Sie sind auf Seite 1von 21

UNIVERSIT DI ROMA LA SAPIENZA

DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE STORICHE ARCHEOLOGICHE E ANTROPOLOGICHE DELLANTICHIT SEZIONE VICINO ORIENTE

QUADERNO V

ana turri gimilli


studi dedicati al Padre Werner R. Mayer, S.J. da amici e allievi

ROMA 2010

VICINO ORIENTE QUADERNO V

ana turri gimilli


studi dedicati al Padre Werner R. Mayer, S.J. da amici e allievi

a cura di M.G. Biga M. Liverani

ROMA 2010

VICINO ORIENTE
Annuario del Dipartimento di Scienze Storiche Archeologiche e Antropologiche dellAntichit - Sezione Vicino Oriente I-00185 Roma - Via Palestro, 63

Comitato Scientifico: M.G. Amadasi, A. Archi, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, L. Nigro, F. Pinnock, L. Sist Redazione: L. Romano, G. Ferrero Copertina: Disegno di L. Romano da Or 75 (2006), Tab. XII La foto di Padre Mayer di Padre F. Brenk

UNIVERSIT DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA LA SAPIENZA

SOMMARIO
Presentazione M.G. Amadasi Guzzo - Encore hypothses Karatepe L. Barbato - Esarhaddon, Naid-Marduk e gli btu del Paese del Mare M.G. Biga - War and Peace in the Kingdom of Ebla (24 Century B.C.) in the First Years of Vizier Ibbi-zikir under the Reign of the Last King Iar-damu F. DAgostino - Due nuovi testi dal British Museum datati allepoca pi antica di Ur III P. Dardano - La veste della sera: echi di fraseologia indoeuropea in un rituale ittito-luvio G.F. Del Monte - Su alcune tecniche contabili delle amministrazioni di Nippur medio-babilonese F. Di Filippo - Two Tablets from the Vicinity of Emar F.M. Fales - The Jealous Superior (ABL 211) and the Term btu in NeoAssyrian Everyday Texts P. Fronzaroli - Les suffixes blates de la premire personne du duel M. Giorgieri - Osservazioni sulluso di accad. kubbutu e kubburu in EA 20:64-70 M. Liverani - The Pharaohs Body in the Amarna Letters P. Mander - The Mesopotamian Exorcist and his Ego M. Marazzi - Pratiche ordaliche nellAnatolia hittita G. Marchesi - The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia L. Mori - The City Gates at Emar. Reconsidering the Use of the Sumerograms K.GAL and K in Tablets found at Mesken Qadime P. Notizia - ulibar, Dudu(u)NI e la frontiera orientale F. Pomponio - Assiriologia e letteratura poliziesca: rapporti tra due nobili avventure intellettuali M. Ramazzotti - Ideografia ed estetica della statuaria Mesopotamica del III millennio a.C. D.F. Rosa - Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists: Geographical Implications M. Salvini - Contributo alla ricostruzione del monumento epigrafico degli Annali di Sarduri II, re dUrartu
th

3 7 23

39 59 75 85 105 117 129 137 147 177 197 231 249 269 293 309 327 343

C. Saporetti - Qualche nota dai testi di Enunna S. Seminara - Uno scriba che non conosca il Sumerico, come potr tradurre? I Proverbi bilingui: fra traduzione e reinterpretazione C. Simonetti - Note in margine ad alienazioni immobiliari det paleobabilonese G. Torri - The Scribal School of the Lower City of Hattua and the Beginning of the Career of Anuwanza, Court Dignitary and Lord of Nerik L. Verderame - Un nuovo documento di compravendita neo-sumerico P. Xella - Su alcuni termini fenici concernenti la tessitura (Materiali per il lessico fenicio - IV)

353 369 375

383 397 417

[Quaderni di Vicino Oriente V (2010), pp. 327-342]

MIDDLE ASSYRIAN GIN OFFERINGS LISTS: GEOGRAPHICAL IMPLICATIONS

Daniele Federico Rosa - Roma

1. INTRODUCTION The Middle Assyrian (MA) capital, then holy city, of Aur (modern Qalat erq) has been surveyed and excavated by German missions since the first part of the last century. Among the remarkable amount of documents found there, a particular archive1 was discovered in the temple of Aur. This included almost exclusively records compiled by a special office, the duty of which was to keep track of regular offerings, called gin (later gin), delivered to the temple by provinces2, and consisting in barley, honey or syrup3, sesame and fruit4. The great majority of the gin texts belongs to the MA period, and has been partially published in the Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte (MARV) series, by H. Freydank5. The lists seem to have been mostly compiled in a period spanning from the early 12th century BC (the earliest available documents can be dated to the reign of obscure kings: Aur-nrr III and Ellilkudurri-uur6) to the reign of Tiglath-Pileser I (1114-1076 BC). This offerings-system survived up to Neo-Assyrian (NA) times7, probably with minor changes in the materials delivered, and debatably with reduced importance. In order to keep record of deliveries received year by year, the scribes redacted lists including the names of the provinces (Assyrian putu)
1

