Yamada2012-RAI54

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/yamada2012-rai54 1/19

Organization, Representation,

and Symbols of Power

in the Ancient Near East

Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationaleat Würzburg

20–25 July 2008

edited by

GERNOT WILHELM

Winona Lake, Indiana

EISENBRAUNS 2012

OFFPRINT FROM

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


© 2012 by Eisenbrauns Inc. All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of Americawww.eisenbrauns.com

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American Na-

tional Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materi-als, ANSI Z39.48–1984. ♾ ™

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Rencontre assyriologique internationale (54th : 2008 : Würzburg, Germany)Organization, representation, and symbols of power in the ancient Near East :

proceedings of the 54th Rencontre assyriologique internationale at Wuerzburg,20–25 July 2008 / edited by Gernot Wilhelm.

p. cm.Includes bibliographical references.ISBN 978-1-57506-245-7 (hardback : alk. paper)

1. Middle East—Civilization—To 622—Congresses. 2. Middle East—Politics and government—Congresses. 3. Middle East—Antiquities—Congresses. 4. Assyria—Civilization—Congresses 5. Assyria—Politics andgovernment—Congresses. 6. Assyria—Civilization—Congresses.I. Wilhelm, Gernot. II. Title.

DS41.5R35 2008939.4—dc23 2012019372

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


Contents

Vorwort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii

Das Ansehen eines altorientalischen Herrschers bei seinen Untertanen . . . . 1W ALTHER S ALLABERGER

L’exercice du pouvoir par les rois de la Ière

Dynastie de Babylone:problèmes de méthode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21DOMINIQUE CHARPIN

Verwaltungstechnische Aspekte königlicher Repräsentation:Zwei Urkunden über den Kult der verstorbenen Königeim mittelassyrischen Assur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

E VA C ANCIK -K IRSCHBAUM

Bild, Macht und Raum im neuassyrischen Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51DOMINIK BONATZ

Die Rolle der Schrift in einer Geschichte der

frühen hethitischen Staatsverwaltung . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73THEO VAN DEN HOUT

WOR KS H OP: Collective Governance and the Role of the Palace in theBronze Age Middle Euphrates and Beyond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 A DELHEID OTTO

Archaeological Evidence for Collective Governance along theUpper Syrian Euphrates during the Late andMiddle Bronze Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

A DELHEID OTTO

Textual Evidence for a Palace at Late Bronze Emar . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101D ANIEL E. FLEMING

Die Rolle der Stadt im spätbronzezeitlichen Emar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111BETINA F AIST

Les « Frères » en Syrie à l’époque du Bronze récent:Réflexions et hypothèses* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

SOPHIE DÉMARE-L AFONT

Organization of Harrâdum, Suhum, 18th–17th Centuries B.C.,

Iraqi Middle Euphrates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143CHRISTINE K EPINSKI

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


Contents

Ein Konflikt zwischen König und Ältestenversammlung in Ebla . . . . . . 155GERNOT WILHELM

WORKSHOP: The Public and the State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167E VA VON D ASSOW

The Public and the State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171E VA VON D ASSOW

From People to Public in the Iron Age Levant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191SETH S ANDERS

Administrators and Administrated in Neo-Assyrian Times . . . . . . . . . 213SIMONETTA PONCHIA

The Babylonian Correspondence of the Seleucid and Arsacid Dynasties:New Insights into the Relations between Court and Cityduring the Late Babylonian Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

ROBERTO SCIANDRA

La liste Lú A et la hiérarchie des fonctionnaires sumériens . . . . . . . . . . . 249 A LEXANDRA BOURGUIGNON

Königslisten als Appellativ-Quellen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257P AVEL ČECH

From King to God: The NAMEŠDA Title in Archaic Ur. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265PETR CHARVÁT

The Uses of the Cylinder Seal as Clues of Mental Structuring Processesinside Ur III State Machinery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275

A LESSANDRO DI LUDOVICO

EN-Priestess: Pawn or Power Mogul? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291JOAN GOODNICK WESTENHOLZ

Die Uruk I-Dynastie—ein Konstrukt der Isin-Zeit? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313C ATHERINE MITTERMAYER

Neue Erkenntnisse zu den königlichen Gemahlinnen der Ur III-Zeit . . . . . . 327M ARCOS SUCH-GUTIÉRREZ

Ĝeštinanna und die Mutter des Šulgi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347

FRAUKE WEIERSHÄUSER

Vom babylonischen Königssiegel und von gesiegelten Steinen . . . . . . . . . . 357SUSANNE P AULUS

Marduk and His Enemies: City Rivalries in Southern Mesopotamia. . . . . . . 369J. A. SCURLOCK

Text im Bild — Bild im Text: Bildmotive als Bedeutungsträger vonMachtansprüchen im hellenistischen Mesopotamien? . . . . . . . . . . 377

K ARIN STELLA SCHMIDT

The Tablet of Destinies and the Transmission of Power in Enūma eliš . . . . . 387K AREN SONIK

