of the "Bellino Cylinder" (best preserved on ex. 1). These are edited as exs. 1*–13* and as text no. 1 ex. 1*. For text no. 1 ex. 1*, see the commentary to that inscription.

Exs. 1*–12*, all of which preserve parts of lines 1–56, are duplicates of either the "Bellino Cylinder" (ex. 1) or text no. 2 since both inscriptions are near duplicates up to line 56, at which point the texts deviate. Ex. 1* may preserve lines 1–11 of text no. 2, but since it does not add re-ṣi-šú ("his ally") after ELAM.MA.KI ("Elam") in line 5, that fragment is more likely an exemplar of this text. Should exs. 2*–12* be exemplars of text no. 2, then those fragments would preserve the following lines of that inscription: ex. 2* contains parts of lines 7–26; ex. 3* has parts of lines 12–23; ex. 4* preserves parts of lines 21–27; ex. 5* is inscribed with parts of lines 26–32; ex. 6* contains parts of lines 28–48; ex. 7* has parts of lines 33–44; ex. 8* preserves parts of lines 35–44; ex. 9* is inscribed with parts of lines 39–48; ex. 10* contains parts of lines 43–56; ex. 11* has parts of lines 17–27; and ex. 12* is inscribed with parts of lines 37–57.

Ex. 13* may be a duplicate of either text no. 3 or text no. 4. Should that fragment be an exemplar of the latter text, then it preserves parts of lines 83–88.

It is uncertain how long this inscription was in circulation since only ex. 1 has a date preserved on it. It is possible that this inscription was also inscribed on clay cylinders during the eponymy of Ḫanānu, governor of the city Tīl-Barsip (701); note that all of the known copies of text no. 4 that preserve a date were inscribed in the first part of the eponymy of Mitūnu (700).

The master text is ex. 1, with some minor improvements from the other exemplars. A score of the inscription is presented on the CD-ROM. The scribe of ex. 1 marked every tenth line with a winkelhaken on the left edge; line counts also appear on several exemplars of text no. 4.

Bibliography

4 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003478/]

Eight complete clay cylinders and numerous fragments from Nineveh and Aššur are inscribed with a text describing Sennacherib's first three campaigns and his large-scale renovations of the "Palace Without a Rival" (the South-West Palace) at Nineveh, as well as various other public works in that city, including the creation of a botanical garden, the broadening of city squares, and the construction of a bridge. The prologue, the accounts of the first and second campaigns, and the building report are similar to those of text no. 3. This inscription also includes the earliest known account of his third campaign, during which he marched to the Levant, where he collected gifts and tribute from eight kings, deposed Ṣidqâ of Sidon and replaced him with a pro-Assyrian ruler (Šarru-lū-dāri), defeated an Egyptian-led coalition that had been organized by the nobles and citizens of the city Ekron, reinstalled Padî as king of Ekron, captured numerous cities belonging to the Judean king Hezekiah, and laid siege to Jerusalem (but without capturing the city). Some of the events in Judah are also described in the Bible (2 Kings 18:13–19:36 and 2 Chronicles 32:1–22). The military narration concludes with a boast about Hezekiah sending a substantial payment to Nineveh and a short passage stating that Sennacherib formed a large military contingent of archers and shield bearers from prisoners deported from conquered lands. Several exemplars preserve a date and these were inscribed at the beginning of the eponymy of Mitūnu, governor of the city Isāna (700). In addition, the scribe indicated the total number of lines; each copy was inscribed with ninety-four lines of text. The inscription is commonly referred to as the "Rassam Cylinder," being named after Hormuzd Rassam, who discovered several complete copies (exs. 1–5) in the ruins of the South-West Palace. In older literature, this inscription is also referred to as "Cylinder B."