2 3 4 5 6 7

The term archive is used here to indicate a complex of documents accumulated over the course of an organizations lifetime (specifically the office of the rb gin of the temple of Aur) that was clearly preserved for a certain time (cfr. Pedersn 1985, 43). See also Jakob 2003, 175-181. On dipu translated as syrup, see ibidem, 406 fn. 92. Postgate 1987, 136 fn. 10. Freydank 1976; 1982; 1994; Freydank - Feller 2004; 2005; 2006; 2008. See Freydank 1997; idem 2006, esp. 221-222. The gin system is attested up to Sargonid times: Postgate 1974, 214-216; Menzel 1981, 39-40 and 60; Pedersn 1986, 12-28 (esp. 14); Fales - Postgate 1992, xxxv-xxxvi; Postgate 1992, 251-252.

327

Daniele Federico Rosa

forwarding them, followed by the quantity of material(s) provided. The geographical reliability of these texts has been debated by scholars discussing the MA provincial system. E.F. Weidner8, who could only partially reconstruct the sequence, was doubtful; many years later, P. Machinist9 stated that if we exempt the last three entries (= Aur, putu eltu, putu apltu) as placed for reasons of special emphasis and summary the list actually followed a geographical order (East to West, across Assyria into the abur). Anyway, the rough East-to-West order of the first four entries seemed in fact broken by the fifth, the town of Idu, which was located at modern Ht on the far side of the Euphrates10. Moreover, it was not clear how reasons of special emphasis could lead someone to put some names somewhere in the middle of the list. Relying on the geographical accuracy of these records, K. Nashef11 postulated the existence of another Idu Im Norden, different from the Euphrates one; nevertheless, when reviewing his work, J.N. Postgate correctly observed that it is improbable that two Idus of such importance existed without being differentiated from one another12. For this and other reasons, Postgate discarded the use of MA lists for the reconstruction of historical geography; what is more, he considered them not founded on strictly geographical principles13. Anyway, recent localization of the Idu of MA lists at Satu Qala on the Lower Zab14 showed the substantial correctness of Nashefs suggestion. Meanwhile, a view somehow similar to Postgates one had been expressed by H. Freydank15, who, due to the fluctuating number of listed provinces through time, doubted the gin-offerings texts could be used to show the extent of the MA kingdom. Even though Postgates paper appeared almost 25 years ago as a quite brief note, it has been since then the main foundation of any survey of MA geography. Recently, K. Radner added little in her paper on MA and NA provinces16. This was of course due to the high quality of Postgates work, but also to the fact that the repetitive structure of province lists made further inquiries seems useless. Moreover, in the gin
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Weidner 1935-36, 13 fn. 87 and 21 fn. 148. Machinist 1982, 4. Postgate 1976; Stol 1979, 99; Russell 1985. Cfr 3. Nashef 1982,136. Postgate 1985. Postgate 1985, 98. On Postgates vision of MA provincial system and more, see also idem 1995. van Soldt 2008. Freydank 1997, 51 and 2006, 220. See also Llop 2007, 680. Radner 2006.

328

Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists

lists the name of the eponym is rarely preserved, so that it is often impossible to date them17. In addition, a high number of them is so heavily damaged that only fragments of toponyms are readable. For all these reasons, these texts have not been greatly considered by scholars interested in the reconstruction of ancient Mesopotamian topography. When taken into account, their apparent (or, to someone, evident) illogic character has prevented scholars from investigating them more deeply. Nonetheless, when we say that the product of an ancient society is or is not founded on logic principles, we must be careful to what principles are we referring to. Are we looking for what a 12th century BC Aur temple employee would have found logic, or are we trying to read lists according to principles we would use some 32 centuries later instead? If we had to record today all the provincial capitals forwarding their tribute to a center, we would in all probability list them in alphabetic order, or in a clockwise direction, or in a North-to-South sequence, and so on. All these perfectly logic principles would seem totally illogic (and probably unintelligible) to someone not using our alphabet, not knowing clocks, and not being used to see maps with the North at the top of them. Instead of searching for our own principles in the lists, then, we should better try to see if they were redacted on the basis of any principle, no matter how far from the one we would have chosen. In order to do so, it can be useful to confront a few lists in which the eponyms name is preserved (with one exception). A selection of them is presented in the featured table. In the first line, each list is given a number (1 to 6); the original MARV volume and text numbers follow; in the second and third ones, eponym names and relative reign18 are shown. Editions of lists follow; to the side of each toponym, numbers of original lines are indicated. For convenience reason, the last column on the right contains the list edited by Postgate19 - probably the best preserved and most recent20 known MA province list at all.

