Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-07T14:22:07.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Murder in Mesopotamia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

D. J. Wiseman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This contribution to the volume in honour of Sir Max Mallowan has its starting point in texts found at Nimrud (Calah) during the excavations he directed there in 1949–57. The initial publication of texts soon after their discovery was invariably due to his personal encouragement and realization of their wide-ranging importance and interest. Indeed, his work at the site produced much new evidence for the political and cultural history of Assyria during the last four centuries of its power when it dominated much of the ancient Near East. Later generations may well attribute to his work there much of the change from the traditional picture of Assyrian kings as primarily the forerunners of military frightfulness to a new view of them as sensitive, able leaders, administrators and builders. It is true that they always needed to be alert to guard their personal position while they maintained law and justice in troubled times which then, as so often in the history of Mesopotamia, required the use of military resources to maintain territorial integrity and the economic basis on which it depended.

The vassal-treaties imposed by Esarhaddon illustrate the means by which the stability of the royal dynasty was maintained and the often precarious nature of the king's hold over his subject peoples. The stipulations presented to them both orally and in writing in May 672 B.C. called both for an initial affirmation of loyalty and for its periodic renewal.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 36 , Issue 1-2 , October 1974 , pp. 249 - 260
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Mallowan, M. E. L., Nimrud and its Remains I–II (1966)Google Scholar. The title of this article has been chosen, with apologies to Dame Agatha Christie Mallowan, in the hope that it may be a small tribute to them both for all they have done together for the British School of Archaeology in Iraq at Nimrud and elsewhere over-more than forty years.

2 Mallowan, M. E. L., Nimrud and its Remains I–II (1966)Google Scholar; Hallo, W. W., “The Rise and Fall of Kalah”, JAOS 88 (1968), 772–5Google Scholar.

3 Iraq 20 (1958), 1–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Borger, R.ZA 54 (1961), 173–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Reiner, E., ANET (1969), 534–541Google Scholar.

4 Iraq 20 (1958), 3 ffGoogle Scholar.

5 qātē II-kunu ana limnēti ina libbīši tubbalāni; to lay hands on, to bring (Reiner, “lift”) the hands against a person (or country) with evil intent is a stronger action than mere hostility (cf. CAD A/1, 19; Güterbock, H., ZA 42 (1934). 53 (l. 29))CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Cf. ABL 1379, r. 8, 33, “if you hear of a plot to murder (ša dâki) or do away with Aššurbanipal”. For “murder” as opposed to “execute”, i.e. put to death judicially (passim) see CAD D, 35–43, especially sub a. For ana dâkim kulhim, “to vow to murder” see RA 62 (1968), 24Google Scholar.

7 Naṣāru, translated “serve” by Reiner, E., ANET (1969), 534 ff., ll. 50, 65, 100, 169Google Scholar; the restoration in ll. 329, 331 is doubtful, means “to guard or keep (a covenant)”, or “keep (faith with)” as Heb. nāṣar, Ps. 78:7, etc. (Weinfeld, M., JAOS 93 (1973Google Scholar), 193, 198 n. 104). The context of Esarhaddon's treaties is in each case one of violent action (ll. 67–71) or fighting for the crown-prince so the emphasis is here on protection (cf. AHw, 756a). The phrase ina eqli (ina) birti āli (ll. 49, 99) may emphasize the open (undefended) country and the fortified (defended) city rather than the latter be translated simply “town” (as E. Reiner, loc. cit., 535). It differs from ālu libbi āli (“Binnenstadt”, RlA I, 173) which is generally taken as a name for Assur (URU ŠA URU, SO VTE, l. 31; Oppenheim, A. L., ANET (1950), 281, n. 4Google Scholar; and now van Driel, G., The Cult of Aššur (1969), 200, 1. 6′Google Scholar; Postgate, J. N., CTN 2 (1973), 231Google Scholar (no. 248, 6) (contra Iraq 13 (1951), 116 (ND 487)Google Scholar; 14 (1952), 65, n. 7).

8 In Old Babylonian times these were the girseq(q)û, pl. gir-sig5-ga-te (Goetze, A., JCS 11 (1957), 81Google Scholar), possibly a eunuch (CT 39, 45, 33). For their rôle as a bodyguard in battle, see Sasson, J. M., The Military Establishments at Mari (1969), 19 fGoogle Scholar.