Aššur and Enlil in Neo-Assyrian Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397SPENCER L. A LLEN

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


Contents

“The Charms of Tyranny:” Conceptions of Power in the“Garden Scene” of Ashurbanipal Reconsidered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411

MEHMET-A LI A TAÇ

Les archers de siège néo-assyriens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429

F ABRICE Y. DE B ACKER

King’s Direct Control: Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Officials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449PETER DUBOVSKY

Triumph as an Aspect of the Neo-Assyrian Decorative Program . . . . . . . . . 461N ATALIE N AOMI M AY

Local Power in the Middle Assyrian Period:The “Kings of the Land of Māri” in the Middle Habur Region . . . . . 489

D AISUKE SHIBATA

Women, Power, and Heterarchy in the Neo-Assyrian Palaces . . . . . . . . . . 507

S AANA S VÄRDOrganising the Interaction Between People: a New Look at the

Elite Houses of Nuzi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 519D AVID K ERTAI

Les femmes comme signe de puissance royale:la maison du roi d’Arrapha. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531

BRIGITTE LION

Power Transition and Law: The Case of Emar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543LENA FIJAŁKOWSKA

The Representatives of Power in the Amarna Letters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 551

J. M YNÁŘOVÁ

Herrscherrepräsentation und Kult im Bildprogrammdes Aḥirom-Sarkophags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559

H. NIEHR

Religion and Politics at the Divine Table: The Cultic Travels of Zimrī-Līm . . . 579CINZIA P APPI

The City of Ṭābatum and its Surroundings: The Organization of Powerin the Post-Hammurabi Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 591

SHIGEO Y AMADA

The Horns of a Dilemma, or On the Divine Nature of the Hittite King . . . . . 605G ARY BECKMAN

The Power in Heaven: Remarks on the So-Called Kumarbi Cycle . . . . . . . . 611C ARLO CORTI AND FRANCA PECCHIOLI D ADDI

Die Worte des Königs als Repräsentation von Macht:Zur althethitischen Phraseologie. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 619

P AOLA D ARDANO

Treaties and Edicts in the Hittite World. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 637ELENA DEVECCHI

Luxusgüter als Symbole der Macht: Zur Verwaltung der Luxusgüter

im Hethiter-Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647M AURO GIORGIERI AND CLELIA MORA

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


Contents

Autobiographisches, Historiographisches und Erzählelemente inhethitischen “Gebeten” Arnuwandas und Mursilis . . . . . . . . . . . . 665

M ANFRED HUTTER

The (City-)Gate and the Projection of Royal Power in Ḫatti . . . . . . . . . . . 675

J. L. MILLER

Hethitische Felsreliefs als Repräsentation der Macht:Einige ikonographische Bemerkungen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 687

ZSOLT SIMON

“. . . Ich bin bei meinem Vater nicht beliebt. . .”: Einige Bemerkungenzur Historizität des Zalpa-Textes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 699

BÉLA STIPICH

Dating of Akkad, Ur III, and Babylon I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 715PETER J. HUBER

Cuneiform Documents Search Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 735WOJCIECH J AWORSKI

Fluchformeln in den Urkunden der Chaldäer- und Achämenidenzeit . . . . . . 739JÜRGEN LORENZ

Arbeitszimmer eines Schreibers aus der mittelelamischen Zeit . . . . . . . . . 747BEHZAD MOFIDI N ASRABADI

Siegel für Jedermann: Neue Erkenntnisse zur sog. Série Élamite Populaireund zur magischen Bedeutung von Siegelsteinen. . . . . . . . . . . . . 757

GEORG NEUMANN

Did Rusa Commit Suicide? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771

MICHAEL ROAF

Über die (Un-)Möglichkeit eines “Glossary of Old Syrian [GlOS] ” . . . . . . . . 781JOAQUÍN S ANMARTÍN

Adapas Licht . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 795ILLYA V ORONTSOV

Early Lexical Lists and Their Impact on Economic Records: An Attempt of Correlation Between Two SeeminglyDifferent Kinds of Data-Sets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805

K LAUS W AGENSONNER

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


591

The City of Ṭābatum and Its Surroundings:The Organization of Power in the Post-Hammurabi Period

Shigeo YamadaTSUKUBA

Introduction

In the winter season of 2005, after an interruption of five years, a Japaneseteam resumed excavation at Tell Taban, which is located about 19 kilometers southof Hassake, Syria. The excavation has continued since, in the six summer seasons of2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010 under the directorship of Hirotoshi Numotoof Kokushikan University. 1 This new series of excavations has uncovered a largenumber of cuneiform inscriptions. The majority of them originate in the middle

