Rollinger- The Median Empire, books & articles
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
To be published in:
Proceedings of the 1
st
International Conference on Ancient Cultural Relations Between Iran and West Asia,
Tehran 2004, in press.
The Median “Empire”, the End of Urartu and Cyrus’ the Great Campaign in 547 B.C.
(Nabonidus Chronicle II 16)
by
Robert Rollinger (Innsbruck)*
1.) Introduction
In 1988, 1994 and in 1995, the late Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg questioned with
arguments of considerable weight, the existence of a Median “Empire” as a political entity
possessing structures comparable to those of the so called Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian or
the Achaemenid “empires”.
She pleaded for a methodologically fresh approach by not only
casting doubt on the general validity of our most important source, i.e. Herodotus’
Medikos
Logos
, and pointing to gaps in the non-classical sources, i.e. primarily for the first half of the
sixth century B.C., but also taking into consideration anthropological models of state
formation and conceptual systems of the social sciences.
Independently from each other Burkhart Kienast and I adduced arguments calling into
question the presumed vassal status of the early Persians vis à vis the Medes.
Amélie Kuhrt
has recently shown that the Assyrian heartland as well as its eastern fringes (the region around
Arrapha) were part of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. Both regions stayed under firm
Babylonian control after the downfall of its Assyrian predecessor.
In 2001 an international
*Prof. Mag. Dr. Robert Rollinger
Institut für Alte Geschichte und
Altorientalistik
Innrain 52
Universität Innsbruck
A-6020 Innsbruck
AUSTRIA
E-mail:
robert.rollinger@uibk.ac.at
1
Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1988. Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1994. Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1995. Cf. also
Briant 1996, 36f.
2
Kienast 1999, 65. Rollinger 1999, 127-134.
3
Kuhrt 1995.
1
conference held in Padova focussed on the problem of the Median “Empire” from an
interdisciplinary viewpoint taking into consideration historical, archaeological and
philological perspectives. Though it became clear that even modern reconstructions of the so
called Median language do not rest on too firm ground
there remained disagreement
concerning the existence of a Median “Empire”. Whereas some scholars questioned the
existence of such a structure
others still believed that a Median “Empire” played an
important role in the history of the Ancient Near East.
In any case it became clear that
modern views of this “empire” are heavily built upon the picture Herodotus presents in his
Histories written around 420 B.C
Cuneiform sources dealing with the Medes from the 9
th
century B.C. onwards do not support this view
This is also true for the archaeological
remains the interpretation of which is often dependent on the picture the written sources
offer
In the present study I want to draw the attention to one specific problem connected
with the Median “Empire” and its geographical dimensions which has only partly been treated
in Padova but which deserves further examination.
This topic which is inextricably linked to the problems of the Median “Empire” is the end
of the kingdom of Urartu.
We know very little about this event because the evidence of the
written sources ends in the forties of the seventh century B.C.
Yet there seems to be a
general consensus that the state of Urartu was destroyed by the Medes at the end of this
century. One reason for this view is the information of Herodotus’
Histories
that the Median
“Empire” reached as far west as the River Halys. This Halys border is generally accepted as a
fact. It is assumed that the Medes somehow were able to extend their dominion westwards.
But as has been demonstrated recently Herodotus’ image of the Median “Empire” has been
4
Schmitt 2003.
5
Henkelmann 2003. Jursa 2003. Liverani 2003. Reade 2003. Rollinger 2003a. Wiesehöfer
2003.
6
Panaino 2003. Parpola 2003. Roaf 2003. See also Tuplin 2003.
7
Lanfanchi-Roaf-Rollinger 2003. Rollinger 2003a. Cf. now also Rollinger 2004.
8
Lanfranchi 2003. Liverani 2003. Radner 2003a. Radner 2003b. See also Fales 2003. Greco
2003.
9
Curtis 2003. Gopnik 2003. Kroll 2003. Roaf 2003. Rollinger 2003b. Sarraf 2003. Stronach
2003.
10
See Kroll 2003.
11
Cf. Çilingıroğlu 2002. Kroll 1984. Kessler 1986. Salvini 1995, 117-119. Sevin 2002.
Wartke 1993, 171-175.
2
modelled to a high degree on the Achaemenid Empire and the Halys border seems to be a
much later invention.