17 Sometimes texts, though datable, are broken in the most interesting part: e.g., see MARV

VI, 1, compiled at the time of Hayayu (or Hiyyu), who was eponym during the reign of Tiglath-Pileser I, cfr. Freydank 1991, 78-87 and 138; also Saporetti 1979, 154. 18 This is done after Freydank 1991. 19 Postgate 1985, 96-97. 20 It was compiled in Tiglath-Pileser Is penultimate regnal year. Cfr. Freydank 2006, 219220.

329

Daniele Federico Rosa

2. COMMENTARY It is evident that all lists are very similar to each other; the quest for a logic in their compositional process could then be considered concluded by making a simple assumption: the scribes had at their disposal a model list that they copied through time. I find this explanation unsatisfactory for at least one reason: it is true that, even if any proof is lacking, a model list could have existed, or better, scribes might simply have copied lists compiled in precedent years. However, even if a first list surely existed, it must well have been redacted according to some principle. How can this be sustained? First of all, an office that seems to have had purely practical aims must have kept its work well organized, and a randomly-composed list would not have helped. Furthermore, although very similar, lists are not exactly equal to each other. The remarkable fact is that changes in them (both additions and subtractions) do not lead us to think of an unsystematic sequence. First of all, toponyms that change places in the sequence through time (quite a few, indeed) do not alter their position in a remarkable way: they are always recorded in the same section instead21. Moreover, when new places are inserted in or subtracted from the list, this does not seem to have been done randomly. Nineveh (Ninua) is not ever-present, but when it appears in the sequence, it is always inserted in the central section of the document; the Upper Province (putu eltu) apparently takes the place of adikannu and (U)ukanu from a certain moment on (cfr. below); ailli and umela, when added, conclude the list; and so on. In addition, there are rarely minor changes in the lists (e.g., two toponyms usually written in consecutive lines that in one or a few cases switch places, or a place-name that just in one case is written one or two lines after its usual position, or similar) that could be explained with oversights of a scribe trying to remember a sequence that was logic to him. Admittedly, this is not enough to postulate the existence of an order laying beyond the redaction of lists here in analysis. I think some attention should be paid then to another administrative document composed in the eponymy of Liptnu who was probably in charge at the time of Ninurta-apil-ekur22, published by H. Freydank as MARV V, 64. As we read in line 1, this is a record of the
21 A similar system is attested in the Hellenotamiai tribute-lists redacted in 5th century BC

Athens according to a fixed sequence of five (later four) major topographical areas, inside which place-names were recorded. These areas were not listed in a way that we would find coherent nowadays: Ionia, Hellespont, Thrace, Caria and Aegean Islands. See Meritt - Wade-Gery - McGregor 1939; 1949-53; a summary is found in Guarducci 1969, 221-228. 22 Freydank 1991, 169.