Access the composite text [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003478/] or the score [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003478/score] of Sennacherib 4

Sources [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003478/sources]:

Commentary

The prologue, the accounts of the first and second campaigns, and the building report of this inscription are more or less borrowed directly from text no. 3, but with some omissions and additions, and the occasional substitution of words; most of text no. 3 is copied from text no. 2, which in turn borrows some of its content from text no. 1. The report of the third campaign, however, appears to have been composed anew for this inscription. Close examination of text nos. 1–4, as well as of inscriptions written on clay prisms between 697 and 691/689 (text nos. 15–18 and 22–23), provides valuable insight into some of the editorial practices of scribes used in the composition of this king's res gestae; omissions, additions, and substitutions can be easily tracked from one edition to the next. This volume, however, is not the venue for a complete and thorough examination of the editorial history of Sennacherib's foundation inscriptions. Some of the more significant changes are noted in the on-page notes of text nos. 1–4, 15–18, and 22–23. For further information about Sennacherib's foundation inscriptions that were written on clay cylinders, see the commentary of text no. 1.

Ex. 32 (BM 134451) may have been inscribed in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni (699) since a horizontal ruling separates the reports of the second and third campaigns (after line 8'). Ruling lines appear to have been used for the first time in texts inscribed in 699 (Sennacherib's 6th regnal year); see Frahm, Sanherib pp. 49 (ex. HHH) and 61, and the commentary to text no. 5.

Exs. 1–5, all complete cylinders, were discovered by Hormuzd Rassam, or his nephew Nimroud Rassam, during the 1878–82 excavations of the South-West Palace. J. Reade (ARRIM 4 [1986] pp. 33–34) suggests that they were discovered in the following order: ex. 3 (BM 22501), ex. 1 (BM 22503), ex. 4 (BM 22504), ex. 5 (Istanbul; formerly 80-7-19,3), and ex. 2 (BM 22500). Since BM 22501 (ex. 3) reached the British Museum in mid-1879, that complete cylinder is most likely the cylinder discovered in December 1878, in "the solid brick pillar ... between entrances g and h of Chamber IX." BM 22503 (ex. 1) was found by N. Rassam on 25 October 1879, in the "first foundations" of Room VII, in the "small pillar at the entrance" (= the wall between Doors d and e). BM 22504 (ex. 4) was discovered by N. Rassam on 22 November 1879, in the "second foundations" of Room VII; the "second foundations" are thought to be the wall between Doors c and d. The Istanbul cylinder (formerly 80-7-19,3; ex. 5) was found by N. Rassam on 20 January 1880, in the "foundations" (that is, the wall) between Rooms VII and VIII. BM 22500 (ex. 2) is thought to have been discovered prior to December 1880 in a wall of Sennacherib's palace; the details of its discovery are not known. See Reade, ARRIM 4 (1986) pp. 33–34 for further details, including the relevant documentation in the British Museum.

Several fragments of clay cylinders inscribed with copies of this text were discovered at Aššur. These are edited as exs. 9, 25, 43, 45, 48, 56, 60, 67, 69–70, 74, and 82–87. It is curious that texts whose building reports describe construction at Nineveh should be found at Aššur, and in more than one exemplar; note that some exemplars of text no. 1 and text no. 3 were also discovered at Aššur.

There are a number of cases where two or more fragments probably come from the same cylinder, but without any physical join (for example, exs. 29 and 34, and exs. 69 and 70 [suggested by O. Pedersén; Katalog p. 207]). Since such speculation is necessarily tentative, all unjoined fragments are registered in the catalogue as separate exemplars.

There are numerous scribal errors in the completely preserved cylinders, exs. 1–5; ex. 3 has an exceptionally high number of errors, dittographies in particular. The high number of erasures, omissions, and dittographies may be attributed to the fact that the scribes divided the ninety-four-line text in the exact same way on every copy of the inscription. Based on orthography, exs. 1–5 are assumed to have been inscribed by three different scribes; exs. 1–2 and 5 by one scribe, ex. 3 by another, and ex. 4 by a third scribe. The scribes of exs. 7, 29, and 68 marked every tenth line with a winkelhaken on the left edge; line counts also appear on text no. 3 ex. 1.

In addition to the eighty-seven certain exemplars of this inscription, there are two cylinder fragments that may preserve copies of this text. These are edited as text no. 1 ex. 1* and text no. 3 ex. 13*. See the catalogues and commentaries of those texts for further details. S.A. Picchioni (Sumer 42 [1979–81] p. 50 fig. 7) published a photograph of a badly damaged clay cylinder in the Mosul Museum. That object could be a duplicate of this inscription, but the photograph is illegible. Since its contents cannot be confirmed, it is excluded from the catalogue. MMA 86.11.197 (ex. 40) is included here courtesy of G. Frame. A copy and an edition of the fragment will appear in Spar, CTMMA 4 (forthcoming).