Assyrian period and include hundreds of administrative-legal tablets and commem-orative inscribed objects (bricks, cylinders, nails, etc.), 2 but a few dozen Old Baby-

lonian tablets and inscribed envelopes were also unearthed.The majority of the Old Babylonian materials, totaling 24 fragments of tabletsand inscribed envelopes, were excavated during the summer seasons of 2005 and2006. These fragments were found in a rectangular room, measuring about 3 mby 2 m, at trench 8, which is located at the western side of the mound. 3 They hadbeen exposed to fire. These pieces fall into three groups: (1) two school text frag-ments, (2) sixteen letters, and (3) six administrative-legal texts. A thorough studyof the entire corpus will be published in due course. 4 This article deals with the

1. For th

Author’s note: I would like to thank Dr. Bassam Jammous (Director General, DGAM), Dr. Michel al-Maqdissi (Director of Excavations, DGAM) and H. Numoto (director of the excavations at Tell Taban),who granted me permission to work on the textual material from Tell Taban. My sincere gratitude also

goes to I. Nakata and O. Rouault, who read a draft of this paper, in whole or in part, and gave me a num-ber of valuable comments. I would like to thank P. Abrahami, D. Charpin, J. Eidem, D. Shibata, M. Stol,and N. Ziegler for their criticisms on the earlier version read in RAI (2008/7/23) and offering information.

All the mistakes remaining are of course my responsibility. This study was financially supported by aGrant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture (Japan).

e excavations of 2005, 2006, and 2007, see Numoto 2006, Numoto 2007, Numoto 2008, andNumoto 2009. The preliminary reports of the three later seasons are now in preparation by H. Numoto.

2. For the administrative-legal tablets (about 150–200 pieces), see the preliminary report of D. Shi-bata (2007). There were 206 fragments of various types of building inscriptions found in 2005–2010.

3. Numoto 2008: 3–5; cf. Yamada 2008. The total number of the inscribed materials given there, 25,has now been reduced to 24, after fragments of school texts assigned to Tab T05B-27 and Tab T05B-28were all joined into a single large tablet during the restoration work in Syria in 2010. I am grateful for

the assistance of Ghassan Abdul-Aziz and Akiko Nishimura for this work.4. A preliminary report on these materials is presented in Yamada 2008. See Durand 2008 forimproved readings of several personal names and some other notes on the contract (Tab T06–4) (see

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


SHIGEO Y AMADA 592

administrative-legal texts and letters and considers what light they shed on thepolitical organization along the Lower Habur and the Middle Euphrates during thepost-Hammurabi period.

Ṭābatum under Terqa

The identification of Tell Taban with Ṭābatum, mentioned in Old Babyloniansources from Mari (Tell Hariri) and Chagar Bazar, seems established, 5 now beingfurther supported by its attestation in three letters from Tell Taban itself. 6 E. Forreridentified Tell Taban with the Ṭābatu/Ṭābetu of the Middle-Assyrian and Neo-As-syrian sources in 1920, 7 and this was fully verified concerning the Middle Assyrianperiod by the commemorative texts found in Tell Taban and Tell Bderi published byS. Maul. 8 This later city of Ṭābatu/Ṭābetu can now be safely identified with the OldBabylonian Ṭābatum. 9

Eight of the 16 letters are addressed to a certain Yasīm-Mahar (Tab T05B-41,

Tab T05B-42, Tab T05B-43, Tab T05B-44, Tab T06-1, Tab T06-9, Tab T06-10, TabT06-12+Tab T06-14). 10 Another two fragmentary letters are also possibly addressedto him (Tab T06-3 + Tab T06-17, Tab T06-11), though the addressees’ names arepartly damaged; and one letter refers to him as the sender (Tab T06-13). 11 Thus, thegreat majority of letters are certainly connected with this person.

Yasīm-Mahar is probably the local representative of the city of Ṭābatum. Two ofthe letters (Tab T05B-42, Tab T05B-43) are letter orders sent from his overlord, Iṣī-Sumuabi; this Iṣī-Sumuabi must be identified with the king of Terqa known fromthe documents of Tell Ashara, the ancient Terqa (see below).

Two of the administrative-legal documents also mention Iṣī-Sumuabi. One (Tab

T05B-39) is a list of some monthly rotation relating to the pudûm ceremony forthe god Shamash. 12 Iṣī-Sumuabi is mentioned twice: once at the beginning, in an

below). Photographs of those materials are presented in Numoto 2007 and Numoto 2008; see Yamada2008: 48–50, nn. 7–39, for the correspondence between the excavation numbers and photographs. All ofthese texts will be published with full edition in monographic volumes in the series of of the final reportson the cuneiform texts from Tell Taban. The preliminary report includes a historical analysis of the datafound in those materials. This article repeats parts of the discussions in the preliminary report withsome modifications and adds some further considerations, especially concerning the relations betweenthe central kingship and the local-tribal society at Ṭābatum.

5. The identification was once sometimes doubted (see Groneberg 1980: 243), but it was persua-sively defended by W. Heimpel (Heimpel 1996: 105–6; see also Heimpel 2003: 626, s.v. “Ṭabatum”). Thereferences to Ṭābatum in the sources from Mari and Chagar Bazar have been collected by M. Wäfler(2001: 176–7, s.v. “Ṭabatum”), and more are added in D. Lacambre and A. Millet-Albà in Tunca et al.2008: 104, no. 173, l. 7, Durand 2005: 87, no. 26, l. 8 and Marti 2008: 86, no. 53, l. 4.