330

Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists

missing sum of the gin offerings23 from a reduced number of places: (3) ta-i-du (4) a-ma-sa-ku (5) ku-li-i-na- (6) URUa-ur (7) u--du (8) aa-di-ka-nu (9) u-ka-nu. What is of particular interest here is that at the end of the tables these places are defined birte, fortresses24. This could be a hint on how we should understand this sequence of toponyms, which are grouped together (with a variation in the order: udu is the first name of the list) also in the above transcribed texts nn. 2-325. Furthermore, in certain texts the towns of adikannu and (U)ukan(n)u are apparently replaced by the Upper Province, so that a sequence udu, Tadu, Amasakku, Kuliina, Aur, putu eltu appears (nn. 5, 7 above26). So far, we only have seen gin-offerings documents, so that the absence of remarkable variants in the sequence could once again be explained with a model list that was copied through time. Nonetheless, we find almost the same sequence in other texts too. MARV V, 60, edited by J. Llop27, is a list of grinders deliveries to the temple of Aur. It consists of a list of 25 provinces, similar to the regular offerings texts ones. Lines 8 to 13 list as usual: udu, Tadu, Amasakku, Kuliina, Aur, putu eltu (then putu apltu, and so on). We get the impression, then, that the above mentioned sequence was well fixed in the minds of those performing a merely practical recording work in MA times Aur. The list must have made some sense to them. In order to understand it, let us make a step backwards to the term fortress which seems to give coherence to an otherwise apparently random sequence (the one including places from udu to Kuliina to Aur and to adikannu/(U)ukannu or the Upper Province, i.e. from the upper abur area to Assyria and then back to the middle abur). The term birtu, normally translated fortress, is not an administrative one like, e.g., alu or putu28. From various sources29 it seems particularly connected with borders, where a birtu is often found. Now, we have seen that all places listed in MARV V, 64 are defined like that. Should we put them all on a map, we would notice that, apart of the definition, they have something in common from a topographical point of view: even though their location is in some cases uncertain, we can be reasonably sure in affirming that they are at least in six cases out of seven the farthest reaches of the MA kingdom in the period
23 Ll. 1-2: [gi-n]a- LALME a li-me Ilip-ta-ni (2) LL E..GI a-za-am-ru (...). 24 L. 11: bi-ra-te. 25 The broken sequence of n. 1 could be integrated like this as well. 26 This is also the case of MARV V, 67, not edited here. 27 2007, 681-682. 28 Cfr. Jakob 2003, 14-25. 29 See CAD/B, s.v. birtu A, 2, 262.

331

Daniele Federico Rosa

under analysis. More detail is added in 3 below. If now we look back at the province-lists transcribed above and to the almost perfectly fixed sequence they express, and we keep in mind that places from udu to ukanu (or to the Upper Province) represent a coherent succession, or better a series of successions, we can assume that the entire list is formed by a series of strings as coherent as that. In the following paragraph, I will try to examine all toponyms included, in order to see if logical sequences can be isolated. 3. COHERENT SEQUENCES INSIDE THE MAIN ONE Part A: the borders of the MA kingdom (from Arbailu to Turan): (1) Arbailu, Kilizu, alau, Talmuu, Idu: the first five entries are ever-present in the gin- lists we know30. Arbailu and Kilizu have been identified with modern sites (respectively Arbl and Qar ammk). The territory corresponding to alau, that included Dr-arrukn (modern orsbd) in later times31, has not been identified with certainty, but must have extended somewhere between that city in the South and the source of the osr river in the North32. The location of Talmuu is uncertain too. On the basis of NA material, J. Reade has tentatively identified it with modern Gir-e-pan33, a solution that has been generally accepted by assyriologists34. In any case, it is clear that from the point of view of Aur the first four places named in the list represent the north-eastern border of Assyria. Moving eastwards, Kilizu and Arbailu were the last important Assyrian centres before the western reaches of the Zagros mountains, where hostile people lived. The plain of Rniya, right east of Arbailu, was probably the core of the land of Tummu35, attested from the time of Tiglath-Pileser I as part of Nairi. In earlier times, Shalmaneser I hinted at the area North of alau and Talmuu while listing his enemies: the land of Uruari extended from imme (i.e. the upper basin of the Lower Zab) in the East to the land of the Qut in the West; on its turn and in that context equal to later
30 Text 3 = MARV VI, 82 is broken in its first lines; however I think it can be well

integrated with this sequence.


31 Radner 2006, 54. 32 The southernmost location is that by Forrer 1920 (around Tell Abbsyah); the

northernmost is the one by Reade 1978a, pp. 52-53 (North of the ebel Baaiqa-ebel Maqlb), followed by Parpola - Porter 2001, map 4; Postgate (1985, 97), chooses an intermediate solution. 33 Reade 1978b, 159-160. 34 Postgate 1995, 11; Parpola - Porter 2001, map 4; Radner 2006, 48. 35 Liverani 1992a, 19-20.