9 Dossin, G., RA 35 (1938), 2 ii 17–18Google Scholar.

10 Postgate, J. N., The Governor's Palace Archive ( = CTN 2, 1973), 69 (32, 7′)Google Scholar.

11 Wilson, J. V. Kinnier, The Nimrud Wine Lists (= CTN 1, 1972), 48–9Google Scholar.

12 Wiseman, D. J., BSOAS 30 (1967), 495CrossRefGoogle Scholar, ll. 12′–14′ (kiṣri maṣṣārtu dunnūt mātGNN ša bīt rēdûti lū nasqu lū bēri). Similarly David employed foreign mercenaries (Kerethites, Pelethites and Gittites) in his bodyguard. They were used to quell internal rebellion (2 Sam 15:17–21) but could be mobilized with the standing army especially if there was any delay in its call-up (2 Sam 18:2). The role of the third man in the chariot as a royal guard should be noted. Respect for the king's person was such that one refused to kill off his master even when he lay mortally wounded in battle (1 Chron 10:4.).

13 ARMT III, 18, 17-27.

14 ARMTX, 7, 8–22.

15 E.g. Saggs, H. W. F., The Greatness that was Babylon (1962), 123Google Scholar.

16 The Synchronistic Chronicle gives 82 kings from Adasi (Brinkman, J., The Political History of Post-Kassite Babylonia (1968), 30Google Scholar; the earlier part of the list may have omissions).

17 Oppenheim, A. L., ANET (1950), 274, n. 1Google Scholar. The title šar māt Aššur ki is itself no sign of legitimacy or otherwise in the King List. It is applied to Šamši-Adad I and omitted after Erišum.

18 As shown by the procedure of installing the heir-apparent in the bīt rēdûti and by VTE, ll. 83–89.

19 The association of princes in the administration may, in conjunction with acts which marked specific length of reign, be significant here, e.g. Shalmaneser III's recurrence in the limmu list after 30 years (RlA II, 420), cf. Idrimi's hand over to Adad-nerari at the end of a thirty year rule at Alalah (Idrimi, 91), if this was not merely related to his personal affairs as suggested by Drower (CAH II/1 (1973), 435). The timing of such co-regencies varied, e.g. Belshazzar was associated with Nabonidus after his father had only ruled three years.

20 Cf. n. 4 (here ana bābili ana limutti [qās]su ūbillū). In a study of law and order in the O.T. world (Vox Evangelica 8 (1973), 16–17Google Scholar), I have suggested that the phrase “to do right/evil” can denote a specif legislative act.

21 Chron. P iv. 6–8; King, L. W., Records of the reign of Tukulti-Ninib I (1904), 96–100, 157Google Scholar; Weidner, E. F., Die Inschriften Tukulti-Ninurtas I und seiner Nachfolger (1959), 41–2 (Nr. 37, 7–11)Google Scholar.

22 Gelb, I. J., JNES 13 (1954), 219 iii 11–13Google Scholar.

23 Weidner, op. cit., 42.

24 JNES 13 (1954), 219 iii, 21Google Scholar.

25 Munn-Rankin, M., CAH II/2 (1967), chap. XXV, 21Google Scholar.

26 Luckenbill, D. D., The Annals of Sennacherib (1924) 161 (ll. 34–5), cf. 83 (ll. 46–8)Google Scholar.

27 Brinkman, J., JCS 25 (1973), 95 and n. 31Google Scholar.

28 CT 34, 50 iii 28.

29 Thompson, R. C., The Prism of Esarhaddon and Sennacherib (1931), 9 f. (i, 10–44)Google Scholar. Note that Esarhaddon makes no direct reference to his father's death.

30 So Wiseman, D. J. in Thomas, D. Winton (ed.), Documents from O.T. Times (1958), 71Google Scholar based on the chronological arrangement of the Esarhaddon prism dated 673/2 B.C.; Borger, R., Die Inschriften Asarhaddons (1956), Nr. 27, Ep. 2Google Scholar.

31 There is no indication in the juxtaposition of vv. 36–7 of how long this was after Sennacherib's return from Jerusalem. The name of his assailant may represent Arad-malki (and the other an abbreviation for (the god X)-šarru-uṣur). A West Semitic name is possible (cf. Atarmilki as suggested for Adrammelech of 2 Kings 17:31 in RA 30 (1933), 72Google Scholar).

32 Streck, M., Assurbanipal (1916) II, 38Google Scholar (Annals iv, 69–72).

33 D. D. Luckenbill, op. cit., 116, viii 65–76 (baḫulāte

34 A Political History of Post-Kassite Babylonia (1968), 186, n. 143Google Scholar. The Aššurnaṣirpal II stele may record a special religious occasion in which the population census was secondary. The inclusion of 5,000 important delegates from ten named regions (ll. 143–7) may indicate that the king had invited them to impress them with his power and wealth and to take the occasion for a renewal of their vassal obligations. Some of these could have been at the court for some years where they might have been held as hostages for the city-states which had paid tribute to Tukulti-Ninurta II (890–884). Brinkman thinks that the ceremony took place c. 874–866 B.C. on the grounds that the reference to the Mediterranean in the historical summary (l. 11) cannot be a generalization (cf. “all countries beyond the Tigris to the Lebanon”) and must refer to an actual campaign of 875 or later. He considers that the peoples listed as attending the banquet, and the countries mentioned specifically as the source of persons settled in Calah (ll. 33–36), could not have arrived until late in his reign. Some of these peoples were in revolt early in his reign or had not yet been the target of military campaigns. However, an earlier date (e.g. c. 879/8) cannot yet be ruled out for the opening of the new capital. Aššurnaṣirpal's annals state that he was in residence in Calah in 878 B.C. and that the city was his basis for subsequent campaigns (AKA, 346 iii 1). The stele does not state that all work on the city had been completed or the annals that this was the first occupation of the site. It seems to have been a reoccupation of an older (ancestral?) holding during the eponymate of Su-ilima-damqa in 879/8 B.C. (Annals, ii 131 (ana eššūte aṣbat), Standard Inscription 15 (ana eššūti abni), i.e. “I took up my residence in Calah again” as CAD E, 377). In his first year the king had begun work on a palace at Tušhan (Annals, ii 3–5) and on another at Dur-Aššur in the following year. By 878 work was also in progress at Kar-Aššur-naṣir-apli and Nibarti (Annals, iii 50). Tušhan was formally opened three years after work had commenced there, i.e. 879 B.C. It would seem improbable that Calah itself would have been accorded a lower priority in the building programme, especially as already in 881 labourers from the hill-tribes had been drafted in to do corvée work there (kudurru, Annals, ii 80), as were peoples from other lands (Annals, iii 125). Since the Suhu are already mentioned (Annals, i 100) as are the Hindanu (i 96) and Hatti (ii 32), it cannot yet be decided that the stele itself is as late as it is assumed are the Annals (877–867 B.C.). Cf. now Schramm, W., EAK II (1973), 31Google Scholar. need not refer only to the (native) subjects of Sennacherib or Sargon (as CAD B, 183, 2′).

35 mār la mamman/mammana. Since Aššur-dugul is designated la mammana la EN GIŠ.GU.ZA {JNES 13 (1954), 215Google Scholar ii 8), and the six succeeding kings likewise, this points to “a person not of the immediate royal line”, possibly a “commoner” (as ANET, 280) rather than “usurper”.

36 AKA, 281–2, 286 (Annals, i 75, 81–2, 93).

37 Aššurnaṣirpal II may have held a separate ceremony for the dedication of the Ninurta temple in the month Šabaṭu (Annals, ii 134; cf. Stele l. 53). For festivals see Die Keilschrifttexte Sargons, Pl. 38, iii 37; Borger, R., Asarhaddon, 63Google Scholar, Ep. 23: 49 ff.; and Luckenbill, D. D., Annals of Sennacherib, 116Google Scholar (viii 74 f.) at the initiation of Sennacherib's palace (ina tašrit ekalli).

38 Mallowan, M. E. L., Nimrud and its Remains (1966), I, 62–73Google Scholar; Wiseman, D. J., Iraq 14 (1952), 22–44Google Scholar; Oppenheim, A. L., ANET (1969), 558–560Google Scholar; Postgate, N., CTN 2 (1973), 238–240Google Scholar.

39 For the early occupation of the SE. part of the acropolis, see N & R, 74 and for the Old Babylonian occupation of the site (N & R, 223). The town was then possibly called Kamilhu (Hallo, W. W., JCS 18 (1964), 83Google Scholar) and pronounced Kâlḫ; cf. Zalḫa (PRU VI 20, 8′) and Heb. Kālaḥ (Gen. 10:11). alKal-ḫi is first found in a Middle Assyrian corn loan from Rimah (TR. 119, 6) dated to Shalmaneser I or a successor (Iraq 30 (1968)Google Scholar, Pl. LXXII and p. 195).

40 AOB I 124 iv 26.

41 N & R I, 109.

42 RlA III, 430 (years 762–758); for the year 746. sīḫu ina alKālḫi.

43 J. A. Brinkman, op. cit., 38.

44 Goetze, A., JCS 1 (1947), 253–265Google Scholar.

45 Gadd, C.J., CAH I/2 (1971), 419Google Scholar.

46 A. Goetze, loc. cit., 256, n. 25 (nūrīšu ušēṣû-liberated him?); cf. ša nūrum ūṣīšu in an ome concerning the otherwise unknown ruler TE-Enlil (ibid., 263), perhaps indicating that it was a message sent by fire signals.

47 A. Goetze (loc. cit., 257 and n. 27) cites a parallel form of the omen which shows that Rimuš was killed “by his palace” (e-ka-lu-šu) which he considered a possible error for “his ministers” (su-ka-lu-šu).

48 Hirsch, H., AfO 20 (1963), 13, n. 128Google Scholar.

49 Hallo, W. W., HUCA 33 (1967), 13, n. 107Google Scholar.

50 Gadd, C. J., History and Monuments of Ur (1929), 96Google Scholar.

51 N & R I, 336, n. 44; cf. 162.

52 Goetze suggests that Maništusu like Rimuš may have died in a revolt and that this explains why a Mari liver omen refers the same omen to Rimuš (Nougayrol, J., RA 35 (1938), 41Google Scholar; A. Goetze, loc. cit., 257).

53 YBTX, 44, 8.

54 For ku-nu-ka-tu(m) see CT 45, 21:9 (O.B. list of objects); AfO 18 (1957/1958), 306Google Scholar, iii 13, 17 (of ivory).

55 Cf. the use of sealed royal letters to bring about the judicial procedure which led to Naboth's death (1 Kings 21:8).

56 LBAT 1419 (BM 32234) quoted by Parker, R. A. and Dubberstein, W. H., Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.–A.D. 75, (1956), 17Google Scholar.

57 Iraq 16 (1954), 205Google Scholar.

58 A. Goetze, loc. cit., 259.

59 RA 9 (1912), 111 f.Google Scholar; 10 (1913), 98 ff.; cf. Güterbock, H., ZA 42 (1934), 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 YBT X, 26, 31 f.

61 YBT, 18, 61; 25, 32.

62 Goetze, loc. cit., 261, 265.

63 King, L. W., CCEBK II, 12, 15Google Scholar; Edzard, D. O., Die “Zweite Zwischenzeit” Babyloniens (1957), 140 fGoogle Scholar.

64 Goetze, loc. cit., 265.

65 Hunger, H., RA 66 (1972), 180–1Google Scholar.

66 Published by permission of the Trustees of the British Museum.

67 See n. 35.

68 G. J. Gadd, CAH II/2, chap, xliii, 11.

69 R. Labat, CAH II/2, chap, xxix, 11.

70 Gurney, O. R., CAH II/1 (1973), 666–8Google Scholar.

71 Hoffner, H. A., in Wiseman, D. J. (ed.), Peoples of Old Testament Times (1973), 205Google Scholar.

72 Sturtevant, E. H. and Bechtel, G., A Hittite Chrestomathy (1935), 184–7Google Scholar.

73 Güterbock, H., JCS 10 (1956), 94–5 (A iii 7, 13–15)Google Scholar.

74 O. R. Gurney, loc. cit., 673–4.

75 CAH I/2 (1971), 498–9. I owe this and some of the following references to Mr. K. A. Kitchen.

76 Waddell, W. G., Manetho (Loeb edn.), 66 f., 70 fGoogle Scholar.

77 Posener, G., Littérature et politique dans l'Égypte de la XIIe Dynastie (1956), 68–9Google Scholar.

78 Edwards, I. E. S., The Treasures of Tutankhamun (1973), 22Google Scholar.

79 G. Faulkener, CAH II/2, chap, xxiii, 32–3.

80 So James, T. G. H., CAH II/2 (1973), 289Google Scholar.

81 mār la mammon must mean “usurper” here; cf. n. 35.

82 2 Kings 8:15.

83 AfO 13 (1940), 233 fGoogle Scholar.

84 2 Chron. 21: 18–20.

85 2 Kings 9:27.

86 2 Chron. 24:25; 2 Kings 12:21.

87 2 Kings 14:17–21.

88 Judges 3:14–26.

89 ABL 1109, r. 10 (bēl dāmē ša bēlīnu ina muhhīnu ul irabbī).

90 Tušratta letter (E. A. 17:14, amata lā banīta ana mātīya ītepušma u bēlšu idūk); Borger, R., Asarhaddon, 103Google Scholar, ii 8 (šarru ša anzilli la kittu ḫabālu šagāšu i[kkibšu]).

91 ABL 652, 18–19.

92 For a partial study cf. Feigin, S.J., “Homicide in the ancient Oriental law and Babylonian-Assyrian contracts”, in Hatequfah 32/33 (1947), 746–765Google Scholar.

93 Death of a distrainee from maltreatment (§ 116) and other cases of sudden death (§§ 207–212, 218, 229) are treated as justifiable homicide (or our “manslaughter”).

94 aššat awēlim aššum zikarim šanîm mūssa ušdīk; Driver and Miles, Bab. Laws I, 313 suggest that she contrived the death by poison; A. Poebel (SAG 1134) that “she gets (her lover) to kill” the husband (ušdīk III/1).

95 Jacobsen, T., “An ancient Mesopotamian Trial for Homicide”, Studia Biblica e Orientalia III (= Analecta Biblica el Orientalia 12, 1959), 130–150Google Scholar (reprinted Toward the Image of Tammuz (1970), 193–214Google Scholar).

96 Landsberger, B., ZA 43 (1936), 315–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Lautner, J. G., Die richterliche Entscheidung und die Streitbeendigung im altbabylonischen Prozessrechte (1922), 74 ffGoogle Scholar.

97 Nougayrol, J., PRU III (1955), 68–9 (no. 16.269)Google Scholar.

98 So also LH § 23; Deut. 21: 1–9 , i.e. the same procedure as for fugitive slaves, missing persons or robbers (Alalakh Tablet 2, ll. 27, 37, 43, 53).

99 “Knew about” or “identified it” (idū ūl ilêm; ARM VI, 43, translated by Oppenheim, A. L., Letters from Mesopotamia (1967), 103–4Google Scholar; cf. dāik IIpqatum la idū anāku la ušāahizzu, “I do not know the murderer of I., I did not incite him” (CT 29, 42, 13–14).

100 Ugaritica V, 27, 40 ffGoogle Scholar.

101 PRU IV, 152.

102 Reviv, H., JESHO 12 (1969), 283–297Google Scholar.

103 KBo I, 10; KUB III, 72 as translated by Oppenheim, A. L., Letters from Mesopotamia, 144Google Scholar.

104 BBSt 9, 5 (p. 57).

105 So CAD D, 79 sub dāmn.

106 In Hittite this is “the one responsible for the blood”, i.e. the person who has the right to claim the blood-money (Korošec, V., Staatsverträge, 38Google Scholar). Other terms for murder include tābik dāmē, TCL 3, 150; Surpu II, 49). While ša nērti may be so used it is more frequently used of violent action whether against humans or property. Thus the man charged with “murder” (amēlu eli amēli nīrtu iddīma (Iraq 27 (1965), 6Google Scholar, iii. 21) and subject to the river ordeal seems to have been involved in causing maltreatment resulting in death. In royal titles nâru is used only of a king killing foreign enemies (Seux, M-J., Epithètes royales akkadiennes et sumériennes (1967), 197–200Google Scholar. On nâ/ê/rum see also JNES 16 (1957), 259Google Scholar; cf. ikappudūšu nīrti (BWL, 88 ; Theodicy, l. 284).

107 E.g. Irvine, A. K., “Homicide in pre-Islamic South Arabia”, BSOAS 30 (1967), 277–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar.