Generally speaking, Ashurbanipal had few problems in the Levant and he benefitted from Assyria's strong position in the region. The bond between Assyria and the west appears to have been strengthened during the reigns of his grandfather and father; for example, Esarhaddon claims that twenty-two kings supplied him with building materials while constructing the armory at Nineveh.[99] During the transition of power in 669, at least as far as the textual record is preserved, Levantine and Cypriot rulers maintained good relations with Assyria. The agreements that they had with Esarhaddon were honored after Ashurbanipal ascended the throne. The new king of Arwad, Yakīn-Lû, like his predecessor Mattan-Baʾal, swore loyalty to Assyria.[100] If Assyrian inscriptions are to be believed, Arwad may have sent troops and boats with the Assyrian army on its campaign to Egypt in 667.[102] After Yakīn-Lû died, Ashurbanipal arbitrated the succession and backed Azi-Baʾal as the next ruler.
In 669, tensions in Egypt had flared up. Esarhaddon was en route to invade the country for a third time when he fell ill and died. Because Ashurbanipal was involved in matters closer to home, Taharqa and his supporters took the opportunity to consolidate their autonomy over Egypt.[103] The Kushite pharaoh marched to Memphis, entered the city, and began ridding Egypt of Assyria and its influence, starting with the garrisons stationed there by Esarhaddon. Upon hearing the news,[104] Ashurbanipal dispatched a large army to Egypt. Along the way, numerous western vassals paid tribute and sent troops and equipment (including boats) to aid in the fight. Assyrian and Egyptian forces clashed at the city Kār-Bānītu. Assyria won the day and, when news of this reached Memphis, Taharqa and his supporters fled to Thebes and then further south, beyond the reach of Ashurbanipal's army.[105] The Assyrians once again occupied Memphis and dealt appropriately with anti-Assyrian conspirators.[106] Afterwards, some of the local rulers who had supported or conspired with Taharqa, Necho and Šarru-lū-dāri in particular, were taken to Assyria.[107] In the Assyrian capital, Ashurbanipal made Necho swear a new oath of fealty before he was permitted to return to his post.
When the exiled Taharqa died, his nephew Tanutamon, the son of Shabako, proclaimed himself pharaoh, secured Thebes and Heliopolis, and marched to Memphis.[108] When news of the attack reached Nineveh, Ashurbanipal dispatched his army to Memphis. As soon as the Assyrians set foot on Egyptian soil, Tanutamon is reported to have fled south, first to Thebes, then to Kipkipi. The former city, a bustling metropolis and major religious center, was captured and plundered; in addition to an abundance of gold and silver, two metal obelisks were sent to Nineveh as part of the vast spoils of war. Psammetichus I (Nabû-šēzibanni) was installed as ruler in Sais and Memphis; Tanutamon, however, remained the ruler of Kush and ruled from the south. After the sack of Thebes, Assyrian sources are silent on events in Egypt, apart from the fact that at some point Psammetichus had severed ties with Assyria and that the Lydian king Gyges (see below) had sent him troops.[109]
Tyre proved itself to be a pocket of anti-Assyrian resistance, as it had been in the time of Esarhaddon. During his first decade as king, Ashurbanipal set up outposts at every major access point to the city, including those by sea, thus depriving the important coastal city of food and fresh water.[110] Baʾalu, Tyre's ruler, eventually submitted. To ensure his loyalty, one of Baʾalu's daughters and several of his nieces were taken to Nineveh. In addition, Baʾalu voluntarily sent his son Yāḫi-Milki to the Assyrian capital. As a sign of good faith, Ashurbanipal dismantled the outposts and reopened the trade routes. The powerful island kingdom did not remain loyal for the duration of Ashurbanipal's reign. Sometime during his third decade on the throne, the Assyrian army was forced to return to the region. Ušû, the mainland portion of Tyre, was attacked and looted since the people of the city are said to have withheld payment.[111] Interestingly, the reigning king of Tyre is not mentioned so it is unclear what role he may have played in this incident.
Near the start of Ashurbanipal's reign, a mounted messenger from the remote kingdom of Lydia arrived in Nineveh. This caused a bit of a stir in the Assyrian court because no one could understand a word he was saying. After an interpreter was finally found, Ashurbanipal and his advisors could relax as the envoy bore good tidings and a request for aid: Gyges, a ruler of western Anatolia, needed Assyria's help defeating Cimmerian tribes.[112] Apparently, the Lydian ruler was told by the god Aššur in a dream that he would be victorious in battle and that vision inspired him to seek help from Ashurbanipal. The Assyrian king claims that Gyges successfully kept the Cimmerian threat at bay and that as a sign of their friendship he sent two captive tribal leaders to Nineveh.[113] Cordial relations between the countries lasted for some time. Then around 645, Lydia was overrun by the Cimmerians and Gyges was killed.[114] Because Gyges had sent aid to Egypt, which had cut ties with Assyria, Ashurbanipal presumably did not help his onetime ally. Gyges' son (Ardys) saw the writing on the wall and resumed good relations with Ashurbanipal, who took the opportunity to use the renewed alliance to hamper future Cimmerian intrusions into Assyria.
Following Ashurbanipal's successes in Egypt (the sack of Thebes) and at Tyre, several major Anatolian rulers sent offers of friendship to Assyria: Sanda-šarme of Ḫilakku (Cilicia) and Mugallu of Tabal (and probably also Melid) sent substantial audience gifts, as well as their daughters, to Nineveh.[115] In response, the Assyrian king imposed an annual payment of horses on the latter.[116] Mugallu, a man who had caused problems for Esarhaddon, appears to have remained loyal to the end of his life. His son (who may have been called Mussi), however, abandoned Assyria and allied himself with the Cimmerian chieftain Tugdammî (Lygdamis of Classical sources).[117] Tugdammî attempted to invade Assyria twice, but calamity befell him on both occasions. On the first occasion, his camp was engulfed in fire and, on the second, he died (from a remote magical attack carried out by Ashurbanial's inner circle); his son Sandakšatru succeeded him. Because no inscriptions are preserved for the last years of Ashurbanipal's reign, no further information is available on Ashurbanipal's dealings with Tabal and the Cimmerians.
For most of his reign, Ashurbanipal appears to have had relatively little trouble north and northeast of Assyria. Nevertheless, the Assyrian army is known to have marched to the region at least three times, all perhaps between his 9th (660) and 12th (657) regnal years.
Before Ashurbanipal became king, thekingdom of Mannea had made serious inroads into territory held by the Assyrians; many cities and towns were appropriated during that time, perhaps with aid from Cimmerian tribes. Towards the end of his first decade as king, Ashurbanipal decided to reverse Assyria's fortunes on its northeastern frontier. The Assyrian army, under the guidance of the king's generals, was sent out to deal with matters.[118] While encamped at Dūr-Aššur, the Mannean king Aḫšēri made a daring nighttime attack on Ashurbanipal's forces. The surprise did not go as planned: the Assyrians were victorious and pursued Aḫšēri and his supporters deep into the heart of Mannea. The Mannean king fled to the remote city Atrāna (or Ištatti according to one text). From that stronghold, he heard about the capture of his cities and fortresses, as well as the deaths of his loyal supporters. The Manneans were not pleased with the havoc the Assyrian had wreaked on their country and they rebelled: Aḫšēri was killed and his body dragged through the streets. A man by the name of Uallî took control. To make amends for the actions of his predecessor, he sent a large payment to Ashurbanipal, together with his son Erisinni and one of his daughters to ensure peace between the two kingdoms. The Assyrian king accepted the gifts, but demanded an additional tribute of thirty horses. The new Mannean ruler, as far as the textual record is preserved, appears to have agreed to Ashurbanipal's terms; Uallî seems to have remained loyal to Assyrian interests.
Some of the Median rulers who had once sworn fealty cast off the yoke of Assyrian domination and became aggressive; these actions may (or may not) have been inspired by their northern neighbor Mannea (when Aḫšēri was king). Assyrian troops captured the Median city-lords Birisḫatri, Sarati, and Pariḫi and carried them off to Nineveh.[119] Numerous settlements under their authority are reported to have been plundered. According to Ashurbanipal, it took a single campaign to reaffirm Assyrian dominance in the region.
The once-powerful kingdom of Urarṭu, for the most part, was on friendly terms with Ashurbanipal and two of its kings, Rusâ (III?) and Sarduri (III?), sent envoys, messages of goodwill, and gifts.[120] Apart from one incident with one of its governors, Assyria and Urarṭu had no problems with each other. Andaria, a man who is referred to as a governor or field-marshal, launched an attack on the Assyrian provinces of Uppumu and Kullimmeri, both of which had been established after Esarhaddon defeated Ik-Teššup of Šubria in 673; it is unknown whether this man acted on his own initiative or on the orders of the Urarṭian king. In a night battle, Assyrian troops reportedly defeated this Urarṭian and beheaded him. No further military actions are recorded against Assyria's northern neighbor.
99 Leichty, RINAP 4 pp. 23–24 no. 1 v 54–vi 1 and p. 33 no. 2 iv 54–v 12. Most of those same rulers aided Ashurbanipal in the construction of Eḫulḫul, the temple of the moon-god Sîn at Ḫarrān; see Novotny, SAACT 10 p. 84 no. 20 rev. 51–55.
100 Grayson, CAH2 3/2 p. 144; Ruby, PNA 1/1 p. 164 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.a.3'; and Tenney, PNA 2/1 pp. 488–489 sub Iakīn-Lû. Text no. 3 (Prism B) ii 63–72, text no. 4 (Prism D) ii 34'–46', text no. 6 (Prism C) iii 89'–103', text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iii 44'–4'', text no. 8 (Prism G) iii 15'–29', text no. 9 (Prism F) i 69–74, text no. 11 (Prism A) ii 63–67, and text no. 13 (Prism J) iii 9'–13'. Grayson's Arwad 1 is not included in text nos. 1 (Prism E₁) and 2 (Prism E₂). It is not known exactly when Yakīn-Lû replaced Mattan-Baʾal (a vassal of Esarhaddon). Because Ashurbanipal reports that Yakīn-Lû had submitted to Assyria for the first time during his reign, it is possible that Yakīn-Lû became king of Arwad sometime in 669 or 668.
101 Numerous inscriptions record that Levantine and Cypriot rulers helped the Assyrian army. Text nos. 6 (Prism C) and 7 (Prism Kh) record the names of the twenty-two kings who provided troops and boats; Iakīn-Lû of Arwad is among them. The reliability of the list has been called into question as it copies the list of rulers in Esarhaddon's inscriptions (see n. 99), but with a few minor alterations. If there is some truth to Ashurbanipal's claim, then Yakīn-Lû may have become an Assyrian vassal in 667, as A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] p. 230) has suggested.
102 Radner, PNA 1/1 p. 239 sub Azi-Baʾal 1. Text no. 3 (Prism B) ii 75–86a, text no. 4 (Prism D) ii 49'–60', text no. 6 (Prism C) iii 106'–115', text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iii 7''–16'', text no. 8 (Prism G) iii 32'–45', text no. 9 (Prism F) i 77–ii 9, and text no. 11 (Prism A) ii 81–94. A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 230–231 and 233) very tentatively proposes ca. 662 as the date of his Arwad 2. Given the lack of evidence, a precise date cannot be suggested. It is certain, however, that Yakīn-Lû died before the composition of text no. 3 (Prism B); the earliest known copy of that inscription is dated to 649.
103 Baker, PNA 3/2 pp. 1317–1318 sub Tarqû; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 pp. 143–144; Lämmerhirt, RLA 13/5–6 (2012) p. 466 sub Tarqû; Onasch, ÄAT 27/1 pp. 147–154; and Ruby, PNA 1/1 p. 164 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.a.1'. Text no. 2 (Prism E₂) iii 6–iv 1', text no. 3 (Prism B) i 48–i 90, text no. 4 (Prism D) i 38–75, text no. 6 (Prism C) ii 4'–2'', text no. 7 (Prism Kh) ii 1'–19'', text no. 8 (Prism G) ii 1'–32', and text no. 11 (Prism A) i 52–117. Text no. 9 (Prism F) and text no. 12 (Prism H) do not include Egypt 1. The date of the campaign is certainly 667: the event is recorded in a Babylonian chronicle for Šamaš-šuma-ukīn's 1st regnal year (= Ashurbanipal's 2nd year).
104 It is possible that some of the anti-Assyrian activities of Taharqa and his allies described by Ashurbanipal may have taken place in 669 and, thus, may have been the reason why Esarhaddon launched a third campaign against Egypt. Because Ashurbanipal was otherwise engaged with affairs in Babylon (the installation of his brother and the return of the statue of Marduk) and in the region of Dēr, he might not have been in a position to organize a large-scale military expedition to Egypt until late 668/early 667. Thus, Ashurbanipal's statement about immediately sending troops against Taharqa after news had reached him that Assyria had lost control of Memphis might be a deliberate untruth.
105 Early inscriptions of Ashurbanipal report that the Assyrian army marched to Thebes, which Taharqa abandoned when the Assyrian army arrived on the scene. The narrative stops abruptly and continues with a report about the treachery of several vassal rulers who were still secretly supporting Taharqa, despite the fact that they had just sworn loyalty to Ashurbanipal. Thus, it has been suggested that the Assyrians opted to deal with the oath-breakers rather than pursue Taharqa and this is the reason the Assyrians abandoned the expedition to Thebes; see Spalinger, JAOS 94 (1974) pp. 316–328. The sequence of events, as well as their timing, is problematic and requires sources other than the Assyrian annals to clarify it further.
106 The inhabitants of the cities Sais, Mendes, and Tanis (or Pelusium) are said to have been executed.
107 Baker, PNA 3/2 pp. 1248–1249 sub Šarru-lū-dāri 13; and Streck, PNA 2/2 p. 963 sub Nikkû.
108 Frahm, PNA 2/2 p. 881 sub Nabû-šēzibanni 12; Görg, RLA 13/5–6 (2012) p. 441 sub Tandamane; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 p. 144; Kitchen, Third Intermediate Period4; Mattila, PNA 3/1 p. 997 sub Pišamelki; Mattila and Pruzsinszky, PNA 3/2 pp. 1310–1311 sub Tanut-Amani; Onasch, ÄAT 27/1 pp. 38–58, 89–90, and 154–168; Ruby, PNA 1/1 p. 164 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.a.1'; and Spalinger, Lexikon der Ägyptologie 4 pp. 1164–1170 sub Psammetichus I. Text no. 3 (Prism B) ii 5b–24, text no. 4 (Prism D) ii 1–11', text no. 6 (Prism C) iii 18'b–57', text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iii 1'–15', text no. 9 (Prism F) i 34–54, text no. 11 (Prism A) ii 22–48, and text no. 12 (Prism H) ii 7'–14'a. This campaign is also mentioned by Herodotus (Hist. II 152). The fall of Thebes is now generally thought to have been ca. 664.
109 Text no. 11 (Prism A) ii 112a–115a.
110 Grayson, CAH2 3/2 pp. 144–145; Lipiński, PNA 1/2 pp. 242–243 sub Ba'alu 2; and Ruby, PNA 1/1 p. 164 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.a.3'. A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 230–231 and 233) tentatively proposes ca. 662 as the date of the Tyre incident. Since this incident does not appear in the Large Egyptian Tablets Inscription — a text that records the second Egyptian campaign and the submission of Mugallu, the king of Tabal — the submission of Baʾalu of Tyre presumably happened sometime after the events reported in that inscription. A precise date cannot be given at this time.
111 Text no. 11 (Prism A) ix 115–121. This incident is embedded in the narrative of Grayson's Arabs 2. The coastal city of Acco was attacked at the same time.
112 Aro-Valjus, PNA 1/2 pp. 427–428 sub Gūgu 1; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 p. 146; and Ruby, PNA 1/1 pp. 164–165 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.b.1'. Text no. 1 (Prism E₁) vi 11–31', text no. 2 (Prism E₂) vi 14–vii 3', text no. 3 (Prism B) ii 86b–iii 4, text no. 4 (Prism D) ii 61'–72', text no. 6 (Prism C) iv 1'–7', text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iii 17''–30'', text no. 9 (Prism F) ii 10–ii 20, and text no. 11 (Prism A) ii 95–125. Gūgu (or Guggu) of Luddu is known as Gyges (Γυγης) in classical sources, which record his ascent to the throne, some of his achievements, and his death. Herodotus (Hist. I 8–14) states that he became king by murdering his predecessor Candaules and marrying his widow. The date of the first contact between Lydia and Assyria is not known and it is unclear if this happened before or after the first Egyptian campaign in 667. Since the event, Grayson's Lydia 1, appears in text nos. 1 (Prism E₁) and 2 (Prism E₂), inscriptions thought to have been composed ca. 666–665 and 665–664 respectively, a tentative date, following A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 230 and 232), ca. 666–665 is suggested here. An earlier date, ca. 668–667 is also possible.
113 As noted by S. Aro-Valjus (PNA 1/2 p. 428 sub Gūgu 1), "It remains unclear where this fight between the Lydians and the Cimmerians took place and whether Assurbanipal actually sent any help to Gyges."
114 Classical sources state that it was the Cimmerian leader Lygdamis (Tugdammî) who killed Gyges. Ashurbanipal's inscriptions confirm that the Lydian ruler was killed by the Cimmerians, but claim direct responsibility: he prayed to Aššur and Ištar to have Gyges killed since he had allied himself with Egypt. The date of Gyges' death is uncertain, but it happened prior to the composition of text no. 11 (Prism A), the earliest possible date of which is 644. Thus, a general date of ca. 645–643 is assigned to Grayson's Lydia 2 incident. Further details about the date of text no. 11 (Prism A) will be addressed in the Chronology and Dating section below.
115 Fuchs, PNA 2/2 pp. 761–762 sub Mugallu; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 p. 145; Pruzsinszky, PNA 3/1 p. 1088 sub Sanda-sarme; and Ruby, PNA 1/1 pp. 164–165 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.b.1'. Text no. 3 (Prism B) ii 63–74, text no. 4 (Prism D) ii 34'–48', text no. 6 (Prism C) iii 89'–105', text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iii 44'–6'', text no. 8 (Prism G) iii 15'–31', text no. 9 (Prism F) i 69–76, and text no. 11 (Prism A) ii 68–80. The statement about Mugallu not having previously submitted to Assyria in the time of Ashurbanipal's ancestors is supported by astrological reports, Babylonian chronicles, prophecies, queries to the sun-god, and royal correspondence; see Fuchs, op. cit. for details. Moreover, it is uncertain when and how he succeeded in taking the throne of Tabal from Iškallû. A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 231 and 233) dates the Ḫilakku and Tabal incidents to ca. 662 since these events "would naturally occur after the successful campaigns against Egypt ('Egypt 2') and Tyre." The earliest extant inscription recording receipt of payment from Mugallu is the Large Egyptian Tablets Inscription (Novotny, SAACT 10 p. 84 no. 20 rev. 28–32). Note that that text does not mention that the ruler of Tabal sent his daughter to Nineveh; A. Fuchs (op. cit.) suggests that this fact was later inserted by mistake or that Mugallu's daughter arrived in the Assyrian capital after the composition of that inscription.
116 The payment of horses can be confirmed from an administrative document dated to 651 (Fales and Postgate, SAA 11 p. 69 no. 112). A letter of an inspector of the Nabû temple (Cole and Machinist, SAA 13 no. 98) mentions horses from Melid.
117 Fuchs, PNA 2/2 pp. 761–762 sub Mugallu; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 pp. 145–146; Ruby, PNA 1/1 pp. 164–165 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.b.1'; Pruzsinszky and Schmitt, PNA 3/1 p. 1087 sub Sandakšatru; and Schmitt and Van Buylaere, PNA 3/2 p. 1328 sub Tudgammî. Text no. 13 (Prism J) viii 6–11', text no. 21 line 19', and text no. 23 (IIT) lines 141b–159a; see also Borger, BIWA p. 202 K 120B+ lines 20–25. According to Strabo (Geo. I 61), it was the Cimmerian leader Lydgamis (Tugdammî) who killed Gyges of Lydia. A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 232 and 235) dates the event to ca. 640 because Tugdammî is not mentioned in Prism A (text no. 11), but in Prism H (text no. 12). This may be true, but text no. 12 (Prism H) is not sufficiently preserved to be certain if the Tugdammî incident appeared in that inscription. It is possible that it was recorded for the first time in text no. 13 (Prism J). Therefore, it is possible that these events took place in Ashurbanipal's 30th regnal year (639) and thus a date ca. 640–639 is given here.
The reading of the name of Mugallu's son is uncertain. A. Fuchs (in Borger, BIWA p. 284) suggests that the partially preserved name may be an Akkadian rendering of the East Phrygian Μουσσιϛ; see Zgusta, Kleinasiatische Personennamen pp. 338–339 §988-7.
118 Baker and Schmitt, PNA 3/1 p. 1030 sub Raiadišadî; Baker and Schmitt, PNA 3/2 p. 1354 sub Uallî; Fuchs and Schmitt, PNA 1/1 p. 68 sub Aḫšēri; Fuchs and Schmitt, PNA 1/2 p. 403 sub Erisinni; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 p. 146; and Ruby, PNA 1/1 p. 165 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.c.1'. Text no. 3 (Prism B) iii 16–92a, text no. 4 (Prism D) iii 9–15', text no. 6 (Prism C) iv 1''–v 5, text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iv 1'–58'', text no. 8 (Prism G) iv 1'–21'', text no. 9 (Prism F) ii 21–52, text no. 11 (Prism A) ii 126–iii 26, text no. 12 (Prism H) iii 1''–9'', and text no. 13 (Prism J) iii 1''–9''. Based on a query to the sun-god (Starr, SAA 4 p. 246 no. 269), Aḫšēri is presumed to have made an alliance with Cimmerian tribes; A. Fuchs (PNA 1/1 p. 68) suggests that this may have been the reason why this Mannean ruler was so successful and why he was able to keep Assyria out of his country for several years. A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 230 and 233) proposes a date of ca. 660 for the campaign. As correctly pointed out by Fuchs (PNA 1/1 p. 68), the Mannea incident could have taken place anytime between 663 and 649; the earliest firmly dated inscription recording the event is text no. 3 (Prism B).
119 Baker and Schmitt, PNA 3/1 p. 988 sub Pariḫi; Fuchs and Schmitt, PNA 1/2 p. 346 sub Biris(i)ḫatri; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 pp. 146–147; Kessler and Schmitt, PNA 3/1 p. 1092 sub Sarati; and Ruby, PNA 1/1 p. 165 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.c.2'. Text no. 3 (Prism B) iii 92b–iv 5, text no. 4 (Prism D) iii 16'–22', text no. 6 (Prism C) v 6–12, text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iv 59''–65'', and text no. 8 (Prism G) iv 22''. Text nos. 9 (Prism F), 11 (Prism A), and 12 (Prism H) do not include Media; this may be the case also for text no. 13 (Prism J). A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 230 and 233) proposes a date of ca. 658 for the campaign. As correctly pointed out by A. Fuchs (PNA 1/2 p. 346), the Media incident could have taken place anytime between 663 and 649; the earliest firmly dated inscription recording the event is text no. 3 (Prism B).
120 Baker, PNA 2/1 p. 571 sub Issār-dūri 28; Fuchs, PNA 3/1 p. 1057 sub Rusâ 3; Grayson, CAH2 3/2 p. 147; Radner, PNA 1/1 p. 111 sub Andaria; Ruby, PNA 1/1 p. 165 sub Aššūr-bāni-apli II.3.c.3'; Salvini, RLA 11/5–6 (2007) pp. 464–466 sub Rusa I. II. III.; and Salvini, RLA 12/1–2 (2009) pp. 39–42 sub Sarduri. Text no. 3 (Prism B) iv 6–14, text no. 4 (Prism D) iv 1–8, text no. 6 (Prism C) v 13–23 and vii 20'–28', text no. 7 (Prism Kh) iv 66''–74'' and vii 11–20, and text no. 11 (Prism A) x 40–50. Text nos. 9 (Prism F), 11 (Prism A), and 12 (Prism H) do not include Grayson's Urarṭu 1; this may be the case also for text no. 13 (Prism J). Grayson's Urarṭu 2 is known only from text no. 11 (Prism A). The mention of the receipt of Rusâ's tribute is embedded in the narrative of the campaign against Gambulu and, thus, presumably took place in 653 or 652. A.K. Grayson (ZA 70 [1980] pp. 230–231 and 233–234) proposes dates of ca. 657 and ca. 643 for the Urarṭu 1 and 2 incidents, respectively. The capture of the Urarṭian governor Andaria could have occurred anytime between 663 and ca. 653; the earliest firmly dated inscription recording the event is text no. 6 (Prism C), which was likely composed in 647. As for Sarduri sending payment to Ashurbanipal, this clearly happened before the eponymy of Šamaš-daʾʾinanni (644, 643, or 642), for which a firm date cannot yet be established, and, thus, a more general date of ca. 645–643 is tentatively suggested here.
Jamie Novotny & Joshua Jeffers
Jamie Novotny & Joshua Jeffers, 'Military Campaigns, Part 2', 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/rinap51introduction/militarycampaigns/part2/]