6. URU ṭà-ba-tum.KI (Tab T05B-44, l. 11), [URU ṭà-b]a-tim.KI (Tab T06–3+Tab T06–17, l. 3),[URU ṭà]-ba-tim.KI (Tab T06–9, l. 13).

7. Forrer 1920: 19, 144.8. Maul 2005: 10, 97 (index, s.v. “Ṭābētu, Ṭābātu”).9. See Maul 2005: 10, which already suggests this.

10. Two of the eight letters (Tab T05B-42, Tab T05B-43) are letter orders sent by the king Iṣī-Sumuabi (see below). Another two (Tab T05B-41, Tab T05B-44) are letters sent from a certain Taṣī-‘annu. These four letters deal with the security of the region as well as the collection, storage, and trans-portation of tax-barley and silver. The other four letters are sent from persons who describe themselvesto Yasīm-Mahar as “your brother (ahūka)” or call him “my brother (ahī, ahīya [genitive])” (Tab T06-1).

These deal with land ownership, the management of animals and workers, the payment of silver, etc.11. The rest of the letters (Tab T05B-45, Tab T06-2, Tab T06-6, Tab T06-15, Tab T06-16) are eithercorrespondence between other persons, or letters where the correspondents are unclear due to breaks.

12. For the pudûm ceremony, see Jacquet 2001: 57–9, and Yamada forthcoming A.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


The Organization of Power in the Post-Hammurabi Period 593

unclear context, but apparently as the patron of the ceremony, 13 and then again inthe year name at the end. It reads: “The Year: Iṣī-Sumuabi the king dedicated [. . .]for Shamash.” 14

The other document referring to him is a dated contract inscribed on a large

tablet (Tab T06–4) and its envelope (T06–5). It records a land grant by Iṣī-Sumuabi,who is again given the title “the king.” This text offers the most significant datafor considering the historical context of the texts unearthed there. The text on thetablet reads as follows: 15

Obv. 1. 10 IKU A.ŠÀ i+na A.GÀR pí -⸢it⸣-ha-tim 2. ÚS.SA AN.TA ÍD.ha-bu-u[r] 3. ÚS.SA KI.TA mu-ut-ka-[ṣ] é-e 4. SAG.DU AN.TA ÍD.ha-bu-ur 5. SAG.DU KI.TA sa-ku-⸢mé-e⸣-dIM 6. 5 IKU A.ŠÀ i+na A.GÀR pí-it-ha-tim 7. ÚS.SA AN.TA qí-iš-⸢ti-DINGIR⸣

8. ÚS.SA KI.TA i-⸢ba-al⸣- e-ra-ah 9. SAG.DU AN.TA sa-ku-mé- e-dIM 10. SAG.DU KI.TA be-el-lum 11. 1+1 ⁄ 3 SAR É.DÙ.DÙ.A 12. ÚS.SA AN.TA mu-ut-AN-[(. . .)] 13. ÚS.SA KI.TA ri-qu 14. SAG.DU AN.TA a-ku-ki 15. SAG.DU KI.TA ka-ṣú-um 16. ŠU+NÍGIN 15 IKU A.ŠÀ 17. ù 1+1 ⁄ 3 SAR É.DÙ.DÙ.A 18. A.ŠÀ ù É ša É.GAL

19. a+na ia-si-im-ma-harLower Edge 20. DUMU su-ma-at-e-ra-ah 21. mi-ṣi-su-mu-a-bi LUGAL 22. IN.NA.AN.BA

Rev. 23. A.ŠÀ ù É na-aṣ-bu-um 24. ša la ba-aq-ri ù la an-du-ra-ri

13. (1) be-el pu-di-im dUTU (2) ra-bi-a-nu-um i-ṣi-su-mu-a-bi.14. (24) MU i-ṣi-su-mu-a-bi LUGAL (25) [. . .] a+na d⸢UTU ú-še-lu-ú⸣. The text is published in Ya-

mada forthcoming A.15. The transliteration and translation given in Yamada 2008 is modified here taking into consid-

eration the criticism in J.-M. Durand 2008. For philological notes, see Yamada 2008: 52–54 and Durand2008.

The inscription on the envelope reads: (1′) k[a-ni-ik i-ṣi]-su-⸢mu⸣-[a]- ⸢bi⸣ (2′) ⸢15⸣ [IKU A.ŠÀ ù 1+1 ⁄ 3 SAR É] DÙ.DÙ.[(A)] (3′) ša [É.GAL] (4′) a+na [ia-si-im-ma-h]ar (5′) DUMU s[u-ma-at-e-ra-a]h (6′) ITI

ki-⸢nu-nim⸣ ⸢UD 16⸣.[KAM] (7′) MU i-ṣi-⸢su⸣-[mu-a-bi] (8′) tap-pí-iš-ta[m] (9′) iš-ku-nu “Sealed [documentof Iṣī]-Sumuabi: 15 [ikû of field land and 1+ 1 ⁄ 3 SAR of (land with) a house] built; (those are the property)of [the (royal) palace] (4′–5′) (given) to [Yasīm-Mah]ar, son of S[umāt-Era]h; Month of Kinūnum, Day16; The Year: Iṣī-Su[muabi] established a spillway of (the river).” Comparable examples of abbreviatedwriting are found in several envelopes of the contracts from Terqa, which were issued in the time of

Yadih-abu (Rouault 1984: Texts, 1E, 3E, and 5EE). Texts 1E opens with the word kanik(um) followed bya description of property ( ka-[n]i-ik 3 [GÁ]N A.ŠÀ, meaning “the sealed document concerning 3 ikû offield land”), and Text 3E may be restored with a similar phrase as Rouault suggests ( k[a]-n[i-ik 9 GÁN

A.ŠÀ]). Text 5EE, however, opens with tuppi (“tablet of”) followed by a property description (tup-pí 2SAR É [qaqqarum?]). The two former examples support the restoration of the first line on our envelope.For the formula: kanik PN or kanik šarrim, “sealed document of so and so/ the king,” see AHw: 437a(s.v. “kanīku(m)”) and CAD K: 151b-152a (s.v. “kanīku”).

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


SHIGEO Y AMADA 594

25. ba-qí-ir i-ba-qa-ru 26. ni-iš dda-gan dIM-ma-ha-ni 27. ù i-ṣi-su-mu-a-bi i-ku-ul 28. ku-up-ra-am em-ma-am up-ta-ša(!)(text: pa)-aš 29. ù 30 MA.NA KÙ.BABBAR Ì.LÁ.E 30. ⸢IGI⸣ m⸢su⸣-mu-ha-am-mi ša-pí-iṭ ⸢URU(?).qa⸣-ṭú-na-an.KI 31. IGI mbu-nu-ma-dIM IGI mmu-tu-da-mi UMB[ISAG] 32. IGI a-bu-ul-la-an IGI i-ba-li-im 33. IGI an-za-nu-um IGI i-ba-al-pí -DINGIR 34. IGI ì-lí-e-pu-uh IGI ha-am-mu-tar 35. 1 GÍN (over IGI) da-di-e-pu-uh DUMU ga-bi-im 36. IGI ia-di-hi-im DUMU ha-am-mu-tar 37. IGI ha-li-li-im-<<im>> 38. IGI mu-ut-ha-li IGI qí-iš-⸢ti⸣(?)-DINGIR 39. IGI ⸢ša-lim-pa⸣-li-ih-dIM IGI bu-ne-DINGIR 40. IGI ia-an-ṣí-ib-dda-gan IGI mu-ut-aš-kur

41. IGI hi-iṣ-né-e-dIM UMBISAGUpper Edge

42. ITI ki-nu-nim UD 16 KAM 43. MU i-ṣi-su-mu-a-bi 44. tap-pí-iš-tam 45. iš-ku-nu

Obv. Left Margin (from top to bottom): NA 4 LUGAL NA 4 mu-tu-da-mi UMBISAG NA 4 su-mu-ha-am-mi ša-pí-ṭi-im

Rev. Left Margin (from bottom to top): NA 4 ha-am-mu-tar NA 4 an-za-nim NA 4 mu-ut-ha-li NA 4 da-di-e-pu-uh

(1) 10 ikû of field land in the irrigation district of pithatum; upper long side: the

Habur River; lower long side: Mut-kaṣē; upper short side: the Habur River; lowershort side: Sakumē-Addu.(6) 5 ikû of field land in the irrigation district of pithatum; upper long side:Qīšti-El; lower long side: Ibāl-Erah; upper short side: Sakumē-Addu; lower shortside: Bellum.(11) 1+1 ⁄ 3 SAR of (land with) a built house; upper long side: Mut-. . .[(. . .)]; lowerlong side: not occupied; upper short side: Akuki; lower short side: the steppe.(16) Total 15 ikû of field land and 1+1 ⁄ 3 SAR of (land with) a built house; (thoseare) the fields and house of the palace. To Yasīm-Mahar, son of Sumāt-Erah, Iṣī-Sumuabi, the king, has granted (them).(23) These fields and house, legally established, are not subject to claims or

release.(25) A claimant who makes a claim – as he ate an oath by Dagān, Addu of Maha-num and Iṣī-Sumuabi – will be smeared with hot asphalt and will pay 30 minaof silver.(30) Witness: Sumu-Hammi, governor of Qaṭṭunān.(31) Witness: Bunuma-Addu; Witness: Mutu-Ami, the scribe.(32) Witness: Abullān; Witness: Ibālim.(33) Witness: Anzanum; Witness: Ibal-pī-El.(34) Witness: Ilī-epuh; Witness: Hammûtar.(35) One shekel (of silver for) Dādī-epuh son of Gabim.(36) Witness: Yadihim son of Hammûtar.(37) Witness: Halilim.

(38) Witness: Mut-halī; Witness: Qīšti-El.(39) Witness: Šalim-pālih-Addu; Witness: Bun-El.(40) Witness: Ianṣib-Dagān; Witness: Mut-Aškur.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54



(41) Witness: Hiṣnī-Addu, the scribe.(42) Month of Kinūnum, Day 16,(43–45) The Year: Iṣī-Sumuabi established a spillway of (the river).

Obv. Left MarginSeal of the king; Seal of Mutu-Ami, the scribe; Seal of Sumu-Hammi, the governor;

Rev. Left MarginSeal of Hammûtar; Seal of Anzanum; Seal of Mut-halī; Seal of Dādī-epuh.

In this grant, Iṣī-Sumuabi, “the king,” grants two tracts of land property, totaling15 ikû, that is about 54,000 square meters, as well as a house, to the same Yasīm-Mahar son of Sumāt-Erah who is the recipient of most of the letters found. The yearname on the contract commemorates a river-improvement project of Iṣī-Sumuabi“the king” (ll. 43–45). The above-mentioned two letter orders from Iṣī-Sumuabi andthe information found in the administrative-legal texts thus show that Iṣī-Sumuabiwas a king residing outside of Tell Taban, but ruling an extensive area which in-cluded that city.

Importantly, the grant includes unique phraseologies confirming and defend-ing the property transaction (ll. 23–29), which definitely demonstrate that this textbelongs to the scribal tradition of the so-called Hana texts used in the contractsexcavated from Terqa (Tell Ashara), and some probably found in its vicinity, duringthe Old and Middle Babylonian periods. 16 The phrase naṣbum ša lā baqri(m) u lāandurāri(m) (ll. 23–24), which confirms the legal property transaction, 17 as well asthe penalty of being smeared with hot asphalt, are clear characteristics of the Hanatexts.

Fortunately, Iṣī-Sumuabi is attested in one of the contracts found at Terqa(Rouault 1984, Text 9), in which the oath is taken in his name, alongside those

of the gods Dagān and Itūr-Mer. 18

Since the Hana-type format is characteristic ofTerqa, and the contract from Tell Taban uses that format, there is no doubt that theIṣī-Sumuabu/i attested at Tell Taban and Tell Ashara are one and the same person.Thus, Iṣī-Sumuabi must have been a king residing in Terqa who ruled an extensivearea along the Middle Euphrates and Lower Habur, including Ṭābatum.

Extension of Terqa’s Political Controland Its Provincial Divisions

It is in place to review briefly the general history of the region, before discussing

the extent of Terqa’s political control and its provincial divisions.

16. The Hana-type texts were written for a considerably long period after the decline of the king-dom of Mari: known texts date from the second half of the 18th century B.C. up to the 12/11th centuryB.C. (parallel to the reign of Tiglath-pileser I, king of Assyria). These Hana-type texts from Terqa, as wellas those of unclear provenance kept in museums and private collections, have been published or editedin Rouault 1984 (Texts 1–10), Podany 2002 (Texts 1–3, 6–15 and 17), Tsukimoto 2003, and Rouault 2011:23 (Terqa 6-2). A further Hana-type text from the reign of Ahuni, which was unearthed from Tell Tabanin 2009, will be published in Yamada forthcoming B. The characteristics of these texts and their varia-tion through the ages were investigated by A. Podany (2002: 155–237); see also Charpin 2002: 85–7 and

Yamada forthcoming B.17. For this phrase, see Yamada 2008: 53, with bibliography cited there, as well as further modifica-

tions in Yamada forthcoming B.18. Rouault 1984: Text 9, ll. 18–19: (18) ni-iš dda-gan di-túr-me-er (19) ù LUGAL i-ṣi-su-mu-a-bu

i-[ k]u-ul.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


SHIGEO Y AMADA 596

Some decades before the time of Iṣī-Sumuabi, Zimri-Lim of Mari ruled theMiddle Euphrates and the Lower Habur areas, including the cities of Terqa andṬābatum. Ṭābatum was somehow under the influence of the governor (šāpitum)of Qaṭṭunān, the city located south of Ṭābatum. 19 Later, Hammurabi of Babylon

conquered Mari, and since his military expedition probably reached as far as Tut-tul (Tell Bi’a), a point far west of Terqa, he probably took under his own control themajority of Zimri-Lim’s territory, including Terqa on the Middle Euphrates andṬābatum on the Lower Habur. 20 It appears that Terqa later won its independencefrom Samsuiluna of Babylon and became the capital of an independent kingdom,dominating the Middle Euphrates region. As previous studies have shown, the firstthree kings of Terqa were Yapah-Sumu[abu], 21 Iṣī-Sumuabu, and Yadih-abu, allmentioned in contracts from that city. 22 They ruled during a period of about 20 to 30years, according to A. Podany’s prosopographical analysis of the texts from Terqa. 23

Though the reign of the first king, Yapah-Sumu[abu], remains obscure, ourknowledge about the second king, Iṣī-Sumuabi, has now greatly increased, thanksto the texts from Tell Taban. As seen, the new texts prove that his rule from Terqaextended at least as far as Ṭābatum. A recently published contract from Harradum(Hirbet ed-Deniye), about 90 km downstream from Terqa on the Euphrates, is alsodated by the name of Iṣī-Sumuabi, 24 probably the same king of Terqa, as D. Charpinhas suggested. 25 Thus, it seems that an extensive region along the Middle Euphra-tes and the Lower Habur, including Harradum and Ṭābatum, was once under Iṣī-Sumuabi’s control. In other words, at least some time in his reign, his kingdom cov-ered almost the entire territory once ruled by Zimri-Lim of Mari. The fact that thegovernor, the šāpiṭum, of Qaṭṭunān is listed as the first witness in the contract fromTell Taban (l. 30) suggests that Ṭābatum was under the influence of the governor of

the Qaṭṭunān district. One may further speculate that Iṣī-Sumuabi continued to use

19. The administration of the Qaṭṭunān district is illustrated by the letters of the governors atQaṭṭunān (Birot 1993, Guillot 1997); see also Durand 1994. Several sites have been suggested as thelocation of Qaṭṭunān, such as Tell Fadgami, Tell Šaddadi, and Tell Ašamsani (Kessler 1980: 233, n. 858;Nashef 1982: 221, s.v. “Qatni”; most recently Charpin 2009: 65–66, n. 28 and Cancik-Kirschbaum 2009:137–138 [both of them support the identification with Tell Fadgami]). It can be safely identified with theQatni of the annals of Tukulti-Ninurta II (Grayson 1991: A.0.100.5, l. 109).

20. Stol 1976: 40; Charpin and Ziegler 2003: 243–4. See also Charpin 2002: 64.21. The restoration of the name is based on the hypothetical identification of this person with a

Yapah-Sumuabu attested in a text from Alalakh (Wiseman 1953: no. 56, l. 47) who bore the title “UGULA Ha-na.”

22. Podany 2002: 32–37; Charpin 2002: 64, n. 23. Podany (2002: 35) reserved judgment about de-termining strictly the chronological order between the two earliest kings, Yapah-Sumu[abu] and Iṣī-Sumuabu, due to the lack of clear philological evidence in the contracts sworn to by their names, i.e.,Rouault 1984: Texts 8 and 9. Charpin noted, however, that a man named Ibāl-pī-el, who is mentionedwith the title šāpiṭum as the first witness in a text dated to Yadih-abu (Rouault 1984: Text 3, l. 30),appears (without title) also in the first position in the row of witnesses in the document dated to Iṣī-Sumuabu (ibid., Text 9). Identifying these namesakes with each other, Charpin argues that it is likelythat the reigns of Iṣī-Sumuabu and Yadih-abu were contiguous and so Iṣī-Sumuabu was probably thedirect predecessor of Yadih-abu, and thus chronologically followed Yapah-Sumu[abu]. This Ibāl-pī-El theṣāpiṭum is apparently different from the Ibāl-pī-El mentioned in our contract from Tell Taban (l. 33); theformer is the šāpiṭum, or district governor, of Terqa, and the latter is probably a local man from Ṭābatumor a nearby place in the Qaṭṭunān district.

23. Podany 2002: 37.24. Joannès 2006: Text 16: MU i-ṣí-su-mu-a-bi (the rest is lost).25. Charpin 2006. See also Joannès 2006: 23, which was the first to consider the identification

possible.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54



the basic district divisions of the kingdom of Mari, that is, the districts of Qaṭṭunān,Saggaratum, and Terqa, setting aside the now deserted center of Mari. 26

Yadih-abu, who succeeded Iṣī-Sumuabi as king of Terqa, seems to have main-tained a realm extending along the Habur for at least some time. Several of his year

names attest to construction works at Terqa and its vicinity. 27

M. Guichard properlyread one of the year names as: “The year: Yadih-abu the king renewed Annunitumof Ṭābatum.” 28 This implies, of course, that his rule was maintained along the lowerHabur at least as far as Ṭābatum. An administrative tablet found in 2007 on thesurface of Tell Taban (Tab T07–3) also bears a year name of Yadih-abu. This tablethas been somewhat eroded, but the text, a list of barley rations, includes about 50personal names, each of which is preceded by the amount of barley assigned to thatperson. The list concludes with the total amount of barley (40 ugāru 3 kurru of bar-ley) and the date, which reads “[The month] of Malkānum, Day 30, Year: Yadih-abuthe king established/set . . ..” 29 This text, being found at Tell Taban, demonstratesthat Yadih-abu controlled Ṭābatum at some time in his reign. It is not clear howextensive a territory Yadih-abu could have controlled on the Middle Euphrates. Ter-qa’s control of the Middle Euphrates, in any case, appears to have been damaged bythe military advance of Samsuiluna of Babylon, who claimed in a year name that hedefeated Yadih-abu in his 28th year. 30 Samsuiluna must have controlled Harradumsome time before this date, in his 25th year at the latest, as suggested by texts fromHarradum. 31

