Clay Vertical Cylinders Clay Cylinders Wall Slabs (with and without Reliefs) Paving Stones Stone Tablet Lapis Lazuli Tablet Anthropomorphic Statues Stone Bull Colossi Seals Stone Vessels Glazed Bricks
Early in Ashurbanipal's reign, at least by 666 or 665 (his 3rd or 4th regnal year), the king's res gestae were inscribed on clay prisms.[7] This versatile medium, which was perfect for composing lengthy texts, was without a doubt this king's preferred choice of foundation document in Assyria, just as it was for his father and grandfather; in Babylonia, however, clay (barrel) cylinders were the desired medium. Ashurbanipal's scribes tailored the shapes and sizes of prisms to match the length of the texts written on them. Shorter texts were often inscribed on pentagonal and hexagonal prisms, with each column accommodating 40–75 lines; medium-length inscriptions were generally written on octagonal prisms, with approximately 90–100 lines per column; and long compositions were frequently written on decagonal prisms, with columns containing around 130 lines each. Heptagonal and nonagonal prisms were also used.
At present, prisms bearing inscriptions of Ashurbanipal are attested for ca. 666–664, 649–644/643/642, and 639–ca. 638.[8] It is assumed here that texts of his were also written on prisms in the years 663–650 and 643–640, as well as after 638.[9] Most of the known pieces were discovered at Nineveh, but a few were found at Aššur, Babylon, and Kalḫu. Based on their building reports, as well as their find spots, these foundation documents were deposited (or displayed) in Ashurbanipal's palace (the House of Succession, the North Palace), the armory, the citadel wall, the Sîn-Šamaš temple, and one of the two akītu-houses of Ištar at Nineveh; in the Nabû temple (Ezida) at Kalḫu; and in temples of Lugaldimmeranki (Duku) and Gula (Esabad) at Babylon.[10] Many of the pieces from Nineveh were not found in situ, but were discovered in Area SH ("Sennacherib's House") — which is near the city wall, about 500 m north of Kuyunjik — or were purchased from a dealer in Mosul.[11]
The contents of Ashurbanipal's prism inscriptions provide us with a wealth of information about many of his accomplishments. These royal compositions, as A.K. Grayson has noted, "are commonly called 'annals' but which are really a curious combination of the annalistic form and the 'display' form" and these texts "are rather like small historical novels and have behind them a complex textual history."[12] For the modern historian, these texts are somewhat problematic since they present the narrative of events geographically, rather than chronologically, regularly give the campaigns different numbers,[13] depending on their position within the narrative, and provide neither eponyms nor regnal years for the events recorded. Furthermore, one "campaign" (Akk. gerru) could include descriptions of several military expeditions and/or could provide conflicting pieces of information,[14] as well as later supplements that included details about the fates of the king's rivals. The geographical arrangement of the "military narration" in Ashurbanipal's annalistic texts, which follows the model established by his father Esarhaddon, was established very early in his reign.[15] Scribes described this king's accomplishments generally in a clockwise direction, beginning with Egypt, and then continuing with the Levant and Anatolia, Qirbit, Mannea, Media, and Elam, Babylonia, and Gambulu, and concluding with Arabia.
Ashurbanipal's prism inscriptions fall into three broad categories: (1) building inscriptions; (2) annalistic texts; and (3) summary inscriptions. As far as the corpus is preserved, annalistic texts are the most common; text nos. 1–4, 6–11, 14–17, and probably 18–19 fall into this category. Building inscriptions and summary inscriptions, on the other hand, are far less common; text no. 5 falls into the former group, while text nos. 12–13, and probably text nos. 16 and 20, belong to the latter. There is a great deal of diversity within each category of text, at least for the annalistic texts.