The master text is generally ex. 1, with some minor improvements from the other exemplars; see the on-page notes for details. A score of the inscription is presented on the CD-ROM. Ex. 5 (formerly 80-7-19,3) was sent to Istanbul, but was copied (up to line 65) by G. Smith; his unpublished copy is in the Department of the Middle East of the British Museum. A transliteration of this complete cylinder is included in the score since it was collated from legible photographs. 81-2-4,47 (ex. 7) is really just the left rim of a cylinder, with only traces of one sign on each line. Enough traces are preserved to recognize that these are the first signs of lines 1–95 of this text, but it would be pedantic to transliterate those signs, all of which would appear between half brackets in the score; in lieu of this, ellipses (...) appear for each line of ex. 7. Ex. 8 is known only from a mostly illegible photograph (lines 47–54 are legible) published by T. Madhloom (Sumer 24 [1968] pl. 16B). Since that complete cylinder was not available for study, that exemplar does not appear in the score.

Bibliography

5 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003479/]

A small fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh preserves parts of the prologue, concluding formulae, and date line of a foundation inscription with annalistic narration. The cylinder was inscribed in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni, governor of the city Kurbail (699), the year after the three-campaign version (text no. 4) was composed, and thus the military narration presumably included an account of Sennacherib's fourth campaign, which was directed against Bīt-Yakīn. It is no longer possible to determine which building project at Nineveh this inscription's building report commemorated.

Access Sennacherib 5 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003479/]

Source:

Commentary

E. Frahm (Sanherib p. 61) suggests that there are four cylinder fragments that were inscribed in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni (699): (1) K 1645 (this text); (2) 82-5-22,24 (text no. 6); (3) Bu 91-5-9,32 (text no. 7); and (4) 81-2-4,46 (text no. 8). K 1645 and 81-2-4,46 (text no. 8) preserve part of the date line, but 82-5-22,24 (text no. 6) and Bu 91-5-9,32 (text no. 7) do not. The assignment of text no. 6 to 699 is based on the fact that the scribe responsible for copying that inscription on the cylinder separated passages with horizontal rulings. Prior to 699 (Sennacherib's 6th regnal year), ruling lines were not used to divide units of text, but only to separate the date line from the inscription; cf. text nos. 1–4.

With regard to the content of these four texts, Frahm proposes that these editions contained a short prologue, accounts of Sennacherib's first four campaigns, (probably) a concluding statement about forming a large military contingent of archers and shield bearers, a building report (with concluding formulae), and a date line.

Due to the poor state of preservation of text nos. 5–8, it is not certain how many inscriptions those four fragments represent. There could be as few as two texts or as many as four. Text nos. 5 and 8 clearly represent different editions of Sennacherib's res gestae, as do text nos. 7 and 8. Text nos. 5, 6, and 7, on the other hand, either represent a single inscription or two or three different inscriptions. Moreover, text nos. 6 and 8 could be parts of the same text. Because text nos. 5–8 are not sufficiently preserved to be certain of their contents, each fragment is edited on its own.

The extant text of this inscription duplicates text no. 4 lines 1–3 and 93–94 and text no. 8 lines 1–3 and 19'–20', but with variation in the prologue and concluding formulae. Text no. 8 follows earlier texts (text nos. 1–4), while text no. 5 deviates in several regards. In the prologue, the epithets šar lā šanān ("unrivalled king") and rēʾûm mutnennû pāliḫ ilāni rabûti ("pious shepherd who reveres the great gods") were replaced by šar kibrāt erbetti ("king of the four quarters"), rēʾûm itpēšu ("capable shepherd"), and migir ilāni rabûti ("favorite of the great gods"). In the concluding formulae, Ištar, the patron deity of Nineveh, is invoked alongside Aššur. Because these editorial changes also appear in texts written on clay prisms (starting in 698), it is likely that text no. 5 was written later in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni than text no. 8. For a study of Sennacherib's titulary, see Liverani in Fales, ARIN pp. 225–257.

Although this inscription has more in common with later texts than with earlier texts, restorations are based on other cylinder inscriptions, namely text no. 4.