332

Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists

Uqumenu or Qume/anu, which laid in the area around modern Gefe. As seen above, Idu has recently been located at Satu Qala and must therefore be considered part of this group of places bordering Assyria in the east. (2) Katmuu: at least in MA times, the core of Katmuu seems to have been in the eastern part of the r-Abdn36. Even if these mountains were frequently crossed by MA kings during their expeditions, no enduring conquest was obtained there, and Katmuu was the only land to be added to the borders of Assyria37. It was, then, the northernmost province of the period, and this is why it was included at this point of the list. (3) udu, Taidu, Amasakku, Kuliina, Aur, adikannu, Uukannu; putu eltu, putu apltu: this is the sequence of fortresses of MARV V, 64 we have already seen above, plus the Upper Province (that seems to be interchangeable with the two preceding toponyms, see below) and the Lower Province (which I would consider linked with the Upper one, see below). In this case, we are in my opinion facing a sequence of sequences. This can be proofed not only on the basis of our, not deep indeed, knowledge of ancient topography of Upper Mesopotamia38, but also thanks to the gin-offerings lists themselves. More precisely, Taidu, Amasakku and Kuliina represent a sequence in themselves: even if their location is (with different degrees) still uncertain39, we know these places laid probably in the abur triangle; moreover, their presence and position in the list seem independent from those of udu: they are in fact mentioned before Assur and udu in MARV V, 64; they are absent in our text n. 4 where udu is present and they are listed in text n. 640 where udu is absent. With regard to its
36 On the MA situation of Katmuu, see Nashef 1982, 165-166 with further bibliography;

37 38

39

40

see also the maps (I-III) in Salvini 1967, and p. 88 fn. 28 there. In NA times, Katmuu seems to have extended southwards: see Liverani 1992a, 29-30; now Radner 2006 p. 53 (s. auppa and Till). Grayson 1991, A.0.87.1, iii 30-31. While I am writing, the long-awaited volume Entre deux fleuves - Untersuchungen zur historischen Geographie Obermesopotamiens im 2. Jahrtausend, edited by E. CancikKirschbaum and N. Ziegler, is still in press. The best candidate for Taidu seems to be Tell amdiya, see Eichler et alii 1985; Wfler 1994. Kuliina has good chances to be equal to modern Tell Amuda: Nashef 1982, 171; Machinist 1982, 36; Postgate 1985, 98. Amasakku cannot be located with certainty, even if we know from royal inscriptions that it was part of anigalbat, and comparison with NA Masaka (Tell Muammad? Cfr. Tall al-Hamidiya I, p. 49) seems to confirm its location in the abur triangle. Ll. 8-10: the sign after URU seems to be part of TA more than U, and there is room for two more signs, so that line 8 could be reconstructed as URUta-[i-du].

333

Daniele Federico Rosa

location, apart of its comparison with the uduu of Adad-nrr I41, no serious proposal can be made. Explaining the presence of Aur at this point in the list is not easy, and it is even harder when we find out that Libbi-li, i.e. Aur itself, is mentioned once again a few lines under. The double administrative character of the MA capital (with a putu of Aur distinct from the inner city) could be the explanation42; Aur was then included here because its territory was one of the limits of the MA kingdom (no other important centre is known West of the Tigris and South of Aur43). Lastly, I would keep adikannu and Uukannu apart. While adikannu has been identified with certainity with Tell Aaa, some doubts remain on the yet feasible identification of Uukannu with NA Sikanu and modern Tell Feerye, located near the source of the river abur. Nonetheless, in case this location is accepted, we are facing a couple of places unified by their position along the abur. The geographical principle seems here to prevail on the political one: Uukannu is in fact known from royal inscriptions to have been in anigalbat44, like toponyms from udu to Kuliina; nonetheless, it is not associated with them, but with adikannu, the other province on the abur explicitly mentioned here. As seen above, it has been noted that the last two toponyms are apparently replaced in certain lists by the Upper Province. This had led S. Jakob to argue that the Upper Province consisted in fact in the territory of these two centres45. The problem in identifying this putu, as well as its Lower counterpart, is not easy solved. Adjectives like upper and lower are almost meaningless if we do not perfectly know the cultural horizon, or merely the point of view, of people using them. In lack of decisive proof, then, any proposal in locating the two unnamed MA provinces had at least some chances to be right46. However, we now have two texts both dated to the same eponymy (MARV V, 64 and 67) that give respectively adikannu - ukanu47 and putu eltu48 after Aur. I think another argument can be brought to sustain the correctness of Prof. Freydanks assumption: as he knows well, the Lower
41 Grayson 1987, A.0.76.1, 1-17, and A.0.76.3, 15-31. 42 Postgate 1985, 98. 43 No Assyrian province is found South of Assur until the atallu of Assurbanipal in the

Wdi arar area: cfr. Liverani 1992b.


44 Harrak 1987. 45 Jakob 2003, 12. 46 Postgate (1985, 98-99) thinks the two names refer to MA provinces known from other

sources but unnamed here.


47 MARV V, 64, ll. 8-9. 48 MARV V, 67, l. 12.

334

Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists

abur was firmly under Assyrian control in the MA period, with a province governor, among others, residing in Dr-Katlimmu (modern Tell amad)49. The area seems to be nonetheless left unmentioned in the lists here in analysis. However, if the upper and middle abur (in reverse order) area, perceived as a unique territory by lists-redactors, are represented first by their major towns, and then by the diction Upper Province, we suspect that the Lower Province was nothing but the lower course of the same river (let us say, the area administrated by the governor of Dr-Katlimmu). The adjectives upper and lower could then depend here on the position of the putu on the river course. Summing up what written above, sequence 4 is maybe better intended as 4.1: provinces laying in the central part of the abur triangle (listed as: udu, Taidu, Amasakku, Kuliina; among these, udu is maybe differentiated from the other three); 4.2: Aur. We assume here that the territory of the capitals province more than the city itself is intended. This is probably connected with the birtu character of Aur; 4.3: provinces laying along the course of the abur, i.e. the Upper Province (South to North adikannu and Uukannu) and the Lower Province (DrKatlimmu-Qatnu?). (5) Turan: on the basis of MA material50 combined with evidence from the Nuzi texts51, Turan can be located with reasonable certainty at Tell Mz, on the southern side of the Lower Zab. Even if other important Assyrian centres like Arrapa and Arzuina52 are known in that area, Turan seems nonetheless quite isolated in the regular-offerings lists. Turan concludes the first part of the complete list, that was dedicated to the borders of the MA kingdom. Part B: The inner territory of the kingdom The rest of the list is harder to divide into coherent sequences. On the one hand, it encloses some toponyms which usually represent part of the rare fixed point in the reconstruction of Assyrian topography: this is the case of course of the future NA capitals, Nineveh (Ninua) and Kalu, and of towns like Apku and im/banbe both identified with certainty. On the other, the order according to which place-names are listed in the second part of the list
49 Rllig 1978, 428-430. A good, recent summary is that by Khne 2000. For more detail,

see idem 1991.


50 Nashef 1982, 266 with bibliography. 51 See Fincke 1993, 305-309 (s.v. Tura). 52 Arzuina is already attested as a province in the MA period.

335

Daniele Federico Rosa

seems more flexible than the one used in the first. Actually, one could recognize two major sub-groups inside which interchanges of toponyms take place: the first includes Addarik, Apku, Karana, Kurda, Libbi-li and Ninua. When present, Libbi-li opens the list followed by Ninua; otherwise, Ninua takes its place right after Turan. Other toponyms are listed quite freely. The second group includes iutu, usananu, Kalu, ailli, im/banbe, imu and umela. This is opened alternatively by im/banbe and iutu; the order in which toponyms are given seems slightly more rigid than the one used for the first group. After the first two place-names, the sequence is imu, usananu (absent in nn. 1-2), Kalu, ailli, umela (the last two are not ever-present). Due to the low number of toponyms that have been identified with a modern site unquestionably or with a few doubts, it is hard to determine the reason why the second part of the list, which seems to concern provinces enclosed within the boundaries listed in part A, is organized like that. In any case, a few conjectures can be made, anyway. Part B of the list is opened by Aur as Libbi-li. As we have seen, the double mention of the capital city of Assyria must have depended on some administrative diversification. In this case, I think we can assume that it opens the list of inner provinces for hierarchical (or merely natural) reasons. There follow the provinces belonging to what we have called the first group. Among these, Ninua and Apku are well known. On the basis of Old-Babylonian evidence, we know that both Kurda and Addarik can be sought somewhere between the eastern affluents of the abur in the East and the area of Ninua itself in the West53. Karana laid not far South of Apku in the ebel Sinr region54. Therefore, we have another group of toponyms which probably have a common geographical connotation. The other group is the hardest to discuss, since apart of im/banbe and Kalu we have no fixed points to rely on. Both these places were in the heartland of Assyria, well inside the north-eastern border. Quite the same is sustainable for imu on the basis of NA sources55, while recently ailli has been proven to be different from similar place-names laying elsewhere56. umela is attested at Nuzi (the geographical horizon of which could well correspond to the one we are hinting at)57. We suspect then that that all place-names mentioned in this sub-group belong to a precise area of inner Assyria. If truth be told, we
53 On Kurda, cfr. Groneberg 1980, 173. On Addarik, see Dalley 1976, 4 fn. 25. On the

above mentioned location, cfr. Postgate 1985, 99.


54 Nashef 1982, 151 with bibliography. 55 Postgate 1985, 99; 1995, 11; Radner 2006, 47-48. 56 Llop - George 2001-02, 16-17 fn. 23. 57 Fincke 1993, 262.

336

Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists

have a couple of documents that seem to contradict the possibility of dividing the second part of the whole list into minor sub-parts: our text n. 3 gives Kalu after Apku and usananu, and the above-mentioned MARV V, 60, though very fragmentary, mixes places of what we conjecturally have identified as sub-groups of part B. Anyway, there are few doubts in my opinion that all toponyms listed after Turan were enclosed in the broad circle drawn by previously recorded provinces. 4. CONCLUDING REMARKS In front of the gin lists, some questions could be raised: are they useful to our knowledge of ancient topography, i.e. were they composed according to geographical principles or not? and, do they give us a complete repertory of MA provinces? We have seen that the lists were actually compiled on the basis of a principle that I would define geographic. Provinces laying on the borders of the kingdom are listed first, in the order: East; South (beyond the Euphrates); North; West (abur triangle); South (between Tigris and Euphrates); West (course of the abur); there follow provinces enclosed in these boundaries, with the Inner City of Aur at the top of them, perhaps divided into two main groups (western and eastern). Why the scribes did use this order, we do not know; its constant use shows that it must have made sense to them anyway. The enclosing of a certain place in a determined group, then, gives us a general idea about its location. However, various other sources inform us that not all known MA provinces are included in the regular offerings records. Inner provinces, like Isna and Nmed-Itar, do not appear were we would expect them. The ones laying beyond the far side of the Lower Zab, like Arrapa and Arzuina, were probably not yet under firm Assyrian control when the lists were redacted. In any case, the absence of certain places could simply mean that not all provinces forwarded regular offerings to the central temple of the capital town (exemptions for particular reasons are attested in the NA period). Being purely functional documents, the lists analysed in this paper give practically no details on the cult of the Assyrian major god apart of naming all materials delivered; I hope this short study can help at least to shed some light on the MA geographical conceptions. The making of this paper would have not been possible without the constant and precious advice of Prof. Mario Liverani, who also edited and improved the text, Eva Cancik-Kirschbaum and Johannes Renger, who both helped me in the early stages of my research, and Jaume Llop, who gave me priceless suggestions and patiently reviewed my transcriptions. Prof. Wilfred van Soldt kindly provided me with his paper on Idu. I would also like to

337

Daniele Federico Rosa

thank Ms Valentina Porretta for helping me in finding out bibliographical reference on the Athenian tribute lists, and Ms Francesca Pajno for drawing the map.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
MARV V = FREYDANK - FELLER 2004 MARV VI = FREYDANK - FELLER 2005. DALLEY, S. 1976 The Old Babylonian Tablets from Tell al Rimah, London 1976. EICHLER, S. ET AL. 1985 Tall al-Hamidiya 1. Vorbericht 1984 (OBO Series Archaeologica 4), Freiburg 1985. FALES, F. M. - POSTGATE, N. 1992 Imperial Administrative Records, I (SAA VII), Helsinki 1992. FINCKE, J. 1993 Die Orts- und Gewssernamen der Nuzi-Texte (RGTC 10), Wiesbaden 1993. FORRER, E. 1920 Die Provinzeinteilung des assyrischen Reiches, Leipzig 1920. FREYDANK, H. 1976 Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte (VS 19), Berlin 1976. 1982 Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, II (VS 21), Berlin 1982. 1991 Beitrge zur mittelassyrischen Chronologie und Geschichte (SGKAO 21), Berlin 1991. 1994 Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, III (WVDOG 92), Berlin 1994. 1997 Mittelassyrische Opferlisten aus Assur: WAETZOLDT, H. HAUPTMANN, H. (eds), Assyrien im Wandel der Zeiten, XXXIXe RAI (HSAO 6), Heidelberg 1997, pp. 47-52. 2006 Anmerkungen zu mittelassyrischen Texten. 5: AoF 33/2 (2006), pp. 215-222. FREYDANK, H. - FELLER, B. 2004 Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, V (WVDOG 106), Saarbrcken 2004. 2005 Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, VI (WVDOG 109), Saarwellingen 2005. 2006 Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, VII (WVDOG 111), Saarwellingen 2006.