Annalistic texts, which are often referred to in scholarly literature (including this volume) as 'annals' (which is not the case in the strictest sense) or res gestae (lit. "[royal] deeds," as labeled by the Roman emperor Augustus), are the most common type of royal composition written on prisms[16] and, therefore, the best known texts.[17] The style and contents of Ashurbanipal's annals vary, depending on when they were written and where they were intended to be deposited (or displayed). Early annalistic texts — for example, text nos. 1 (Prism E₁) and 2 (Prism E₂) — contain lengthy prologues, a detailed résumé of accomplishments (including both victories on the battlefield and the voluntary sending of gifts by foreign rulers),[18] a building report, concluding formulae, and a date. The introductions of these early annals, unlike those in later inscriptions, record some of the details of Ashurbanipal's education, including his ability to recognize and discuss celestial and terrestrial portents, to solve mathematical calculations, and to read ancient and obscure texts written in both Akkadian and Sumerian.[19] Moreover, these same inscriptions do not assign numbers to the king's campaigns; this feature was first used sometime between 663 and 649.[20] This style of annals — but without information on Ashurbanipal's "school days" and with more details about the restoration and decoration of temples and the sequential numbering of campaigns — is also known for inscriptions composed during Ashurbanipal's 22nd (647) and 23rd (646) years on the throne; these are text nos. 6 (Prism C), 7 (Prism Kh), and 8 (Prism G).[21] For example, text no. 7 (Prism Kh) contains: (1) a prologue that records work undertaken in five Assyrian cities (Aššur, Arbela, Ḫarrān, Nineveh, and Tarbiṣu) and two Babylonian cities (Babylon and Borsippa); (2) reports of campaigns against Egypt, Tyre, Qirbit, Mannea, Media, Elam, Babylonia, the Gambulu, and various Arab tribes; (3) an account of the renovation of the Nabû temple (Ezida) in Kalḫu; (4) concluding formulae; and (5) a date. Other versions of Ashurbanipal's annals — text nos. 3 (Prism B), 4 (Prism D), 9 (Prism F), and 11 (Prism A) — were less interested in the king's off-the-battlefield accomplishments, especially his building activities, and those inscriptions had short prologues. For example, the introduction to text no. 11 (Prism A) records a few pieces of information about his nomination as heir designate of Assyria and training in the House of Succession and states that Assyria had agricultural prosperity during his reign. With regard to the building reports, they describe work on city walls, palaces (royal residences and armories), and temples; for example, text nos. 1 (Prism E₁), 9 (Prism F), and 11 (Prism A) contained accounts of the construction of the House of Succession (the North Palace at Nineveh), while text no. 10 (Prism T) included a description of the rebuilding of one of the akītu-houses at Nineveh.
Only one building inscription of Ashurbanipal written on prisms is known today: this is text no. 5 (Prism I).[22] That inscription consists of a lengthy prologue, which records several building projects in Assyria and Babylonia,[23] an account of the rebuilding of the Sîn-Šamaš temple at Nineveh, concluding formulae, and a date. Presumably, similar inscriptions must have existed in Assyria in antiquity.
Summary inscriptions are attested for the first time in Ashurbanipal's 30th regnal year (638), beginning with text no. 12 (Prism H). It is uncertain exactly when this king's scribes shifted from writing annalistic texts to summary inscriptions since there is a break in the textual record between 644 (643 or 642) and 639. The few texts of this sub-genre of royal composition that we do have are unfortunately badly damaged. Nevertheless, text nos. 12 (Prism H) and 13 (Prism J) are sufficiently preserved to be able to get a sense of what information these types of texts included. Ashurbanipal's summary inscriptions contain a lengthy prologue that records the renovation and decoration of temples and shrines, a long résumé of successes on the battlefield, passages stating that various foreign rulers (voluntarily) sent gifts and messengers bearing messages of goodwill, a building report, concluding formulae, and a date. The military narration abandons the numbering of campaigns and records the events one after another; the episodes are occasionally separated by a horizontal ruling. The arrangement of the episodes, at least for the events that took place before 644 (or 643), follows that of the earlier annalistic texts. Events that happened after the composition of text no. 11 (Prism A) — for example, the receipt of audience gifts from Cyrus I of Parsumaš (Persia) and Pislumê of Ḫudimiri, and Tugdammî the Cimmerian's failed attempts to invade Assyria and the tragedies that befell him — are placed at the end of the military narration. As for the building reports, those of the two known summary inscriptions on prisms are different from those of annalistic texts in that they describe building activities in Babylonia, rather than in Assyria; this is not unexpected since text no. 12 (Prism H) exs. 1–2 and text no. 13 (Prism J) ex. 5 were found at Babylon.[24] This type of text was also written on clay cylinders and undecorated stone wall slabs.