2.) The evidence of the chronicles
Apart from Herodotus we do not have even one single source that would shed light on how
this Median expansion to the west unfolded. On the contrary, the scanty information provided
by cuneiform sources seems to suggest Babylonian rather than Median influence in Eastern
Anatolia.
The Babylonian Chronicles again and again exhibit Babylonian and Median forces
acting as allies but it is only the Babylonian army which is campaigning in Anatolia
Thus in
609 B.C. Nabopolassar led his troops to the north on an operation against Izalla and as far as
the “district of Urartu”:
The king of Akkad went to help his army and ... [ ... ] he went up [to] Izalla and / the
numerous cities in the mountains ... [ ... ] he set fire to their [ ... ] / At that time the army of
[ ... ] / [ma]rched / as far as the district of Urartu. / In the land ... [ ... ] they plundered
their [ ... ].
This advance is important because it documents Babylonian military activity not only in
the far west but also in regions belonging to, or at least bordering on, the eastern part of
Anatolia.
12
Rollinger 2003a.
13
Salvini 1995, 117f.
14
The translations of the chronicles will follow Grayson’s edition (Grayson 1975) if not noted
otherwise. But Grayson’s transliterations have been changed according to the standards
adopted in the SAA volumes.
15
Chronicle 3, lines 70-73: LUGAL URI.KI
an re-
s
u-ut
ÉRIN.ME-
šú
DU-
ma
x
[ ...
ana
KUR.]
^
I
\
-
za-al-la i-li-ma
/ URU.ME
šá
URU.ME
ma-a-du-t
[
ú
]
x
[ ... ]
x
-
^
šú-nu
\
ina
IZI
iš-
ru-up
/
ina
UD-
mi-šú-ma
ÉRIN.ME [ ... ] EN
pi-hat
URU.
Ú-ra-áš-
t
u
/
^
D
\
U
ina
^
KUR
(?)
.\
x [
... ]ME-
šú-nu
ih-tab-tu
.
For the location of Izalla see Grayson 1975, 258. Kessler 1980, 128-130. Zadok 1985, 184.
For the problems connected with the “district of Urartu“ (p
i
h
a
t
uru
Uraš
t
u) see Salvini 1995,
117-119. Kessler 1986. Kroll 1984.
3
Chronicle 4, which starts in the eighteenth year of Nabopolassar (c. 608 B.C.), represents
the Babylonians as continuing their military advances. In 608 and 607 B.C. the Babylonian
army operated again “in the district of Urartu”:
The eighteenth year of Nabopolassar (c. 608 B.C.): In the month Elul the king of Akkad
mustered his army and / following the bank of the Tigris / he went up / to the mountains of
Bit-Hanunya / in the district of Urartu. He set fire to the cities (and) / plundered them
extensively. In the month Tebet the king of Akkad went home.
This also true for the following year (c. 607 B.C.):
... He (i.e. Nabopolassar) conquered all of the mountains as far as the district of
[Urartu]
In the meanwhile the Babylonian army must have gained considerable experience in
campaigning in mountainous regions. Chronicle 6 which reports Neriglissar’s military
advance in Cilicia against Appuashu of Pirindu stresses the capability of the Babylonian army
to fight in mountainous terrain:
He (i.e. Neriglissar) captured / his (i.e. Appuashu’s) army and numerous horses. / He
pursued / Appuashu / for a distance of fifteen double-hours of
marching through difficult
mountains, where men must walk in single file,
/ as far as Ura, his royal city. / He did [no]t
capture him
(but) seized Ura, and sacked it / (erasure) / When he had marched for a
16
Chronicle 4, lines 1-4: MU.18.KÁM
d
AG-IBILA-ŠEŠ
ina
ITI.KIN LUGAL URI.KI
ÉRIN.ME-
šú
id-ke-e-ma
/ GÚ ÍD.IDIGNA UŠ-
ma
ana
KUR-
i
šá É-
I
Ha-nu-ni-ia / pi-hat
KUR.
Ú-ra-áš-
t
u
i-li-ma
URU.ME
ina
IZI
^
iš-ru-up
\
/
hu-bu-ut-su-nu ma-diš ih-tab-ta ina
ITI.AB LUGAL URI.KI
ana
KUR-
šú
^
GUR-
ra
\
.
17
Chronicle 4, line 11 ...
ih
-[
tab
]-
ta
EN
pi-hat
KU[R...
gi-m
]
ir
KUR.ME
ik-šu-du
. But cf.
Reade 2003, who proposes to read ... EN
pi
-
^
hat
\
tam
-
^
tim
?
\
, i.e. “...as far as to the district of
the sea (Lake Van)”. Furthermore he suggest to restore line 7 KUR.
za
-
^
tu-ri
\
, i.e. Zaduri in
the upper Tigris.
18
For line 13 I follow Glassner 1993, 201 who translates “il [n]e mit pas [la main] sur lui
(mais) ...”. Thus he obviously reads [ŠU.2
l
]
a
ik-šu-ud-su
... Grayson’s 1975, 103 reads
[q
a
t]a(?) ik-šu-ud-su and translates “He captured him ...”. But this cannot be correct since
4
distance of six double-hours of
marching through mountains and difficult passes
from Ura
to Kirshi – his forefathers’ royal city –, / he captured Kirshi, the mighty city, his royal
metropolis. / He burnt its wall, its palace, and its people. / Pitusu, a mountain which is in
the midst of the ocean, / and six thousand combat troops who where stationed in it / he
captured by means of boats. He destroyed their city / and captured their people ...
Thus the chronicles adduce eastern Anatolian toponyms like Izalla, B
i
t Hanunia and p
i
h
a
t
Uraš
t
u as well as the “numerous cities in the mountains” (
a
l
a
ni ša šadâni) only in connection
with the Babylonian army. The Babylonians seem to have been the principal political player
in these regions since the chronicles mention only Babylonian (and no Median) action in the
Urartian mountains and the only military advance into eastern Anatolia in the chronicles is
that of the Babylonians
3.) Nabonidus Chronicle II 16
There is one further source which sheds light on the history of eastern Anatolia in the first
half of the sixth century B.C. For Nabonidus’ ninth year (c. 547 B.C.) Chronicle 7 (Nabonidus
lines 25f. explicitly mention that Appuashu was able to escape and not captured in this
campaign.
19
Chronicle 6, lines 9-23:... ÉRIN-
ni-šú
u
ANŠE.KUR.RA-
šú
(erasure)
/ ma-a-du-tú u
s
-
s
ab-
bi-ta ar-ki
I
Ap-pu-ú-a-šú
/ 15 DANNA
qaq-qar
KUR-
ú
mar-
s
u šá
LÚ
ár-ki
LÚ
il-la-ku
/
a-di
URU.
Ú-ra-’
URU LUGAL-
ú-ti-šú ir-dip-ma
/ [ŠU.2
l
]
a
ik-šu-ud-su
URU.
Ú-ra-’ i
s
-
s
a-bat šil-
lat-su iš-ta-lal
/ (erasure) /
ul-tu
URU.
Ú-ra-’
EN URU.
Ki
-
^
ir
\
-
ši
/ URU LUGAL-
ú-tú
AD.ME-
šú
6 DANNA
^
qaq-qar
\
KUR-
ú
dan-nu
/
ni-ri-bi mar-
s
u ki-i il-li-ku
/ URU.
Ki-ir-ši
URU
dan-nu
URU LUGAL-
ú-ti-šú i
s
-
s
a-bat
/ BÀD-
šú
É.GAL-
šú u
UN.ME-
šú
ina i-šá-tú iq-
ta-li
/
I
Pi-tu-su
KUR-
ú šá ina
MURUB
4
-
tú
ÍD.
Mar-rat
/
ù
6 LIM ÉRIN-
ni e-piš
s
al-tú šá ana
ŠÀ
i-lu-ú
/
ina
GIŠ.
sa-pi-na-a-tú i
s
-
s
a-bat
URU-
šú it-tab-lu
/
u
UN.ME-
šú u
s
-
s
a-bi-ta
...
For the location of Ura, Kirshi and Pitusu see Grayson 1975, 265, 259, 261. Kessler 1980,
179 (Ura), Zadok 1985, 200, 251, 320.
20
We may also adduce the suggestions for how to read some of the damaged passages of the
chronicles, put forward by Reade 2003, which all refer to the upper Tigris and eastern
Anatolia. Reade proposes to restore in the broken lines 54 and 55 of Chronicle 3 (fifteenth
year of Nabopolassar, c. 611 B.C.) “Tušhan” and “Šinigiša”, both on the upper Tigris. See for
this region also Radner - Schachner 2001.
