130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160
This fragment of a clay tablet preserves part of a report concerning the end of Šamaš-šuma-ukīn's rebellion, specifically the violent death of the king of Babylon and the capture of his principal supporters.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q003829/] of Ashurbanipal 130.
Sm 252 is a fragment that originates from the bottom left corner of a tablet. Parts of both the obverse and reverse and the left and bottom edges are preserved. Obv. 3´–8´ are written on the bottom edge of the tablet. Overall, the tablet's script is fairly dense.
For rev. 1–7, compare text no. 6 (Prism C) ix 21´–24´, text no. 7 (Prism Kh) viii 55´–63´, and text no. 8 (Prism G) viii 16´´´´b–22´´´´, although the present inscription adds the direct speech of Šamaš-šuma-ukīn to the account that reveals his treacherous plans for the Assyrians. The terminus post quem for the inscription is 648. However, given that the contents of the inscription more closely resemble that of the accounts from text nos. 6 (Prism C), 7 (Prism Kh), and 8 (Prism G), the date of composition for this text could be ca. 647–646 (or later).
A flake from one face of a clay tablet preserves parts of seven lines of text from an inscription of Ashurbanipal. What little remains of the tablet contains part of the narrative concerning the flight of Tammarītu with his family and other Elamite nobles from Indabibi to Ashurbanipal in ca. 651–650; see, for example, text no. 11 (Prism A) iv 21–27.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007539/] of Ashurbanipal 131.
Only a small portion of this inscription of Ashurbanipal survives. What remains of it is found on a fragment of a single-column clay tablet. The extant text contains part of a report on Ashurbanipal's third Elamite campaign. Specifically, the text records that the Elamite king Tammarītu sent troops to support Šamaš-šuma-ukīn, the king of Babylon, in his rebellion against Assyria, but his servant Indabibi rebelled against him and he was forced to flee to Assyria together with his family and other, still-loyal Elamite nobles.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007540/] of Ashurbanipal 132.
K 6358 preserves portions of a dozen lines from the middle section of one face of a single-column tablet. For the extant text, compare text no. 3 (Prism B) vii 32b–56, text no. 6 (Prism C) viii 6´´b–24´´, text no. 7 (Prism Kh) vii 20´b–49´, text no. 8 (Prism G) viii 11´´b–32´´, text no. 9 (Prism F) iii 13b–29a, and text no. 11 (Prism A) iv 4b–33a. Restorations to the inscription are taken generally from text no. 11 (Prism A), and the date of composition is possibly ca. 644–642 since the tablet's account contains elements only found in Prism A, which dates to that time.
This poorly-preserved, single-column clay tablet, of which only the right section of twenty lines on the reverse remains, is inscribed with a summary inscription of Ashurbanipal. The text, as far as it is preserved, contains parts of summary reports that describe two military expeditions against Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III) of Elam.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007541/] of Ashurbanipal 133.
The tablet duplicates text no. 197 rev. 9–26, although there is an important divergence between the two inscriptions. The gods mentioned in rev. 2–3, 6, 7, 14, and 17 differ significantly from those mentioned in the corresponding lines of text no. 197; specifically, the special mention of the god Nergal alongside the god Aššur has been removed (rev. 6, 14, and 17) or replaced by a more standard list of the great gods (rev. 2–3) or by a generic reference to "the gods" (rev. 7). This suggests that the present inscription may not have been composed for the god Nergal's temple at Tarbiṣu (compare also text no. 233), as is probably the case for text no. 197. Also, it is possible that exs. 3–7 of text no. 197 could instead be exemplars of the present inscription.
With respect to the contents of the tablet, for rev. 1–5 see text no. 6 (Prism C) ix 45´´–52´´ and text no. 7 (Prism Kh) ix 1–9, and for rev. 6–20, compare generally text no. 9 (Prism F) iii 27–35, 62–79, and iv 20–23 and text no. 11 (Prism A) iv 28–38, 112, v 11–35, and 66–70.
This summary inscription is inscribed on a single-column clay tablet, of which only a portion of a single face is preserved. The extant text contains parts of reports about Ashurbanipal's defeat of his older brother Šamaš-šuma-ukīn, the king of Babylon, and a conflict with the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III) that took place in 646.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007542/] of Ashurbanipal 134.