This medium, which is the perfect blend of a prism and a cylinder, as far as the textual record is preserved, was used only once — namely, to write out some copies of text no. 9 (Prism F). Vertical cylinders use both the smooth, rounded surface of cylinders and the long, multi-column format of prisms. Much like Tiglath-pileser I's attempt to introduce clay prisms as a medium for writing out long annalistic texts, Ashurbanipal's attempt to introduce vertical cylinders seems to have been a short-lived experiment, which was apparently limited to a single inscription.[25]
Unlike in Babylonia, the clay cylinder appears not to have been a commonly used medium for royal inscriptions in Assyria during the reign of Ashurbanipal.[26] Presently, fragments of only one cylinder bearing a text of this king from Nineveh have survived: this is text no. 21.[27] Apart from the fact that text no. 21 is a summary inscription that provides a very cursory résumé of the accomplishments of the first thirty years of his reign (668–ca. 639), very little can be said about the use of this medium in Assyria. It is certain from this text that Ashurbanipal's scribes sometimes chose to use cylinders to write out royal inscriptions towards the end of his reign.
Ashurbanipal had his scribes write out long narrative texts for undecorated wall slabs; inscriptions of the ninth-century ruler Ashurnasirpal II (883–859) in the Ištar temple at Nineveh (Emašmaš) may have served as a model. This medium, as far as we know, was not used for annals and summary inscriptions during the reigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon, but it was used by Ashurbanipal on at least one occasion: when he when he had Emašmaš rebuilt and enlarged late in his reign (ca. 643–638). Two lengthy narrative inscriptions are preserved on a series of wall slabs: text nos. 22 and 23 (Inscription from the Ištar temple; hereafter IIT). Both, unfortunately, are badly damaged. The earlier of the two, text no. 22, which may have been composed ca. 640, appears to be an abbreviated version of the king's annals; the composition was written in no less than four columns.[28] The later inscription, text no. 23 (IIT), which was written no earlier than 638, is a summary inscription; the complete text was written in two columns.[29] Both inscriptions have long prologues that commemorate the renovation and decoration of numerous Assyrian and Babylonian temples and building reports that describe work on the Ištar temple at Nineveh.[30]
Numerous sculpted limestone slabs that once lined the walls of the North Palace and South-West Palace at Nineveh contained epigraphs, short inscriptions and labels that accompanied images of war and hunting. Thirty-five of these have survived; eight come from Room XXXIII of Sennacherib's "Palace Without a Rival" and twenty-five were discovered in various rooms of Ashurbanipal's own palace (North Palace Rooms F, I, M, S¹, and V¹/T¹), while two could come from either palace.[31] These epigraphs provide information about: (1) the war against Aḫšēri of Mannea; (2) the defeat of Teumman at Tīl-Tūba; (3) the flaying of two high profile Gambulian rebels; (4) the capture of Babylon after the death of Šamaš-šuma-ukīn; (4) the defeat of Ummanigaš; (5) the capture and looting of Elamite cities during Ashurbanipal's wars with Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III); (6) the capture of Ummanaldašu; (7) the looting of the city Bīt-Luppi; and (8) two successful lion hunts, one that took place out in the open steppe and one that was staged on the outskirts of Nineveh. In addition, there are drafts of approximately seventy-five other epigraphs that are known only from clay tablets. Most of those deal with the campaigns of 653 (Teumman and Dunānu) and the Šamaš-šuma-ukīn rebellion. These will be included in RINAP 5/2 and further details on these epigraph collections will be provided in the introduction of that volume.