5
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl pingus1.htw.pl
To be published in:
Proceedings of the 1
st
International Conference on Ancient Cultural Relations Between Iran and West Asia,
Tehran 2004, in press.
The Median “Empire”, the End of Urartu and Cyrus’ the Great Campaign in 547 B.C.
(Nabonidus Chronicle II 16)
by
Robert Rollinger (Innsbruck)*
1.) Introduction
In 1988, 1994 and in 1995, the late Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg questioned with
arguments of considerable weight, the existence of a Median “Empire” as a political entity
possessing structures comparable to those of the so called Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian or
the Achaemenid “empires”.
She pleaded for a methodologically fresh approach by not only
casting doubt on the general validity of our most important source, i.e. Herodotus’
Medikos
Logos
, and pointing to gaps in the non-classical sources, i.e. primarily for the first half of the
sixth century B.C., but also taking into consideration anthropological models of state
formation and conceptual systems of the social sciences.
Independently from each other Burkhart Kienast and I adduced arguments calling into
question the presumed vassal status of the early Persians vis à vis the Medes.
Amélie Kuhrt
has recently shown that the Assyrian heartland as well as its eastern fringes (the region around
Arrapha) were part of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. Both regions stayed under firm
Babylonian control after the downfall of its Assyrian predecessor.
In 2001 an international
*Prof. Mag. Dr. Robert Rollinger
Institut für Alte Geschichte und
Altorientalistik
Innrain 52
Universität Innsbruck
A-6020 Innsbruck
AUSTRIA
E-mail:
robert.rollinger@uibk.ac.at
1
Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1988. Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1994. Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1995. Cf. also
Briant 1996, 36f.
2
Kienast 1999, 65. Rollinger 1999, 127-134.
3
Kuhrt 1995.
1
conference held in Padova focussed on the problem of the Median “Empire” from an
interdisciplinary viewpoint taking into consideration historical, archaeological and
philological perspectives. Though it became clear that even modern reconstructions of the so
called Median language do not rest on too firm ground
there remained disagreement
concerning the existence of a Median “Empire”. Whereas some scholars questioned the
existence of such a structure
others still believed that a Median “Empire” played an
important role in the history of the Ancient Near East.
In any case it became clear that
modern views of this “empire” are heavily built upon the picture Herodotus presents in his
Histories written around 420 B.C
Cuneiform sources dealing with the Medes from the 9
th
century B.C. onwards do not support this view
This is also true for the archaeological
remains the interpretation of which is often dependent on the picture the written sources
offer
In the present study I want to draw the attention to one specific problem connected
with the Median “Empire” and its geographical dimensions which has only partly been treated
in Padova but which deserves further examination.
This topic which is inextricably linked to the problems of the Median “Empire” is the end
of the kingdom of Urartu.
We know very little about this event because the evidence of the
written sources ends in the forties of the seventh century B.C.
Yet there seems to be a
general consensus that the state of Urartu was destroyed by the Medes at the end of this
century. One reason for this view is the information of Herodotus’
Histories
that the Median
“Empire” reached as far west as the River Halys. This Halys border is generally accepted as a
fact. It is assumed that the Medes somehow were able to extend their dominion westwards.
But as has been demonstrated recently Herodotus’ image of the Median “Empire” has been
4
Schmitt 2003.
5
Henkelmann 2003. Jursa 2003. Liverani 2003. Reade 2003. Rollinger 2003a. Wiesehöfer
2003.
6
Panaino 2003. Parpola 2003. Roaf 2003. See also Tuplin 2003.
7
Lanfanchi-Roaf-Rollinger 2003. Rollinger 2003a. Cf. now also Rollinger 2004.
8
Lanfranchi 2003. Liverani 2003. Radner 2003a. Radner 2003b. See also Fales 2003. Greco
2003.
9
Curtis 2003. Gopnik 2003. Kroll 2003. Roaf 2003. Rollinger 2003b. Sarraf 2003. Stronach
2003.
10
See Kroll 2003.
11
Cf. Çilingıroğlu 2002. Kroll 1984. Kessler 1986. Salvini 1995, 117-119. Sevin 2002.
Wartke 1993, 171-175.
2
modelled to a high degree on the Achaemenid Empire and the Halys border seems to be a
much later invention.
2.) The evidence of the chronicles
Apart from Herodotus we do not have even one single source that would shed light on how
this Median expansion to the west unfolded. On the contrary, the scanty information provided
by cuneiform sources seems to suggest Babylonian rather than Median influence in Eastern
Anatolia.
The Babylonian Chronicles again and again exhibit Babylonian and Median forces
acting as allies but it is only the Babylonian army which is campaigning in Anatolia
Thus in
609 B.C. Nabopolassar led his troops to the north on an operation against Izalla and as far as
the “district of Urartu”:
The king of Akkad went to help his army and ... [ ... ] he went up [to] Izalla and / the
numerous cities in the mountains ... [ ... ] he set fire to their [ ... ] / At that time the army of
[ ... ] / [ma]rched / as far as the district of Urartu. / In the land ... [ ... ] they plundered
their [ ... ].
This advance is important because it documents Babylonian military activity not only in
the far west but also in regions belonging to, or at least bordering on, the eastern part of
Anatolia.
12
Rollinger 2003a.
13
Salvini 1995, 117f.
14
The translations of the chronicles will follow Grayson’s edition (Grayson 1975) if not noted
otherwise. But Grayson’s transliterations have been changed according to the standards
adopted in the SAA volumes.
15
Chronicle 3, lines 70-73: LUGAL URI.KI
an re-
s
u-ut
ÉRIN.ME-
šú
DU-
ma
x
[ ...
ana
KUR.]
^
I
\
-
za-al-la i-li-ma
/ URU.ME
šá
URU.ME
ma-a-du-t
[
ú
]
x
[ ... ]
x
-
^
šú-nu
\
ina
IZI
iš-
ru-up
/
ina
UD-
mi-šú-ma
ÉRIN.ME [ ... ] EN
pi-hat
URU.
Ú-ra-áš-
t
u
/
^
D
\
U
ina
^
KUR
(?)
.\
x [
... ]ME-
šú-nu
ih-tab-tu
.
For the location of Izalla see Grayson 1975, 258. Kessler 1980, 128-130. Zadok 1985, 184.
For the problems connected with the “district of Urartu“ (p
i
h
a
t
uru
Uraš
t
u) see Salvini 1995,
117-119. Kessler 1986. Kroll 1984.
3
Chronicle 4, which starts in the eighteenth year of Nabopolassar (c. 608 B.C.), represents
the Babylonians as continuing their military advances. In 608 and 607 B.C. the Babylonian
army operated again “in the district of Urartu”:
The eighteenth year of Nabopolassar (c. 608 B.C.): In the month Elul the king of Akkad
mustered his army and / following the bank of the Tigris / he went up / to the mountains of
Bit-Hanunya / in the district of Urartu. He set fire to the cities (and) / plundered them
extensively. In the month Tebet the king of Akkad went home.
This also true for the following year (c. 607 B.C.):
... He (i.e. Nabopolassar) conquered all of the mountains as far as the district of
[Urartu]
In the meanwhile the Babylonian army must have gained considerable experience in
campaigning in mountainous regions. Chronicle 6 which reports Neriglissar’s military
advance in Cilicia against Appuashu of Pirindu stresses the capability of the Babylonian army
to fight in mountainous terrain:
He (i.e. Neriglissar) captured / his (i.e. Appuashu’s) army and numerous horses. / He
pursued / Appuashu / for a distance of fifteen double-hours of
marching through difficult
mountains, where men must walk in single file,
/ as far as Ura, his royal city. / He did [no]t
capture him
(but) seized Ura, and sacked it / (erasure) / When he had marched for a
16
Chronicle 4, lines 1-4: MU.18.KÁM
d
AG-IBILA-ŠEŠ
ina
ITI.KIN LUGAL URI.KI
ÉRIN.ME-
šú
id-ke-e-ma
/ GÚ ÍD.IDIGNA UŠ-
ma
ana
KUR-
i
šá É-
I
Ha-nu-ni-ia / pi-hat
KUR.
Ú-ra-áš-
t
u
i-li-ma
URU.ME
ina
IZI
^
iš-ru-up
\
/
hu-bu-ut-su-nu ma-diš ih-tab-ta ina
ITI.AB LUGAL URI.KI
ana
KUR-
šú
^
GUR-
ra
\
.
17
Chronicle 4, line 11 ...
ih
-[
tab
]-
ta
EN
pi-hat
KU[R...
gi-m
]
ir
KUR.ME
ik-šu-du
. But cf.
Reade 2003, who proposes to read ... EN
pi
-
^
hat
\
tam
-
^
tim
?
\
, i.e. “...as far as to the district of
the sea (Lake Van)”. Furthermore he suggest to restore line 7 KUR.
za
-
^
tu-ri
\
, i.e. Zaduri in
the upper Tigris.
18
For line 13 I follow Glassner 1993, 201 who translates “il [n]e mit pas [la main] sur lui
(mais) ...”. Thus he obviously reads [ŠU.2
l
]
a
ik-šu-ud-su
... Grayson’s 1975, 103 reads
[q
a
t]a(?) ik-šu-ud-su and translates “He captured him ...”. But this cannot be correct since
4
distance of six double-hours of
marching through mountains and difficult passes
from Ura
to Kirshi – his forefathers’ royal city –, / he captured Kirshi, the mighty city, his royal
metropolis. / He burnt its wall, its palace, and its people. / Pitusu, a mountain which is in
the midst of the ocean, / and six thousand combat troops who where stationed in it / he
captured by means of boats. He destroyed their city / and captured their people ...
Thus the chronicles adduce eastern Anatolian toponyms like Izalla, B
i
t Hanunia and p
i
h
a
t
Uraš
t
u as well as the “numerous cities in the mountains” (
a
l
a
ni ša šadâni) only in connection
with the Babylonian army. The Babylonians seem to have been the principal political player
in these regions since the chronicles mention only Babylonian (and no Median) action in the
Urartian mountains and the only military advance into eastern Anatolia in the chronicles is
that of the Babylonians
3.) Nabonidus Chronicle II 16
There is one further source which sheds light on the history of eastern Anatolia in the first
half of the sixth century B.C. For Nabonidus’ ninth year (c. 547 B.C.) Chronicle 7 (Nabonidus
lines 25f. explicitly mention that Appuashu was able to escape and not captured in this
campaign.
19
Chronicle 6, lines 9-23:... ÉRIN-
ni-šú
u
ANŠE.KUR.RA-
šú
(erasure)
/ ma-a-du-tú u
s
-
s
ab-
bi-ta ar-ki
I
Ap-pu-ú-a-šú
/ 15 DANNA
qaq-qar
KUR-
ú
mar-
s
u šá
LÚ
ár-ki
LÚ
il-la-ku
/
a-di
URU.
Ú-ra-’
URU LUGAL-
ú-ti-šú ir-dip-ma
/ [ŠU.2
l
]
a
ik-šu-ud-su
URU.
Ú-ra-’ i
s
-
s
a-bat šil-
lat-su iš-ta-lal
/ (erasure) /
ul-tu
URU.
Ú-ra-’
EN URU.
Ki
-
^
ir
\
-
ši
/ URU LUGAL-
ú-tú
AD.ME-
šú
6 DANNA
^
qaq-qar
\
KUR-
ú
dan-nu
/
ni-ri-bi mar-
s
u ki-i il-li-ku
/ URU.
Ki-ir-ši
URU
dan-nu
URU LUGAL-
ú-ti-šú i
s
-
s
a-bat
/ BÀD-
šú
É.GAL-
šú u
UN.ME-
šú
ina i-šá-tú iq-
ta-li
/
I
Pi-tu-su
KUR-
ú šá ina
MURUB
4
-
tú
ÍD.
Mar-rat
/
ù
6 LIM ÉRIN-
ni e-piš
s
al-tú šá ana
ŠÀ
i-lu-ú
/
ina
GIŠ.
sa-pi-na-a-tú i
s
-
s
a-bat
URU-
šú it-tab-lu
/
u
UN.ME-
šú u
s
-
s
a-bi-ta
...
For the location of Ura, Kirshi and Pitusu see Grayson 1975, 265, 259, 261. Kessler 1980,
179 (Ura), Zadok 1985, 200, 251, 320.
20
We may also adduce the suggestions for how to read some of the damaged passages of the
chronicles, put forward by Reade 2003, which all refer to the upper Tigris and eastern
Anatolia. Reade proposes to restore in the broken lines 54 and 55 of Chronicle 3 (fifteenth
year of Nabopolassar, c. 611 B.C.) “Tušhan” and “Šinigiša”, both on the upper Tigris. See for
this region also Radner - Schachner 2001.
5
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]