Sm 559+ preserves part of one face (possibly the reverse) of a single-column tablet, as well as small portions of its left and right edges. For lines 10´–21´, compare text no. 7 (Prism Kh) vii 37–38 and viii 60´–79´; and for lines 22´– 29´, compare text no. 10 (Prism T) iv 36–49a.
This poorly-preserved summary inscription of Ashurbanipal is known from a small fragment of a single-column clay tablet; only parts of thirteen lines survive. What little of the text is extant contains a heavily condensed overview of the events that took place in Elam. The fragment mentions Elamite royals who fled to Assyria after Teumman's violent accession to the throne, the decapitation of Teumman, the flight of Tammarītu from Indabibi after the latter seized the throne, and part of Ashurbanipal's conquest of Elamite cities during his campaign(s) against Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III).
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007543/] of Ashurbanipal 135.
79-7-8,176 preserves parts of both faces from the lower left portion of a broad single-column tablet, including a portion of its left and bottom edges. For obv. 3´–5´, see text no. 3 (Prism B) iv 72–77; for rev. 1, compare text no. 3 (Prism B) v 93–95, text no. 9 (Prism F) ii 61 and iii 58–59, and text no. 11 (Prism A) iii 36–37 and v 6b–8; for rev. 2a, see text no. 9 (Prism F) iii 12–13 and text no. 11 (Prism A) iv 3–4; for rev. 2b–3, compare text no. 9 (Prism F) iii 23–26 and text no. 11 (Prism A) iv 25–27; the cities included in rev. 4 are mentioned in text no. 11 (Prism A) iv 123, v 22, 48, and 49; and for rev. 6, see text no. 9 (Prism F) iv 63a and text no. 11 (Prism A) v 121a.
This clay tablet fragment contains parts of eighteen lines of a report concerning Ashurbanipal's first war against the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III), which included the conquest of the city Bīt-Imbî, a stronghold of Elam that was under the authority of Imbappa, the chief archer.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007544/] of Ashurbanipal 136.
K 2833+ preserves the upper left portion of one face of a tablet, including parts of the left and top edges of that face. Given that the first line of this face begins in the middle of a narrative account, this suggests it is in fact the reverse of the tablet. For information on the physical join of K 2833 with K 3085, see Borger, BiOr 16 (1959) p. 138, although this join had already been recognized by G. Smith (Assurbanipal p. 205) in 1871.
For the text's contents, compare text no. 7 (Prism Kh) ix 12–14 and 1´´–2´´; text no. 8 (Prism G) ix 29´´b–37´´, 1´´´–5´´´, and x 10´–13´; and text no. 9 (Prism F) iii 35–36 and 46–65. The exact date of composition cannot be determined since the inscription is not sufficiently preserved. However, its terminus post quem can be established as the conquest of Bît-Imbî, an event first narrated in text nos. 7 (Prism Kh) and 8 (Prism G), some exemplars of which are dated to the eponymy of Nabû-nādin-aḫi of Kār-Shalmaneser (646).
A poorly preserved fragment from the center of one face of a clay tablet bears a small part of an inscription of Ashurbanipal. Given that so little of the text's contents remain, it is difficult to establish the exact context of the narrative. T. Bauer (Asb. p. 68) believed that the inscription presented a heavily condensed summary of events that happened in Elam, with lines 2´–3´ and 5´ probably concerning Ummanigaš (Ḫumban-nikaš II), with line 6´ referring to the rebellion of Tammarītu and line 8´ being his flight from Indabibi, and finally with line 10´ starting an account of Ashurbanipal's first campaign against Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III). However, the only Elamite king who is explicitly named in the text is Ummanaldašu in line 10´. Moreover, Šamaš-šuma-ukīn is mentioned in line 5´. Until additional joins clarify the inscription's contents, Bauer's interpretation must be considered uncertain.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007545/] of Ashurbanipal 137.
A fragment from the middle of one face of a clay tablet preserves portions of nine lines from an inscription of Ashurbanipal. These lines of text appear to contain part of a report on his first war with the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III) in 647. For lines 2´–4´, compare text no. 11 (Prism A) v 73–76.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007546/] of Ashurbanipal 138.
This royal inscription of Ashurbanipal is inscribed on a badly-damaged clay tablet, and what little of it has survived contains part of an account of the fifth Elamite campaign, a military expedition that took place in 646.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007547/] of Ashurbanipal 139.