The back, wall-facing surface of a stone slab discovered in the ruins of the armory at Nebi Yunus by Iraqi archeologists in the early 1990s is inscribed with a proprietary label of Ashurbanipal.[32] This text is similar in style to the Palace Inscriptions of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon.[33] Presumably, many of the slabs lining the walls of the armory renovated by Ashurbanipal were inscribed with the same short, four-line text.
Sometime around the years 643–640, Ashurbanipal had the courtyards of Ezida and Emašmaš, the temples of Nabû and Ištar at Nineveh, enlarged. Their floors were paved with inscribed square-shaped stone slabs; the texts were laid face down so that the uninscribed surface faced upwards.[34] The stones used in Ezida were dedicated to Nabû, while those placed in Emašmaš were dedicated to Ištar/Mullissu.[35] Apart from stating that the Assyrian king had the courtyards of those two temples enlarged, the inscriptions record that Ashurbanipal had the head of the Elamite king Teumman cut off and that he had other deposed and captured Elamite kings (including Tammarītu and Ummanaldašu) hitched to his chariot as if they were horses. Both texts conclude with petitions to allow Ashurbanipal to reach extreme old age.
One stone tablet of Ashurbanipal survives today.[36] It was found at Aššur, in a secondary context (being used as a door socket), and it commemorates renovations made to the wall of that city, as well as records the restoration of Esagil at Babylon, the return of Marduk's statue from Baltil (Aššur) to Babylon, and the dedication of a ceremonial chariot and a bed to Marduk and his consort Zarpanītu.[37] The tablet — which had probably been deposited in the structure of the wall of Aššur — is dated to the eponymy of Awiānu, governor of the land Que (655).
A small lapis lazuli tablet, which may have been used as an amulet, was discovered by Campbell Thompson at Nineveh (1905).[38] Its apotropaic function is inferred from the dedicatory inscription written on it; based on the preserved epithets, the text appears to have been dedicated to Marduk.
Several inscriptions record that Ashurbanipal had images of himself made from metal and installed before the gods in their temples.[39] It is certain from a small fragment of a colossal pink limestone statue that the king also had anthropomorphic statues of himself made from stone and that he had brief inscriptions engraved on them (on one of their shoulders).[40] The one known statue of Ashurbanipal found at Nineveh was commissioned by Ashurbanipal ca. late 653–early 652 since the text written on it mentions that the statue was made (shortly) after the Elamite king Teumman was defeated.
The wall-facing surface of a human-headed bull colossus discovered in a wing of the armory at Nebi Yunus constructed by Esarhaddon bears a short, four-line proprietary label.[41] The inscription is the same one that was engraved on the back of at least one wall slab (see above) and it was presumably written on the back of other bull colossi erected in the gateways of that building. This bull colossus, which was discovered by the Iraqis in the early 1990s, is the only one known from the reign of Ashurbanipal and it, together with a single wall slab, are the only physical proof of the armory's renovation by Ashurbanipal.[42]
Four stamp seals of Ashurbanipal are known from thirty-five impressions on clay bullae found at Nineveh.[43] The actual seals themselves have been lost, are in private collections, or remain buried in Iraq. The proprietary label of three of the seals is engraved in a single line, while that of the fourth seal is written over four lines.
Numerous stone vessels are inscribed with a one-line proprietary inscription stating that the objects belonged to Ashurbanipal.[44] Most come from Nineveh, but one was discovered at Aššur. Some of the exemplars of text no. 68 have images of a table and a lion incised to the left of the inscription. In the repertoire of Assyrian hieroglyphs, the lion represents the king and, thus, these vessels were probably used to serve Ashurbanipal's meals, that is, objects used specifically for "the king's table" (TABLE + LION).[45]
A single glazed brick contains a three-word inscription that states that the Assyrian king was "[the one who bro]ught about the defeat of [the land] Elam."[46] Presumably, this brick formed part of a much longer inscription, which no longer exists. Given the near complete lack of evidence, little can be said at this time about glazed-brick inscriptions of Ashurbanipal.