Bibliography

6 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003480/]

A small fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh preserves part of a foundation inscription with annalistic narration. The extant text, which is difficult to read because the inscribed surface is badly worn, contains parts of reports of Sennacherib's third and fourth campaigns (to the Levant and against Bīt-Yakīn respectively). Although the date is no longer preserved, this cylinder was probably inscribed in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni, governor of the city Kurbail (699).

Access Sennacherib 6 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003480/]

Source:

Commentary

This inscription, as noted already by E. Frahm (Sanherib p. 61), is either part of the same inscription as text nos. 5 and/or 7, the same inscription as text no. 8, or a unique inscription. Because of the fragmentary nature of the sources, one cannot be certain of the relationship of 82-5-22,24 (this text) to K 1645 (text no. 5), Bu 91-5-9,32 (text no. 7), and 81-2-4,46 (text no. 8), and therefore this fragment is edited on its own.

With regard to its contents, the complete text may have contained a short prologue, accounts of Sennacherib's first four campaigns, (probably) a concluding statement about forming a large military contingent of archers and shield bearers, a building report (with concluding formulae), and a date line. As for the year 82-5-22,24 was inscribed, Frahm (Sanherib p. 61) proposes 699 (Sennacherib's 6th regnal year) since this text includes a report of Sennacherib's fourth campaign (700) and because the scribe who copied out the text used a horizontal ruling to separate the accounts of the third and fourth campaigns (between lines 14' and 15'). Moreover, the report of the campaign to the Levant has more in common with those of later prism inscriptions than with the account of the third campaign in text no. 4; cf. lines 1'–14' to text no. 22 ii 82–iii 49 and text no. 4 lines 44–58.

The surface of the cylinder is very badly worn and relatively little of the extant text can be read with certainty, and thus no edition is given. However, we provide here a few minor notes, most of which follow Frahm, Sanherib p. 62. Line 6' reads: [... KUR.ia-ú-da-a]-⸢a ša⸣ la ik-nu-šu a-na [ni]-⸢ri⸣-ia x x [...] "[... of the land Juda]h, who did submit to my [yok]e, ... [...]." The phrase ša lā iknušu ana nīrīya is included in the reports of later prism inscriptions, but not in that of text no. 4; compare text no. 22 iii 18–19 to text no. 4 line 49. Lines 12'–14' read: [... pul-ḫi me-lam-me be]-⸢lu⸣-ti-ia is-ḫu-pu-šú^?-ma [LÚ].úr-bi ù ⸢LÚ⸣.[ERIM.MEŠ-šú SIG₅.MEŠ ...] / [... ni-s]iq-ti gu-uḫ-li ták-⸢kàs⸣-[si NA₄.AN.ZA.GUL.ME GAL.MEŠ ...] / [...] MUNUS.NAR.MEŠ a-na qé-⸢reb NINA^?⸣.[KI ...] "[... fear of] my [lord]ly [splendor] overwhelmed him and [the] auxiliary forces and [his elite troops ... choi]ce antimony, [large] block[s of ..., ...] (and) female singers into Nineveh [...]." Those lines duplicate text no. 22 iii 38–47. After the initial report of the third campaign in text no. 4 (700), the list of payment received from Hezekiah was significantly reduced in subsequent editions (beginning in 699); compare text no. 22 iii 38–49 to text no. 4 lines 55–58.

After a ruling line, a small portion of one line (with traces of four signs) is preserved. Line 15' is probably the first line of an account of Sennacherib's fourth campaign (700), rather than that of the building report. The extant text of that line, [...] x x GAL^? x [...], does not appear to correspond with text found in later prism inscriptions. Frahm (Sanherib pp. 62 and 200) has suggested that the text written on K 2627 + K 2666 + K 2676 (+) DT 320 may have had the same narration of military campaigns as 82-5-22,24 since that inscription also deviates from the fourth campaign report that was included in texts inscribed on octagonal and hexagonal prisms (text nos. 15–18 and 22–23). 82-5-22,24 and K 2627+, however, are both too poorly preserved to confirm Frahm's proposal. K 2627+ will be edited in Part 2, with the other inscriptions of Sennacherib written on clay tablets.

Bibliography

7 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003481/]

A tiny fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh preserves part of the building report and concluding formulae of a foundation inscription (with annalistic narration) commemorating the construction of the citadel wall of Nineveh, the expansion and internal restructuring of that city, and the building of a bridge. Although the date is no longer preserved, this cylinder is thought to have been inscribed in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni, governor of the city Kurbail (699), in the same year as text nos. 5–6 and 8.

Access Sennacherib 7 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003481/]

Source:

Commentary

R. Borger identified this text as a Sennacherib inscription. As noted by E. Frahm (Sanherib p. 61), this text is either part of the same inscription as text nos. 5 and/or 6, or a unique inscription. This text, however, belongs to a different text than 81-2-4,46 (text no. 8). Because of the fragmentary nature of the sources, one cannot be certain of the relationship of Bu 91-5-9,32 (this text) to K 1645 (text no. 5) and 82-5-22,24 (text no. 6), and therefore this fragment is edited on its own.

With regard to its contents and date, Frahm (Sanherib p. 61) proposes that Bu 91-5-9,32 was inscribed in 699 and that the text, when complete, may have contained a short prologue, accounts of Sennacherib's first four campaigns, (probably) a concluding statement about forming a large military contingent of archers and shield bearers, a building report (with concluding formulae), and a date line. The preserved text most closely parallels an inscription written on tablet fragment K 2662 (rev. 3'–20'); see Frahm, Sanherib pp. 197–198. It is from that inscription, which is a later copy (reign of Ashurbanipal or Esarhaddon), that we are able to determine that the building report of Bu 91-5-9,32 commemorated the construction of Nineveh's citadel wall. That project is confirmed by Ashurbanipal, who not only names Sennacherib as a previous builder but also records that he discovered foundation inscriptions of his when he renovated sections of that wall; see Borger, BIWA pp. 118–120 Prism D viii 64–100 and p. 183 Prism E Stück 18 lines 4–8.

Restorations are based on text no. 4, text no. 8, and K 2662 (Frahm, Sanherib pp. 197–198); lines 3' and 6'–8' are restored from K 2662. With regard to the restorations, preference is given, when possible, to text no. 4 and text no. 8 because K 2662 is a copy from the time of Ashurbanipal (or Esarhaddon).

Bibliography

8 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003482/]

A fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh preserves part of a foundation inscription with annalistic narration. The cylinder was inscribed in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni, governor of the city Kurbail (699), but earlier in the year than text no. 5 (see the commentary). The extant text contains parts of the prologue, an account of the first campaign (against Marduk-apla-iddina II and his Chaldean and Elamite allies), and the building report (with concluding formulae). The complete inscription probably also included accounts of the second, third, and fourth campaigns, as well as a concluding statement about forming a large military contingent of archers and shield bearers. The building report commemorates the construction of the inner and outer walls of Nineveh, Badnigalbilukurašušu ("Wall Whose Brilliance Overwhelms Enemies") and Badnigerimḫuluḫa ("Wall, Terrorizer of Enemies"), and various other public works, including the construction of aqueducts and a bridge.

Access Sennacherib 8 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003482/]

Source:

Commentary

This inscription, as noted already by E. Frahm (Sanherib p. 61), is either part of the same inscription as text no. 6 or a unique inscription; this text, however, belongs to a different text than K 1645 (text no. 5) and Bu 91-5-9,32 (text no. 7). Because of the fragmentary nature of the sources, one cannot be certain of the relationship of 81-2-4,46 (this text) to 82-5-22,24 (text no. 6) and therefore this fragment is edited on its own.

The extant text of the prologue and report of the first campaign (lines 1–15) and the concluding formulae (lines 19'–20') duplicates text no. 4 lines 1–15 and 93–94. Text no. 5, which was also written in the eponymy of Bēl-šarrāni (699), includes several editorial changes known from inscriptions written on octagonal and hexagonal clay prisms (beginning in 698); for example, Sennacherib's epithets šar lā šanān ("unrivalled king") and rēʾûm mutnennû pāliḫ ilāni rabûti ("pious shepherd who reveres the great gods") were replaced in text no. 5 (and texts written after 699) by šar kibrāt erbetti ("king of the four quarters"), rēʾûm itpēšu ("capable shepherd"), and migir ilāni rabûti ("favorite of the great gods"). Such differences between this text and text no. 5 indicate that 81-2-4,46 was inscribed earlier in the year than K 1645 (text no. 5) since it follows more closely the prologue and concluding formulae of text no. 4. Moreover, these changes indicate that several editorial changes were introduced to those passages during the year 699.