K 3097 is a fragment that preserves part of one face (possibly the reverse) of a tablet, including a portion of its right edge. The approximate date of composition is ca. 645–642 since the fragment duplicates materials from text no. 10 (Prism T) iv 37–51a and text no. 11 (Prism A) x 38–39.
A small fragment from the bottom portion of a clay tablet preserves parts of two faces, with a total of only five lines of text of an inscription of Ashurbanipal. What little remains on the fragment mentions statues and other items that were plundered from Susa, which likely make this part of a report about the king's second war against Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III) of Elam in 646.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007548/] of Ashurbanipal 140.
A clay tablet, of which only a small portion remains, preserves part of this inscription of Ashurbanipal. The extant text contains part of a unique, although poorly preserved, version of an account detailing the return of the goddess Nanāya's statue from Susa to her temple Eḫiliana in the Eanna complex at Uruk in 646.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007549/] of Ashurbanipal 141.
K 2638 preserves about a dozen lines from one face of a tablet, along with a portion of its left edge. For the contents of lines 5´–14´, compare generally the accounts of text no. 9 (Prism F) v 72–vi 11, text no. 10 (Prism T) v 9–32, and text no. 11 (Prism A) vi 107–124.
This summary inscription is known only from a poorly-preserved clay tablet. The extant text contains parts of a report describing the aftermath of Ashurbanipal's second campaign against the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III), including Paʾê's submission to Assyria, and a general statement that (vassal) rulers from far and wide brought tribute to Ashurbanipal in Nineveh and that their messengers regularly arrived in their countries with news of the king of Assyria's victories. Although the text is damaged, the final section seems to indicate that the foreign dignitaries demonstrated their submission to Ashurbanipal by apparently licking a certain threshold. The dedication of this threshold — to which the subscript in rev. 13´ likely refers — appears to be the principal motivation for the creation of the present inscription.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007550/] of Ashurbanipal 142.
K 4524+ is a fragment from the lower portion of broad single-column clay tablet that preserves part of the reverse. The join between the two pieces was recognized by R. Borger (BIWA p. 333). Regarding its contents, for rev. 5´–7´, compare text no. 11 (Prism A) vii 51–57, and for rev. 12´, compare text no. 11 (Prism A) x 68–69.
The middle portion of one face of a clay tablet preserves parts of eleven lines of text from a summary inscription of Ashurbanipal. The extant text contains the conclusion of an account of the king's second war against the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III) and the subsequent capture of that enemy king.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007551/] of Ashurbanipal 143.
Regarding the tablet's contents, for lines 1´–3´, compare text no. 11 (Prism A) vii 9–15 and text no. 194 v 24–29; and for lines 4´–6´, compare text no. 11 (Prism A) x 9–16. The translation is restored from these sources, but no attempt has been made to restore the transliteration due to the fact that the fragment does not preserve any edges that could be used to determine which contents belong in each line of text.
A fragment from one face of a clay tablet preserves portions of nine lines of text from an inscription of Ashurbanipal. The fragment establishes little context for its contents, but the inscription appears to be a summary text reporting on the king's conflict with the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III).
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007552/] of Ashurbanipal 144.
With regard to the extant text, for lines 1´–7´, compare text no. 9 (Prism F) iii 73–81 and v 63–64, and text no. 10 (Prism T) v 6–7; and for lines 8´–9´, compare text no. 11 (Prism A) x 11–15.
A clay tablet fragment preserves part of a copy or a draft/model of one of Ashurbanipal's inscriptions. The extant text contains a report about the punishment of three former Elamite kings (Tammarītu, Paʾe, and Ummanaldašu [Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III]) and the Arab leader (Uaiteʾ) in which the Assyrian king states that he had all four men hitched up like horses to his processional carriage and had them pull it to the main gateway of the Ištar temple in Nineveh; the building report; and the beginning of the king's advice to future rulers. The unusually terse and nondescript building account could suggest that the tablet's contents were a draft or model for an inscription rather than a copy of an actual text that had already been written on an object.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007553/] of Ashurbanipal 145.