7 Due to a significant gap in the textual record in Assyria from 669 to ca. 666, it is not known whether this Assyrian king had his annalistic texts first inscribed on clay (barrel) cylinders and then later on prisms, like his grandfather Sennacherib (and his father Esarhaddon), or whether he first used clay tablets and then transitioned to clay prisms.
8 The dates for text nos. 1 (Prism E₁), 2 (Prism E₂), 11 (Prism A), and 13 (Prism J) are uncertain. Text no. 1 (Prism E₁) may have been written ca. 666–665; text no. 2 (Prism E₂) was likely composed ca. 665–664; text no. 11 (Prism A) was either written in 644, 643, or 642; and text no. 13 (Prism J) was written no earlier than 638. For the date of text no. 11 (Prism A), which was inscribed on prisms during the eponymy of Šamaš-daʾʾinanni, see the Dating and Chronology section below.
9 For example, text no. 15 is probably an inscription written between 663 and 649; it may have been written before 655. For details, see the commentary to that text; Weissert and Onasch, Orientalia NS 61 (1992) p. 73 n. 46; and Novotny, Orientalia NS 72 (2003) pp. 211–214. The dates of text nos. 14 and 18 are unknown and it is possible that one of those two inscriptions may have been written between 644 (643 or 642) and 639. Moreover, there is a slight possibility that text no. 16 was composed ca. 652–650; see Novotny, ibid. It is unclear how long after Ashurbanipal's 31st regnal year (638) inscriptions continued to be written. It is likely, although it cannot be proven, that official texts were written in his name until the end of his reign, 631 at the earliest and 627 at the latest.
10 Few prisms of Ashurbanipal have been found in situ. Text no. 3 (Prism B) ex. 1 is reported to have been discovered in the North Palace at Nineveh by H. Rassam; this purported find spot is doubtful if its now-missing building report recorded work on the armory since one would expect that this prism had come from Nebi Yunus instead. Many of the exemplars of text no. 7 (Prism Kh) were found in the debris of the collapsed walls of the Nabû temple at Kalḫu. Text no. 10 (Prism T) ex. 1 was used as fill in the Ezida temple at Nineveh; this prism, which appears to have been broken in antiquity, should have been deposited in one of Ištar's akītu-houses at Nineveh. Text no. 11 (Prism A) exs. 1–2 were found in the structure of the North Palace; the former came from one of the walls of Room H.
11 For details about the cache of texts from Area SH and the prism fragments purchased by E. Chiera in 1928, see in particular Thompson and Hutchinson, CEN p. 83; Piepkorn, Asb. pp. 2–3 and n. 12; Reade, CRRA 30 p. 216; Cogan and Tadmor, JCS 40 (1988) pp. 84–85; and Reade, RLA 9/5–6 (2000) p. 420 §15.4.
12 Grayson, CAH2 3/2 p. 142.
13 For example, in some inscriptions, the second campaign to Egypt is not assigned a campaign number, while in others it is either referred to as the first or second campaign; compare text nos. 3–4 and 6–8 to text nos. 9 and 11.
14 It is sometimes unclear who actually led the Assyrian army into battle, the king or one of his generals.
15 This is in contrast to the annalistic texts of other Assyrian kings, especially Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, and Sennacherib, all of whose annals narrate events chronologically.
16 The same can be said for the inscriptions of Sargon II, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon.
17 The modern designations of most of Ashurbanipal's annals follow those used by R. Borger in BIWA, but with one exception: Borger's Prism CKalach/CND has been renamed Prism Kh (following Novotny, SAOC 62 p. 129). Text nos. 1–4 and 6–11 are Prism E₁, E₂, B, D, C, Kh, G, F, T, and A respectively.
18 One inscription even included a report about the hunting of a pride of lions in the vicinity of Arbela. See text no. 14.
19 Little of the prologues of text nos. 1 (Prism E₁) and 2 (Prism E₂) is preserved, but the bulk of their contents can be reconstructed with some degree of certainty from the prologue of the so-called Ashurbanipal's School Days Inscription (also known as the L[ondon]4 Inscription); see Novotny, SAACT 10 pp. 77–78 no. 18 i 1–ii 25'. This volume assumes that the prologues of these two prism inscriptions more or less contained the same information as Ashurbanipal's School Days Inscription.
20 Text no. 3 (Prism B) is the earliest extant annalistic inscription of Ashurbanipal in which campaigns are assigned numbers. Copies of that text were written during the eponymies of Aḫu-ilāʾī (649) and Bēlšunu (648). It is assumed here that scribes began assigning campaign numbers in the king's annals long before Ashurbanipal's 20th regnal year. Given the long gap in the textual record between text no. 2 (Prism E2) and text no. 3 (Prism B), it is not possible to be certain when this change took place. Few Assyrian inscriptions of Ashurbanipal from 663 to 650 have been positively identified. It is possible that some of the uncertain exemplars edited with text no. 3 (Prism B), exs. 1*–147*, preserve parts of inscriptions written after 664 and before 649. Text no. 15 was most likely written during this time, perhaps before 655.
21 Text no. 10 (Prism T) is a variation of this type of inscription. Instead of having lengthy military narration, this text includes an abbreviated report of a single campaign.
22 This inscription is referred to as "Prism TVar" in Borger, BIWA (pp. 134–136). The designation "Prism I" follows Novotny, Studies Walker p. 192 n. 6.
23 The prologue is identical to those of text nos. 6 (Prism C), 7 (Prism Kh), and 8 (Prism G).
24 As is fairly certain from the concluding formulae, the building report of text no. 12 (Prism H) would have recorded the restoration of the Gula temple Esabad at Babylon. The building account of text no. 13 (Prism J) ex. 5 describes the renovation of Marduk's akītu-house at Babylon. However, the Nineveh version of text no. 13 (Prism J), which is known from exs. 1–4, likely contained a description of some project at Nineveh.
25 The known vertical cylinders are text no. 9 (Prism F) exs. 7, 29, 32, 35–36, 57, 96, 146–147, 154, 160–161, 164, 172, and 204. Prior to the reign of Sargon II (721–705), only one Assyrian royal inscription was written on clay prisms: this is the now-famous annals of Tiglath-pileser I (Grayson, RIMA 2 pp. 7–31 A.0.87.1). Sargon's scribes appear to have reintroduced this medium during the second half of his reign. Between 1076 and 721, clay tablets were the primary choice of foundation document used by Assyrian kings.
26 For his Babylonian inscriptions on cylinders, see Frame, RIMB 2 pp. 196–198, 202–208, 212–216, 219–221, and 224–228 B.6.32.1, 3–6, 12–13, 15, and 19–20. These will be included in Part 2. It is unknown if cylinders were used as foundation documents in Assyria from 668 to early 666 since few texts of Ashurbanipal are extant from his first decade on the throne. It is possible that some of his early inscriptions were written on this medium, just as it was during the early reigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon. Alternatively, as suggested by multiple copies of the so-called Large Egyptian Tablets Inscription (Novotny, SAACT 10 no. 20), early annalistic texts and summary inscriptions may have been written on clay tablets.
27 A.R. Millard (Iraq 30 [1968] p. 111) suggested that BM 122613 belongs to Ashurbanipal. Following E. Weissert (apud Borger, BIWA p. 356), the authors believe that that piece actually contains an inscription of Sîn-šarra-iškun.
28 Only a small portion of text no. 22 survives today and pieces of it are housed in the Hearst Museum of Anthropology of University of California at Berkeley, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the Vorderasiatisches Museum. The prologue, as far as it is preserved, most closely duplicates text no. 12 (Prism H) and the military narration, what little of it survives, abbreviates material included in text no. 11 (Prism A).
29 The inscription is known from approximately one hundred limestone fragments that were discovered during the 1930–31 British Museum excavations of the Kuyunjik mound under the direction of R. Campbell Thompson. All but one of these pieces are known only from Campbell Thompson's copies. Despite earlier claims that the IIT was set up in triplicate, there were at least four copies of this monumental inscription lining the walls of Ištar's temple; for details, see Fuchs in Borger, BIWA p. 259 and see the introduction and commentary of text no. 23 (IIT).
30 The building report of text no. 22 is not preserved, but based on the inscription's concluding formulae it is conjectured that the slabs with this text once lined the walls of Emašmaš at Nineveh and recorded that temple's renovation in its building account. See Frame in Spar and Jursa, CTMMA 4 p. 274.
31 Text nos. 25–28 and 33–36 come from the South-West Palace, text nos. 24, 29–30, and 37–58 come from the North Palace, and text nos. 31–32 could belong to either palace. See Gerardi, JCS 40 (1988) pp. 1–35; Borger, BIWA pp. 297–319; and J.M. Russell, Writing on the Wall pp. 154–209.
32 Text no. 64 ex. 2.
33 Compare Grayson and Novotny, RINAP 3/2 pp. 123–125 no. 80; and Leichty, RINAP 4 pp. 67–69 nos. 20–22. The scribes of Sargon II also carved inscriptions on the back of most (if not all) of the king's palace wall slabs, but these inscriptions are much longer (and more poorly written) than those of his successors (see J.M. Russell, Writing on the Wall pp. 101–103).
34 Text nos. 59 (Nabû Inscription) and 60 (Mullissu Inscription).
35 The goddess Mullissu, Aššur's consort, had a cult at Nineveh in the Ištar temple (Emašmaš) during the second half of Ashurbanipal's reign. Starting around 645, at least according to a few of Ashurbanipal's inscriptions, Mullissu appears to have supplanted Ištar as the main occupant of Emašmaš. This is evident from text no. 10 (Prism T) v 33–vi 51; text no. 11 (Prism A) x 17–39; text no. 23 (IIT) lines 1–13a, 30–37a, and 162–183; and text no. 60 (Mullissu Inscription). Ištar does not seem to have been entirely booted out of her seat in Nineveh. For example, text no. 60 (Mullissu Inscription) line 12 still refers to the Emašmaš as "the temple of the goddess Ištar."
36 Text no. 61.
37 According to the subscript on K 2411 (Grayson and Novotny, RINAP 3/2 p. 231 no. 162 iii 36'–40'), the bed was returned to Babylon on the 27th of Simānu (III) of the eponymy of Awiānu (655). For further details, see n. 194.
38 Text no. 62.
39 See, for example, text no. 10 (Prism T) iii 49b–iv 3.
40 Text no. 63.
41 Text no. 64 ex. 1. Sargon II's scribes also carved inscriptions on the wall-facing side of his bull colossi (see J.M. Russell, Writing on the Wall pp. 101–103).
42 The building reports of text no. 3 (Prism B), and probably that of text no. 6 (Prism C), provide the textual evidence.
43 Text nos. 65–67.
44 Text nos. 68–70.
45 For further details and bibliography on Assyrian hieroglyphs, see Leichty, RINAP 4 pp. 238–243 no. 115; Nadali, Iraq 70 (2008) pp. 87–104; and Niederreiter, Iraq 70 (2008) pp. 51–86
46 Text no. 71. For some information on glazed bricks, see in particular Nadali, Iraq 70 (2008) pp. 87–104; and Nadali in Encyclopaedia of the History of Science3 pp. 978–981.
Jamie Novotny & Joshua Jeffers
Jamie Novotny & Joshua Jeffers, 'Survey of the Inscribed Objects Included in Part 1', RINAP 5: The Royal Inscriptions of Ashurbanipal, Aššur-etel-ilāni, and Sîn-šarra-iškun, The RINAP/RINAP 5 Project, a sub-project of MOCCI, 2019 [http://oracc.org/rinap/rinap5/rinap51introduction/surveyoftheinscribedobjectsincludedinpart1/]