In the Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions we find accounts of the past that are inserted in the form of a relative clause, that function to embellish the king's image. In this paper I discuss how the king is represented by dealing with the accounts of the past in the narrations of the campaigns.
　In the Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions, accounts of the past often refer to the deeds of the king's predecessors. The king emphasizes his heroic priority by stating that no previous king had accomplished a certain achievement that he had （the so-called Übertreffungsmethaphorik）. For example, the king has marched in regions that none of his forefathers had set foot in and has subjugated enemies who had threatened Assyrian territory or foreign rulers who had been unsubmissive since early times. These motifs depict the king as a capable military leader （a conqueror and protector of the land）, the traditional royal portrait that goes back to the Middle Assyrian period. Moreover, a reference to the voluntary surrender of a previously unsubmissive ruler from a distant place highlights the might of a king who overwhelms without the need to do anything. The comparison to the previous kings does not always emphasize his heroic priority. By referring to the faults of his predecessors, the account represents the king as a true king and legitimates his kingship.
　However, from Sargon on, accounts about the past without the Übertreffungsmethaphorik appear. The most prominent theme is the king's favor to his vassals, especially his appointing them as rulers and guaranteeing them their positions. This theme highlights a new aspect of the king, that of benefactor. The expansion of Assyria from the time of Tiglath-pileser III caused tensions with the neighboring great powers. In this situation, the king treated the vassal states at the periphery more favorably than before in order to keep their loyalty. This led to the introduction of representing the ruler as a warm-hearted king.

抄録全体を表示

This paper discusses how the accounts of rebellion in Assyrian royal inscriptions were described and manipulated, taking the Annals of Ashurnasirpal II as an example.

　Accounts that deal with rebellions can be divided into two types : 1） those where the suppression of the rebellion is clearly mentioned, and 2） those where a punitive expedition is presented in a way to suggest that the military activity is unrelated to a rebellion. Those of the first type present putting down rebellious acts that disturb the world order as the reason for the campaign. By describing those acts the accounts put enemy in the wrong and justify the military activity of the king.

　Those of the second type, where the rebellion is concealed, include not only accounts of unsuccessful punitive expeditions, but also those of campaigns that fulfilled their aim. A number of rebellions in the same region, even if the king subjugated them each time, might expose the incompetency of the king and the fragility of his rule. Since this does not lend itself to royal praise, the accounts describe only the last rebellion in a certain region as such.

　The failure to mention the rebellion in the account was not merely intended to cover up an unfavorable fact, but was also utilized to glorify a royal deed. If a description of the rebellion is left out of an account, it is indistinguishable from the account of a campaign against a foreign land. The punitive expedition is thus described as if it was a military activity against an unsubmissive ruler. In particular, through first hiding and then mentioning rebellions, the suppression of repeated rebellions in the same region is transformed into the conquest of "unsubmissive" land and the stabilization of the kings rule through the elimination of the rebel.

抄録全体を表示

The city of Ḫarrān in northern Syria, the northernmost part of Mesopotamia, has a history of more than 3,000 years, extending from the 3^rd millennium BCE to the 13^th century CE. Ḫarrān has long been famous as a religious center of the worship of the moon god Sîn, though he may have originated from the moon god Nanna/Sîn of the Sumerian city Ur. Sîn was politically and religiously developed the most during the Neo-Assyrian Era. Therefore, in order to explore his essence, this paper analyzes the icons and the inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian steles related to him.

During the Neo-Assyrian Era, Ḫarrān was in the realm of the Aramaeans. The Assyrian Empire used Sîn of Ḫarrān for its own western expansion policy. Examination of the steles engraved with the crescent moon, the symbol of Sîn of Ḫarrān, reveals that this god was the guarantor of boundaries and had the character of a war god and was incorporated into the Assyrian pantheon. Furthermore, from the distribution of the excavated steles, it is presumed that his original range of influence extended to the whole of northwestern Syria. It is probable that, due to the activities of the Aramaeans and the expansion policy of Assyrian Empire, his influence extended even to present-day Palestine and Jordan.

In the Aramaean realm of the western territory of the Assyrian Empire, Sîn of Ḫarrān became the guardian god of Assyria’s western expansion policy and possessed overwhelming authority as a guarantor and maintainer of agreements between nations. The steles related to Sîn of Ḫarrān in the Neo-Assyrian Era were the products of this complex view of religion. Eventually, the authority of Sîn of Ḫarrān led to Sîn’s being conceived as the national god by Nabonidus, the last king of the Neo-Babylonian Empire.

抄録全体を表示

The 2005 excavation at Tell Taban (ancient Tabetu), located in the Middle Habur region, brought to light a Middle Assyrian archive which documents the administration of the local palace. This paper offers a preliminary report on this archive as well as a study of the political status of the city in the Middle Assyrian period on the basis of the new material. The cuneiform texts constituting the archive were written during the mid 13^th and early 12^th centuries B.C.E. The archive reveals that the city had an unusual political position within Assyria: the city was subject to Assyrian rule, but retained a privileged position as a local kingdom, differing from other provinces (pahutu) in many respects. First of all the city was governed not by a governor (bel pahete) but local rulers, who bore the title “king of the land of Mari” (šar mat Mari) and formed a local dynasty at least from the mid 13^th to the early 11^th centuries B.C.E. It seems very probable that this position was acknowledged in the Assyrian capital, the city of ššur. There is a possibility that the local dynasty was an offshoot of the Assyrian royal family. The geographical name “the land of Mari” in the titles of the local rulers, reminiscent of the city of Mari in the 3^rd and early 2^nd millennia B.C.E., seems to derive from a local tradition originating in the period when the city of Tabetu was ruled by the city of Mari and its successor, the city of Terqa, in the 18^th century B.C.E.

抄録全体を表示

Das berühmte Relief Assurnasirpals II. im Thronsaal des Nordwest-Palastes zu Kalhu, das hinter dem Thron angebracht war, besteht aus folgenden Bestandteilen: geflügelte Sonne, darunter “Heiliger Baum, ” zwei sich gegenüber stehende Könige, hinter ihnen jeweils ein Genius. Die Interpretation sowohl der Einzelteile als auch der Gesamtdarstellung ist unter den Forschern strittig. Die geflügelte Sonne wird oft als Aššur, manchmal als Šamaš gedeutet. Kontrovers ist auch, warum der assyrische König zweimal dargestellt ist.
Unter den symbolischen Darstellungen der Götter in Assyrien gibt es genügend Belege dafür, daß die Hörnerkrone-in Babylonien Symbol des Anu und des Enlil-für Aššur, und die geflügelte Sonne für Šamaš steht. Das Symbol des Šamaš wird aber im Prinzip zusammen mit dem Symbol des Sîn (Mondsichel), manchmal auch mit den Symbolen der anderen Götter dargestellt. Den Erwähnungen des Šamaš im schriftlichen Material ist zu entnehmen, daß Šamaš im offiziellen assyrischen Pantheon keine höchstrangige Stellung zukam.
Eine Betrachtung der Siegel der hethitischen Großkönige dürfte für eine überzeugendere Deutung des fraglichen assyrischen Reliefs hilfreich sein. In der Mitte steht, in hieroglyphischen Zeichen, der Großkönigsname. Darüber schwebt eine geflügelte Sonne, die als Hieroglyphe “MAIESTAS” genannt wird und der keilschriftlichen Titulatur ^DUTU-, ŠI (“meine Sonne”) entspricht. Beiderseits des Großkönigsnamens steht das Determinativ für “Großkönig”. Die Wiederholung des Determinativs ist an sich überflüssig und einzig durch die symmetrische Anlage bedingt. Bei einem gemeinsamen Siegel des Großkönigs und der Großkönigin wird ein Determinativ für “Großkönig” durch das Determinativ für “Großkönigin” ersetzt.
Bereits seit der mittelassyrischen Zeit bestanden Beziehungen zwischen den Königshöfen von Assur und Hattusa. Zur Zeit Assurnasirpals II. erwachte erneut ein großes Interesse durch die Expansion nach Westen, besonders nach den “Hatti-Ländern”, die damals allerdings als Bezeichung der späthethitischen Städte Ostanatoliens und Nordsyriens galten.
In den Königsinschriften des Assurnasirpal II. ist Šamaš mit der Inthronisation dieses Königs in Verbindung gebracht: “Zu Beginn meines Königtums, am Anfang meiner Regierung, in dem Šamaš, der Richter der vier Weltgegenden, seinen wohltuenden Schirm über mich ausbreitete, in dem ich glorreich mich auf den Königsthron setzte, und er (=Šamaš) das Szepter zum beständigen Weiden der Menschen in meine Hand legte, ….”
Die Hervorhebung des Šamaš in diesem Zusammenhang geht wohl auf den Einfluß der hethitischen Königsideologie zurück. Diese Ausdrücke finden ihren bildlichen Niederschlag in dem oben erwähnten Relief im Thronsaal. Die geflügelte Sonne steht dort für Šamaš als den Schutzgott der Inthronisation und des Königstums. Dies gilt auch für die geflügelte Sonne, die alleinstehend als Objekt der verschiedenen Beter in der Glyptik dargesteilt ist.

抄録全体を表示

The Tayinat Archaeological Project of Toronto University, in 2009, excavated a large clay tablet along with 10 other tablets at Tell Tayinat, Turkey, which was identified as a copy of the 'Succession Oath Documents' issued by the Assyrian king Esarhaddon in 672 BC. These documents were known through the Nimrud version published by D. J. Wiseman in 1958, and reedited by myself in 1987. As J. Lauinger, who published the Tayinat version in 2012, pointed out, the tablets were excavated in situ at the sacred precinct in the center of the mound, and had been issued to the governor of Kunalia. Through this information, Tell Tayinat was definitely identified with the ancient city Kunalia.
　The present author considers §30 (ll. 353-359), now restored by the Tayinat version, to be especially important here. The mood of the verb in line 353 of the conditional clause has proven to be indicative, not subjunctive, as I had expected before. Indicative verbs are generally used in conditional clauses led by "if" (šumma). However, the usage of subjunctive verbs in conditional clauses had not yet been elucidated in any Akkadian grammars, which had regarded the subjunctive as an expression of an oath, and in translation, merely gave instructions to omit the word "if" and to render affirmative subjunctive verbs in the negative, and negative subjunctive verbs in the affirmative.
　However, almost all of the conditional clauses in these documents are in the second person plural, and are in fact, followed by curses as apodoses, mostly placed in the latter part of the documents. Only §57 is an utterance of an oath and consists of a conditional clause (protasis) in the first person plural subjunctive, and a directly following self-curse (apodosis).
　Sometimes, with verbs in the second person plural indicative and subjunctive are combined in the same conditional clause, as in the case of §30. In my view, the indicative is used to explain certain given conditions and the subjunctive affirmative ('if you should do ...') that follows, indicates something that the speaker assumes that 'you' ought not to do ; the negative subjunctive ('if you should not do ...') expresses something that 'you' ought to do.

抄録全体を表示