K 6388 preserves parts of thirteen lines from the reverse of a single-column tablet. The account in rev. 4´–9´a generally follows that of text no. 11 (Prism A) x 17–39, but the tablet seems to omit clauses in rev. 4´–8´ that contain references to deities outside of the long, general list of gods — such as in rev. 2´ and 8´ — that appears often in Prism A. Thus, the tablet seems to omit ša ina e-mu-qí AN.ŠÁR u d15 EN.MEŠ-ia ú-šak-ni-šá a-na GIŠ.ŠUDUN-ia "whom I had made bow down to my yoke through the might of (the god) Aššur and the goddess Ištar, my lords" of Prism A x 19–20 and ina qí-bit AN.ŠÁR u d15 "by the command of (the god) Aššur and the goddess Ištar" of Prism A x 22, as well as omitting Prism A x 24–28 concerning Ashurbanipal's offering of sacrifices in Emašmaš before the goddess Mullissu. Rev. 9´a should include Prism A x 36b–39, but due to its damaged state and the fact that all of the Prism A material seems not to fit in the break, this line cannot be reconstructed with certainty (see the on-page note). For rev. 10´–11´, see text no. 11 (Prism A) x 108b–109. Since the tablet's contents relate to Prism A, its date of composition is ca. 644–642.
An unusual features of K 6388 is that it only contains the short statement ú-šá-áš-ṭir EDIN-uš-šú, "I had (this) inscribed upon it," in rev. 9´b for its building report. While this indicates that the text was originally intended to be written upon some type of object, possibly a stele (see, for example, text no. 220 [L4] iv 5´), such a terse statement is an anomaly given that the building report usually includes some information as to what type of object is being inscribed and where that object is to be deposited, set up, or dedicated. This information may have appeared in the next section with the king's exhortation to future rulers to restore the structure or object in question when it becomes old and is in need of repair, but this material is not preserved.
Alternatively, it is possible that the text was a draft or model, and thus the scribe included this line in the inscription to represent the expected building project or dedication that was unknown at the time of writing. Presumably, this section would have been filled out when the text was actually inscribed upon an object that was to be deposited in a structure's foundations or dedicated in a temple somewhere.
A small fragment preserves only a portion of the right side of one face of a clay tablet. The text belongs to the reign of Ashurbanipal given that it mentions Atta-metu, the chief archer of Ummanigaš (Ḫumban-nikaš II), who was one of the individuals sent to aid Šamaš-šuma-ukīn in his rebellion (see, for example, text no. 3 [Prism B] vii 6–19). The fragment also mentions the Gambulian city Ša-pī-Bēl.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007554/] of Ashurbanipal 146.
A fragment from the right side of one face of a clay tablet that preserves the end of only nine lines of text likely bears an inscription of Ashurbanipal. While its contents provide little context, the narrative appears to relate to the king's dealings with the Elamites.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007555/] of Ashurbanipal 147.
A flake from one face of a clay tablet belonging to Ashurbanipal's reign preserves parts of seven lines of text from the middle of the tablet. What little of its contents remains refers to a victory of the king, the craft of the deity Ninagal, and the goddesses Mullissu?, Ištar of Nineveh, and Šarrat-Kidmuri.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007556/] of Ashurbanipal 148.
A fragment originating from the middle of one face of a clay tablet preserves parts of only eleven lines of text from an inscription of Ashurbanipal. The text appears to mention the city Tīl-Tūba and the Elamite king Urtaku, although not enough of the narrative is preserved to establish the broader context. As also noted by T. Bauer (Asb. p. 67), the signs are sometimes poorly written, making an edition of the fragment difficult.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007557/] of Ashurbanipal 149.
Fragment K 6375 originates from the middle section of one face of a clay tablet and this fragment preserves a maximum of five signs from each of its extant sixteen lines. While no clear context for the narrative can be established, the inscription appears to deal with Ashurbanipal's conflicts with the Elamites; Tammarītu is specifically mentioned.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007558/] of Ashurbanipal 150.
This small fragment of a clay tablet preserves parts of fourteen lines of an inscription of Ashurbanipal. The text mentions the Elamite king Tammarītu and appears to include a speech of his to Ashurbanipal, presumably after Indabibi deposed him.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007559/] of Ashurbanipal 151.
A small flake from one face of a clay tablet preserves only a handful of signs from an inscription of Ashurbanipal. The extant text mentions the land Elam and the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III). For these limited contents, compare text no. 9 (Prism F) iv 49–54a and text no. 11 (Prism A) v 106–111.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007560/] of Ashurbanipal 152.
A tiny fragment from the top of one face of a clay tablet preserves parts of eight lines from one of Ashurbanipal's inscriptions. The text, what little of it remains, mentions Nabû-bēl-šumāti, a grandson of Marduk-apla-iddina II (Merodach-baladan), and the city Uzubia (Izibia), a royal city of the Manneans.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007561/] of Ashurbanipal 153.
This inscription of Ashurbanipal is known from two poorly-preserved clay tablets. The originals were to be inscribed upon objects, including an emblem (simtu) of the god Nusku, that were to be displayed in the Sîn-Šamaš temple at Nineveh. The text was composed after 646 since its historical narrative commemorates Ashurbanipal's fifth Elamite campaign and the return of the goddess Nanāya's statue to Eḫiliana at Uruk.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007562/] or the score [/rinap/scores/Q007562/] of Ashurbanipal 154.
The majority of the inscription is contained on ex. 1, a fragment that preserves both faces from the upper left portion of a single-column clay tablet, including parts of its top and left edges. In contrast, ex. 2 is a small fragment from the middle of a single-column clay tablet that only contains a portion of the concluding lines of the inscription. Unfortunately, too little of ex. 2 is preserved to be certain that it duplicates ex. 1; it is possible that the building account of ex. 2 reports on the construction of a cult object for the Sîn-Šamaš temple at Nineveh other than the simtu of Nusku that is recorded in ex. 1. The association with this temple in Nineveh is suggested by the list of gods in rev. 4 and 12 — namely Sîn and his consort Ningal, Šamaš and his consort Aya, and Nusku — and also by rev. 15 in which Ashurbanipal advises a future ruler not to erase the mention of his name, as well as his father and grandfather's names. All three Assyrian kings are known to have worked on this temple.
The master text is generally ex. 1, but rev. 11–13 contain a conflated text and rev. 14–16 are from ex. 2. The lineation follows ex. 1 up to rev. 13a, but given that there are no edges preserved on ex. 2, the exact lineation for lines 13b–16 is uncertain and some of the contents from the beginning of rev. 14 of the master text that are from ex. 2 could have appeared at the end of rev. 13 on ex. 1. Only a score of the overlapping lines of rev. 9–14 is presented on Oracc, and the few minor orthographic variants are given at the back of the book.
Restorations to the historical section of the inscription are based on text no. 10 (Prism T) iv 46–v 8 and text no. 9 (Prism F) v 72–vi 11, but there are important deviations from the prism inscriptions (see the on-page notes to obv. 1´, 2´, 4´ and 6´). Although both of these prism traditions report on Ashurbanipal's fifth Elamite campaign, the narrative context presented in obv. 1´–3´ generally follows that of text no. 10 (Prism T), while the language of obv. 4´–10´ more closely matches that of text no. 9 (Prism F).
Two tablet fragments bear an archival copy or draft of a dedicatory inscription of Ashurbanipal to the god Nabû. It is uncertain if the original was to be put on display in the Ezida ("True House") temple at Nineveh, Kalḫu, or Borsippa; such information would presumably have been supplied by the subscript, but it is not extant. The preserved portion of the inscription contains the end of the introductory section that included the king's genealogy, summary reports about the king's wars against the Elamites (namely, Teumman, Ummanigaš [Ḫumban-nikaš II], Tammarītu, Indabibi, and Ummanaldašu [Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III]) and on the return of Nanāya's statue to her shrine Ehiliana ("House of the Luxuriance of Heaven") in the Eanna complex at Uruk, a report on the fashioning and dedication of a reddish-gold knife (makkasu), along with appeals for blessings from the god Nabû for this work, and, lastly, a warning to future rulers not to alter the inscription or the inscribed object upon which it was written.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007563/] or the score [/rinap/scores/Q007563/] of Ashurbanipal 155.
Ex. 1 preserves both faces of a single-column, probably horizontal clay tablet, along with portions of its left, right, and bottom edges. In contrast, ex. 2 only preserves one face of a single-column tablet, with most of its left and part of its top edges also preserved. Ex. 1 supplies all of the obverse and rev. 1–14 for the master text, while ex. 2 provides the remainder of the inscription. The division between the obverse and reverse for the master text also follows ex. 1; the first line of the reverse from ex. 2 corresponds to rev. 4 of the master text.
A score for the overlapping lines of rev. 4–14 has been provided on Oracc, and the few minor orthographic variants between the two texts are presented at the back of the book.
As for restorations to the inscription's historical narrative, obv. 7´–8´ are reconstructed based on text no. 9 (Prism F) ii 67–71 and text no. 11 (Prism A) iii 44–49; obv. 9´–13´ are based on text no. 3 (Prism B) vi 86–vii 5 and 21; obv. 14´–rev. 6 are based on text no. 9 (Prism F) iii 10–26 and text no. 11 (Prism A) iv 1–12a and 23–27; and rev. 10–11 are based on text no. 9 (Prism F) iv 47b–50 and text no. 11 (Prism A) v 104–107.
Three clay tablet fragments bear an archival copy or draft of a dedicatory inscription of Ashurbanipal to the goddess Dilbat (the planet Venus). This deity is a manifestation of the goddess Ištar (see the god list AN: da-nu-um Tablet IV line 181 [Litke, God-Lists p. 161]) who is invoked alongside Ištar in the introduction of another Ashurbanipal inscription dedicated to that goddess (see text no. 200 obv. 1–6) and who appears in the list of gods in the prologue of a third Ashurbanipal inscription where the other manifestations of Ištar are typically named (see text no. 113 obv. 12 and the on-page note). The historical portion of the present text reports on Assyria's campaigns against the Arabs, not just for Ashurbanipal's reign, but also for the reigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon. The inscription appears to have been composed for the restoration of a gold-plated star that Esarhaddon had created after his dealings with the Arabs. Given that the date of Ashurbanipal's conflict with the Arabs (ca. 645–643) coincides with his work on Ištar's temple Emašmaš (ca. 645–638), as well as the rebuilding of her akītu-house (ca. 645) and the celebration of a New Year's festival in Nineveh, it is possible that this object was to be displayed in one of these two locations.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007564 /] of Ashurbanipal 156.
Ex. 1 preserves both faces from the left half of a clay tablet, including its left and part of its bottom edges. Ex. 2 preserves the center portion of the obverse of a tablet, including a very small segment of its top edge, as well as a few signs from the last line of the reverse. Ex. 3 is a small fragment that preserves a handful of lines from the center part of the bottom of the tablet.
The edition is a conflation of all three exemplars. The lineation of the master text follows ex. 1. Rev. 19–20 are two illegible lines at the end of ex. 1, and rev. 21 comes from the last and only line preserved on the reverse of ex. 2, which is probably part of the subscript of the inscription. The exact relationship between this final line of ex. 2 and the final two illegible lines of ex. 1 is unclear, especially since it is not known whether ex. 1 contained a colophon.
For the historical reports pertaining to Sennacherib's and Esarhaddon's reigns, see Grayson and Novotny, RINAP 3/1 p. 232 no. 35 lines 53´–56´ and 5´´–9´´ and Leichty, RINAP 4 pp. 19–20 no. 1 iv 17–31. For the details of Ashurbanipal's dealings with Uaiteʾ, see text no. 11 (Prism A) ix 53–114. Restorations to rev. 9–12 are taken from ix 105–111 of that prism inscription. For a discussion of the identity of Uaiteʾ in Ashurbanipal's inscriptions, see the on-page notes to text no. 11 (Prism A) vii 82–x 39; vii 91–101 and viii 1–14; ix 53; and ix 103–114.
A score of the overlapping lines in obv. 1–rev. 4 of the inscription is presented on Oracc, and the minor variants are given at the back of the book.
Two fragmentary tablets from Nineveh bear an archival copy or draft of a dedicatory inscription of Ashurbanipal to the goddess Ištar. Unfortunately, the mention of the type of object to be dedicated to Ištar is not preserved. The historical narrative of the inscription is also poorly preserved, although it appears to report on one of Ashurbanipal's Elamite campaigns. The extant language of the inscription might indicate that the text was a version of a summary report written after the capture and removal of Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III), the king of the land Elam, and Uaiteʾ, the king of the land of the Arabs, to Assyria (compare generally text no. 11 [Prism A] x 6–29, although especially 17–18 with obv. 9). Like the previous text, the date of the historical content of this inscription (ca. 645–643) coincides with Ashurbanipal's rebuilding and expansion of Emašmaš, the temple of Ištar (ca. 645–638), as well as the rebuilding of her New Year's temple (ca. 645) and the celebration of an akītu-festival in Nineveh, and this suggests that the present object was also to be displayed in Emašmaš or Ištar's akītu-house.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007565/] of Ashurbanipal 157.
Ex. 1 preserves the obverse of a horizontal tablet, including portions of its top, bottom, and right edges. This exemplar is the master text for lines 1–17, and it is also the basis for the division of lines between the obverse and reverse. Ex. 2 is a small fragment that preserves only a few signs from the last line of its obverse and a portion of the beginning seven lines on its reverse, including part of the tablet's bottom edge. Obv. 1´ of ex. 2, which is the last and only line preserved on that face, corresponds to obv. 15 of the master text, while rev. 1–7 of ex. 2 correspond to obv. 16–17 and rev. 1–5 of the master text.
No score of the inscription is provided on Oracc as there are no variants between the two exemplars.
K 15296 is a small fragment that only preserves part of five lines from one face of a clay tablet. What little of the text is extant makes clear that the fragment bears an inscription of Ashurbanipal; it refers to his defeat of the Elamite king Ummanaldašu (Ḫumban-ḫaltaš III), and then it mentions the three former Elamite kings Tammarītu, Paʾê, and Ummanaldašu together, just like in text no. 11 (Prism A) x 17. Although not much of the inscription is preserved, the presence of a second feminine singular pronominal suffix on tukulti "support" in line 5´ suggests that it was probably part of a dedicatory inscription to a goddess, possibly Ištar. If this is correct, the date of the historical content of this inscription (ca. 645–643) coincides with Ashurbanipal's work on the Ištar temple Emašmaš (ca. 645–638), as well as the rebuilding of her glazed-brick decorated akītu-house (ca. 645) and the celebration of a New Year's festival in the Assyrian capital Nineveh, and this might suggest that the present inscription (as with text nos. 156–157) was related to his work on one of these two temples.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007566/] of Ashurbanipal 158.
K 3136+ is a single-column clay tablet that has inscribed on it archival copies or drafts of two dedicatory inscriptions of Ashurbanipal to the goddess Bēlet-parṣē in Nineveh. The first inscription (this text) was to be inscribed on a wooden "excellent" throne (kussû arattû) that had been overlaid with silver alloy and displayed in the House of Succession, Ashurbanipal's royal residence at Nineveh.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007567/] of Ashurbanipal 159.
K 3136+ preserves both faces from the right half of a single-column horizontal tablet, including all of its right and portions of its top and bottom edges. The join with the fragment 82-3-23,60 was made by R. Borger (BIWA p. 332).
As stated in the introduction, this tablet contains two inscriptions to the goddess Bēlet-parṣē: the first inscription (this text) is written on the obverse and is followed by a horizontal ruling, while the second inscription (text no. 160) is written on the reverse, followed by a horizontal ruling and a subscript. The subscript of the tablet states that this is what is written upon the ⸢ma⸣-KI-[...], but because of damage to the tablet it is unclear what the relationship is between this object, the "excellent" (lit. "coming from Aratta") throne mentioned in the present inscription, and the object that would have been mentioned in text no. 160 but is no longer preserved.
The same clay tablet (K 3136+) that is inscribed with text no. 159 also bears an archival copy or draft of a second dedicatory inscription of Ashurbanipal to the goddess Bēlet-parṣē in Nineveh. This inscription is much shorter than the previous one and, unfortunately, the reference to the object that was to be dedicated to the goddess is no longer preserved.
Access the composite text [/rinap/rinap5/Q007568/] of Ashurbanipal 160.
See the commentary of text no. 159 for details.
Joshua Jeffers & Jamie Novotny
Joshua Jeffers & Jamie Novotny, 'Inscriptions on Tablets, Part 3 (text nos. 130-160)', RINAP 5: The Royal Inscriptions of Ashurbanipal, Aššur-etel-ilāni, and Sîn-šarra-iškun, The RINAP/RINAP 5 Project, a sub-project of MOCCI, 2022 [http://oracc.org/rinap/rinap5/rinap52textintroductions/tabletspart3texts130160/]