338

Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists

Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, VIII (WVDOG 119), Saarwellingen 2008. GRAYSON, A.K. 1987 Assyrian Rulers of the Third and Second Millennia BC (to 1115 BC) (RIMA 1), Toronto-Buffalo-London 1987. 1991 Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC, I (1114-859 BC) (RIMA 2), Toronto-Buffalo-London 1991. GRONEBERG, B. 1980 Die Orts und Gewssernamen der altbabylonischen Zeit (RGTC 3), Wiesbaden 1980. GUARDUCCI, M. 1969 Epigrafia Greca II, Roma 1969. HARRAK, A. 1987 Assyria and Hanigalbat, Hildesheim-New York 1987. JAKOB, S. 2003 Mittelassyrische Verwaltung und Sozialstruktur: Untersuchungen (CM 29), Leiden-Boston 2003. KHNE, H. 1991 Die rezente Umwelt von Tall eh Hamad und Daten zur Umweltrekonstruktion der Assyrischen Stadt Dur-Katlimmu (BATSH 1), Berlin 1991. 2000 Dur-Katlimmu and the Middle-Assyrian Empire: ROUAULT, O. WFLER, M. (eds), La Djzir et l'Euphrate syriens de la protohistoire la fin du second millnaire av. J.-C. (Subartu VII), Turnhout 2000, pp. 271-277. LIVERANI, M. 1992a Studies on the Annals of Ashurnasirpal II, 2: Topographical Analysis (QGS 4), Roma 1992. 1992b Raappu and atallu: SAAB 6 (1992), pp. 35-40. LLOP, J. 2007 Review of FREYDANK-FELLER: BiOr 44 (2007), pp. 677-683. LLOP, J. - GEORGE, A.W. 2001-02 Die babylonisch-assyrischen Beziehungen und die innere Lage Assyriens in der Zeit der Auseinandersetzung zwischen Ninurtatukulti-Aur und Mutakkil-Nusku nach neuen keilschriftlichen Quellen: AfO 48/49 (2001-02), pp. 1-23. MACHINIST, P. 1982 Provincial Governance in Middle Assyria and Some New Texts from Yale: Assur 3/2 (1982), pp. 1-37. MENZEL, B. 1981 Assyrische Tempel, I, Rome 1981. MERRITT, D. - WADE-GERY, H.TH. - MCGREGOR, M.F. 1939 The Athenian Tribute Lists, I, Cambridge 1939. 1949-53 The Athenian Tribute Lists, II-IV, Princeton 1949-1953.

2008

339

Daniele Federico Rosa

Die Orts- und Gewssernamen der mittelbabylonischen und mittelassyrischen Zeit (RGTC 5), Wiesbaden 1982. PARPOLA, S. - PORTER, M. 2001 The Helsinki Atlas of the Near East in the Neo-Assyrian Period, Helsinki 2001. PEDERSN, O. 1985 Archives and Libraries in the City of Assur, I, Uppsala 1986. POSTGATE, J.N. 1974 Taxation and Conscription in the Assyrian Empire, Rome 1974 1976 Idu: RlA 5/1-2 (1976), p. 33. 1985 review of NASHEF 1982: AfO 32 (1985), pp. 95-101. 1987 Notes on Fruit in Cuneiform Sources: BSA 3 (1987), pp. 115-144. 1992 The Land of Assur and the Yoke of Assur: WA 23/3 (1992), pp. 247263. 1995 Assyria: the Home Provinces: LIVERANI, M. (ed.), Neo-Assyrian Geography (QGS 5), Roma 1995, pp. 1-17. RADNER, K. 2006 Provinz: C. Assyrien: RlA 11 (2006), pp. 42-68. READE, J. 1978a Studies in Assyrian Geography, I: RA 72 (1978), pp. 47-72. 1978b Studies in Assyrian Geography, II: RA 72 (1978), pp. 157-180. RLLIG, W. 1978 Dur Katlimmu: Or NS 47 (1978), pp. 419-430. RUSSELL, H.F. 1985 The Historical Geography of the Euphrates and abur According to Middle and Neo-Assyrian Sources: Iraq 47 (1985), pp. 57-74. SALVINI, M. 1967 Nairi e Ur(u)ari, Roma 1967. SAPORETTI, C. 1979 Gli eponimi medio-assiri (BM 9), Malibu 1979. STOL, M. 1979 On Trees, Mountains, and Milestones in the Ancient Near East, Leiden 1979. VAN SOLDT, W. 2008 The localization of Idu: NABU 2008/55. WFLER, M. 1994 Taddum, Tdu und Taidu(m)/Tdum: CALMEYER, P. et al. (eds), Festschrift fr Barthel Hrouda zum 65. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden 1994, pp. 293-302. WEIDNER, E.F. 1935-36 Aus den Tagen eines assyrischen Schattenknigs: AfO 10 (1935-36), pp. 1-53.

NASHEF, K. 1982

340

Middle Assyrian gin Offerings Lists

341

Tab. 1

Daniele Federico Rosa

Fig. 1: The Middle Assyrian Kingdom as depicted in the regular offering lists from the temple of Assur.

342

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen