No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
page 405 note 1 The text is given three times—once in facsimile (in sections) half-tone blocks, once in Messrs. Harrison's larger cuneiform type, and again by means of line blocks from the author's copy. The obverse is also given as a plate to show the appearance of the slab as a whole.
page 406 note 1 In this notice the old reading Tukulti-Ninib is retained, that being the form used by Mr. King. In reality, however, the name seems to have been Tukulti-Enu-rêštū, or something similar (see the Journal of the R.A.S. for January, p. 206). He was son of Shalmaneser I, grandson of Adad-nirari, and great-grandson of Arik-dên-îli, as Delitzsch has shown that Pudi-ilu is to be read.
page 406 note 2 Enu-rêštū (?).
page 407 note 1 Thus (without the punctuation) in the original. The author points out that the land of Meḫru was so called from the meḫru-trees which grew there. Are we to understand from this passage that Qutû, Uqumanû, Elḫunia, and Šarnida were also habitats of the same tree, or is it only the last-named ? It is difficult to imagine that the copula ‘and’ has been placed before Šarnida instead of Meḫru, though this is possible. Mr. King translates: “ the Ḳutî and the Uḳumanî and the lands of Elkhunia and Sharnida and Mekhri.”
page 408 note 1 This is all the more necessary in that the obtaining of a sight of an exhibited tablet at the British Museum (to say nothing of a careful examination such as this passage would need) is quite an affair of state.
page 408 note 2 Another improved rendering has been obtained by Mr. King by detaching the name “ Bel” from Tukulti-Aššur (J.R.A.S. for October, 1894, pp. 814, 822, 1. 12, and 826). The passage then reads “ For 6 years, until (the time of) Tukulti-Aššur, Bel was residing in Assyria—he went (back) to Babylon in the time of Tukulti-Aššur.” He suggests that Tukulti-Aššur was the successor of Tukulti-Ninib, in which case Aššur-naṣir-apli, the son who revolted against him, did not succeed him.
page 408 note 3 His reading of the name of king Šagarakti-Šuriaš on Sennacherib's tablet referring to the recovery of his seal is especially noteworthy. (I came across the form Ša-ga-ra-ak-ti-šur-ya-aš some time ago.)