The building report (lines 1'–18') includes passages composed for earlier inscriptions (commemorating the construction of Egalzagdinutukua) and sections composed anew for inscriptions recording the construction of Badnigalbilukurašušu and Badnigerimḫuluḫa, Nineveh's inner and outer walls. With regard to material borrowed from other cylinders (text nos. 1–4), lines 1'–3', 14', and 16'–18' duplicate (with a few minor changes) text no. 4 lines 86–92. As for lines 4'–13' and 15' — which describe the creation of a marsh, the construction of the walls of Nineveh, and the building of aqueducts — these passages were either composed anew for this inscription or were borrowed from an earlier text (now lost) that also commemorated those events. Those sections of the building report were incorporated (with editorial changes) into the building reports of inscriptions written on octagonal clay prisms inscribed from 698 to 695. Cf. text no. 15 vii 14–24, 24'–30', viii 2'–8'a, and 1''–7''; and text no. 16 vii 22–33, 70–76a, 81–84, and viii 29–51.

Restorations are based on text no. 4, text no. 15, and text no. 16, but with help in lines 1'–5' and 18'–19' from K 2662 and K 3752 (Frahm, Sanherib pp. 197–198), two fragmentarily preserved clay tablets.

Bibliography

9 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003483/]

A small fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh (or Aššur) preserves the first thirteen lines of a foundation inscription with annalistic narration. The extant text contains parts of the prologue and an account of the first campaign (against Marduk-apla-iddina II and his Chaldean and Elamite allies). The text is either a duplicate of one of the better preserved cylinder inscriptions (text nos. 2–3) or a copy of a hitherto unknown text. Because the prologue and military narration are not separated by a horizontal ruling, this cylinder must have been inscribed in 702, 701, or 700.

Access Sennacherib 9 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003483/]

Source:

Commentary

The fragment is housed in the N.P. Lichatschevs Collection of the Pushkin Museum (Moscow). It was not examined from the original and therefore the edition is based on E. Frahm's published transliteration, which is based on an unpublished copy of V.K. Šilejko. The copy has traces of signs that cannot be clearly identified from better preserved texts. Because there appear to be problems with Šilejko's copy, it is uncertain if this is a unique text or if it is actually a duplicate of one of the better known inscriptions. What is preserved most closely parallels text no. 2 lines 1–12 and 14–15, and text no. 3 lines 1–12 and 14–15; cf. text no. 4 lines 1–10 and 12–13. The restorations in lines 1–8 and 10–13 are are based on text no. 3. The problematic passages in the text are noted in the on-page notes.

Bibliography

10 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003484/]

A small damaged clay cylinder and a fragment of another cylinder, both presumably from Nineveh, are inscribed with a short inscription recording the construction of a shrine for the god Ḫaya, the "god of scribes." The style of the inscription is similar to a text written on stone horizontal prisms recording the construction of the Aššur temple at Aššur. Both texts consist of a prologue, a building report, a petition to the foundation inscription, and advice to future rulers. Because the inscription does not include narration of military events and since the known copies do not include a date line, the year during which the cylinders were inscribed is not known.

Access the composite text [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003484/] or the score [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003484/score] of Sennacherib 10

Sources [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/scores/Q003484/sources]:

Commentary

A little less than half of ex. 1 is missing from the left-hand side and middle. Physically the cylinder is similar to those with text nos. 12 and 13, but it does not join or come from the same cylinders with text nos. 12 and 13. Only a small portion of the middle of ex. 2 is preserved. Horizontal rulings separate each line of text on both exemplars.

Text nos. 10–13 are foundation inscriptions with no military narration (Grayson, Orientalia NS 49 [1980] p. 153). In the Sennacherib corpus, the text written on VA 8254, a stone horizontal prism from Aššur recording work on the Aššur Temple, best exemplifies this type of text because that inscription is complete; see Schroeder, KAH 2 no. 124 and Luckenbill, Senn. pp. 144–147 I7. The prologues, the petitions to the foundation inscription, and advice to future rulers of text nos. 10–13 duplicate those same passages (with minor variation) on VA 8254 (lines 1–8a and 30b–39). E. Frahm (Sanherib pp. 109–111) regarded these cylinder fragments as inscriptions from Nineveh with "Aššur titulary," but that designation is not entirely accurate. These texts, as well as the text written on VA 8254, should be regarded as foundation inscriptions with demilitarized, cult-focused prologues and building reports commemorating work on temples. Sennacherib's titles and epithets in the prologues of text nos. 10–13 and of VA 8254 are probably representative of those used in foundation inscriptions without military conquests that were written on clay cylinders and stone horizontal prisms deposited in the structure of temples at Aššur and Nineveh. Therefore, there is no need to stress the Aššur aspect of the titulary. For a study of Sennacherib's titulary, see Liverani in Fales, ARIN pp. 225–257.

Due to the poor state of preservation of text nos. 10–13, it is not certain how many inscriptions these fragments represent; there could be as few as two texts or as many as four. Text nos. 10 and 11 clearly represent different inscriptions, but text nos. 12 and 13 could be duplicates of either text nos. 10 or 11 or be parts of unique text(s). K 1635 (ex. 1) and A 16931 (ex. 2) are arbitrarily edited together, as they both refer to Ḫaya, the "god of scribes," but BM 123418 (text no. 11), BM 127888 (text no. 12), and BM 128242 (text no. 13) are each edited on their own.

The master text is ex. 1, with some restorations from ex. 2. A score of the inscription is presented on the CD-ROM. Restorations are based on VA 8254 lines 1–8a and 30b–39; that inscription will be edited in Part 2 with the other texts from Aššur.

The building report is poorly preserved and it describes work on a shrine of the god Ḫaya (formerly read as Ḫani), which may have been the Ezida temple ("True House") at Nineveh since this deity, who is described in this text as the "god of scribes" (line 19), is often identified with Nabû, the pre-eminent scribal god of the first millennium; see Frahm, Sanherib pp. 110–111 and Reade, RLA 9/5–6 (2000) p. 410. It has also been suggested that the shrine of Ḫaya was located in Aššur because the prologue, the passage requesting that the foundation inscription speak favorably about Sennacherib, and the advice to future rulers duplicate passages on texts from Aššur; see Menzel, Tempel 1 p. 79 and Frahm, Sanherib p. 110.

Bibliography

11 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003485/]

A small fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh preserves the prologue of a foundation inscription (presumably without military narration), as well as part of a passage mentioning lamentation singers (kalû). The building report, which is completely missing, may have described construction on a temple at Nineveh. The concluding formulae are also completely missing. The prologue duplicates those of text nos. 10, 12, and 13, and that of a text written on a stone horizontal prism from Aššur (VA 8254). The year during which the cylinder was inscribed is not known.

Access Sennacherib 11 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003485/]

Source:

Commentary

Physically the cylinder is twenty to twenty-five percent larger than text no. 10 ex. 1 (K 1635). Each line of text is separated by a horizontal ruling.

Text nos. 10 and 11 clearly represent different inscriptions. BM 127888 (text no. 12) and BM 128242 (text no. 13), however, could be duplicates of this text or copies of another inscription. Because all three pieces are not sufficiently preserved to be certain of their contents, the fragments are each edited on their own.

Although only small portions of the first eleven lines of the text are preserved, this inscription may have been similar in format to text no. 10 and the text written on VA 8254, a stone horizontal prism from Aššur recording work on the Aššur Temple; for the latter inscription, see Schroeder, KAH 2 no. 124 and Luckenbill, Senn. pp. 144–147 I7. Therefore, the complete text probably comprised a prologue, a building report, a passage requesting that the foundation inscription speak favorably about Sennacherib, and advice to future rulers. Based on Sennacherib's titulary, the building report may have recorded work on a temple at Nineveh; see the commentary to text no. 10. At Nineveh, Sennacherib is known to have worked on the shrine of the god Ḫaya (text no. 10), the Sîn-Šamaš temple (text no. 36), the temple of the Lady of Nineveh (text no. 36), and the akītu-house Ešaḫulezenzagmukam (text no. 37); another temple is mentioned in text no. 36 (line 3'), but the name of the deity to which it belonged is completely missing. Thus it is possible that the building report of this text recorded work on one of those temples.

Lines 1–9a duplicate text no. 10 lines 1–9, text no. 12 lines 1–7, text no. 13 lines 1–6, and VA 8254 lines 1–8a. The restoration of damaged text is generally based on VA 8254. Lines 9b–11 are not duplicated elsewhere in the known Sennacherib corpus.

Bibliography

12 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003486/]

A small fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh preserves parts of the prologue and concluding formulae of a foundation inscription (presumably without military narration). The building report, which may have described construction on a temple at Nineveh, is completely missing. The prologue, which contains a list of cult-focused epithets of the king, duplicates those of text nos. 10, 11, and 13, and that of the Aššur Temple Inscription (VA 8254), a stone horizontal prism from Aššur. The year during which the cylinder was inscribed is not known since no date line was included on the object.

Access Sennacherib 12 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003486/]

Source:

Commentary

Physically the cylinder is similar to text no. 10 ex. 1 (K 1635) and text no. 13 (BM 128242), but it does not join or come from the same original as either of them. Horizontal rulings separate each line of text.

This text could be a duplicate of text nos. 10, 11, or 13, or it could be a unique text. Because BM 127888 does not preserve enough text to be certain of its contents, this inscription is edited on its own.

Although only small portions of the text are preserved, this inscription may have been similar in format to text no. 10 and the text written on VA 8254, a stone horizontal prism from Aššur recording work on the Aššur Temple; for the latter inscription, see Schroeder, KAH 2 no. 124 and Luckenbill, Senn. pp. 144–147 I7. See the commentary of text no. 10 for further details. The building report, despite the fact that it is completely missing, may have recorded work on a temple at Nineveh, perhaps the shrine of the god Ḫaya (text no. 10), the Sîn-Šamaš temple (text no. 36), the temple of the Lady of Nineveh (text no. 36), or the akītu-house Ešaḫulezenzagmukam (text no. 37).

The extant text duplicates text no. 10 lines 1–3 and 27–29, text no. 11 lines 1–7, text no. 13 lines 1–7, and VA 8254 lines 1–6a and 35b–39. Restorations are generally based on VA 8254.

Bibliography

13 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003487/]

A small fragment of a clay cylinder from Nineveh preserves parts of the first seven lines and the last line of a foundation inscription (presumably without military narration). All of the building report, which may have described construction on a temple at Nineveh, and most of the concluding formulae are missing. The prologue duplicates those of text nos. 10, 11, and 12, and that of the Aššur Temple Inscription (VA 8254), a stone horizontal prism from Aššur. The year during which the cylinder was inscribed is not known since no date line was included on the object.

Access Sennacherib 13 [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap3/Q003487/]

Source:

Commentary

Physically the cylinder is similar to text no. 10 ex. 1 (K 1635) and text no. 12 (BM 127888), but it does not join or come from the same original as either of them. Each line of text is separated by a horizontal ruling.

This text could be a duplicate of text nos. 10, 11, or 12, or it could be a unique text. Because BM 128242 does not preserve enough text to be certain of its contents, the inscription written on this fragment is edited on its own.

Although only small portions of the text are preserved, this inscription may have been similar in format to text no. 10 and the text written on VA 8254, a stone horizontal prism from Aššur recording work on the Aššur Temple; for the latter inscription, see Schroeder, KAH 2 no. 124 and Luckenbill, Senn. pp. 144–147 I7. See the commentary of text no. 10 for further details. The building report is completely missing, but it may have recorded work on a temple at Nineveh, perhaps the shrine of the god Ḫaya (text no. 10), the Sîn-Šamaš temple (text no. 36), the temple of the Lady of Nineveh (text no. 36), or the akītu-house Ešaḫulezenzagmukam (text no. 37).

The extant text duplicates text no. 10 lines 1–3, text no. 11 lines 1–6, text no. 12 lines 1–6, and VA 8254 lines 1–5a. Restorations are generally based on VA 8254.

Bibliography

A. Kirk Grayson & Jamie Novotny

A. Kirk Grayson & Jamie Novotny, 'Nineveh, Part 1', RINAP 3: Sennacherib, The RINAP 3 sub-project of the RINAP Project, 2019 [http://oracc.org/rinap/rinap3/rinap31textintroductions/nineveh/]