Though many points remain to be clarified, the area along the Middle Euphra-tes and Lower Habur, including Terqa and Ṭābatum, seems to have been treatedas a single political entity under different ruling powers throughout the age; it was

26. Here I follow the broadly accepted understanding. However, D. Charpin doubts the completedownfall of Mari as the regional capital in the post-Hammurabi period (Charpin 2004: 358–9); he arguesthat the protective deity of Mari, Itūr-Mer, is often mentioned in the contracts of Terqa, and this mightreflect the survival of Mari.

27. The known year names of Yadih-abu are: (1) MU Ia-di-ha-a-bu LUGAL URU! A-ra-i-te.KIi-pu-šu “Yadih-abu the king built the city of Araite” (Rouault 1984: Text 1, ll. 41–43); (2) MU Ia-di-ha-a-bu LUGAL KÁ dIM i-pu-šu-ú “Yadih-abu the king built the gate of Addu,” (ibid.: Text 2, ll. 39–40, and 2E,ll. 41–42); (3) MU Ia-di-ha-bi-im a-ia-bi-šu ik-šu-du “Yadih-abu defeated his enemy” (ibid.: Text 3, ll. 49–50); (4) MU I [a-di-ha]-a-bu LUGAL.E BÀD? x x NU A LA AL [i]- pu-šu // M[U] I [a-di-ha-a]-b[u L]UGAL.EBÀD? [ x x] NU A LA AL [i-p]u-šu “Y[adih]-abu the king built the wall? of . . .” (ibid.: Text 4, ll. 12′–14′,and 4E, ll. 12′–14′); (5) MU Ia-di-ha-a-[b]u LUGAL An-nu-ni-tam ša MUNx ú-di-šu // MU Ia-d[i]-ha-a-bu LUGAL An-nu-n[i]-tam ša Ṭà-ba-tim ú-[u]d-di-šu “Yadih-abu the king renewed Annunitum of Ṭābatum”(ibid.: Text 5, ll. 51–52; 5E, ll. 48–50; following the improved reading of M. Guichard 2003); (6) [M]U Ia-di-ha-a-bu LUGAL.E URU Du-un-nam.KI i-pu-šu “Yadih-abu the king built Dunnum” (Rouault 1984:Text 6, ll. 50–51); (7) MU Ia-di-ha-a-bu LU[GAL].E É.GAL ša URU T [ er-qa.KI ú!?]-š[ e?- pi?-iš?] “Yadih-abu the king [built(?)] the palace of T[erqa] (ibid.: Text 7, ll. 11–13); (8) another year name attested in anadministrative tablet found at Tell Taban in 2007 (see below, n. 29). Thus, construction is mentioned inthe following places: Araite (1), Ṭābatum (5), Dunnum (6) and Terqa (7). Araite and Dunnum are locatedon the Upper and Middle Euphrates (J.-R. Kupper in Birot et al. 1979: 5, 10, s.vv. “Ara’itum,” “Dunnum”).

28. See n. 27 above, Year name (5).29. (20) ŠU+NÍGIN 40 A.GÀR 3 GUR ŠE (21) [ITI] ma-al-ka-nim UD 30 KAM (22) ⸢MU⸣ ia-di-ha-

a-bu ⸢LUGAL⸣ (23) ⸢ x x x x x x⸣ (24) ⸢iš-ku-nu-ú⸣.30. Horsnell 1999: 220–2 (Si 28).31. The texts from Harradum published by Joannès include tablets dated by the 25th year of Sam-

suiluna (Joannès 2006: 21–2). As noted by D. Charpin (Charpin in press), the “sixth year of Samsuiluna”

can be read on one of the tablets from Harradum (Joannès 2006: Text 23, l. 33). Accordingly, Samsuilunaapparently took over the control of Harradum from his father Hammurabi. It is most likely a king ofTerqa, either Yapah-Sumuabu or Iṣī-Sumuabi, seized control of Harradum from Samsuiluna after thelatter’s sixth year, and then Iṣī-Sumuabi or Yadih-abu lost it back to Samsuiluna.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


SHIGEO Y AMADA 598

first ruled by Zimri-Lim of Mari, then by Hammurabi of Babylon, and eventually bythe kings of Terqa. 32

Relations between the central royal government and the

local tribal society at Ṭābatum

I now shall consider the administrative organization in the area surroundingthe city of Ṭābatum, in particular the relations between the central royal govern-ment in Terqa and the local tribal society at Ṭābatum. The key to this question isthe status of Yasīm-Mahar son of Sumāt-Erah. As mentioned above, the majorityof letters from trench 8 in Tell Taban were addressed to Yasīm-Mahar, and he wasgranted property there, so he was apparently residing in that city. The beginningsof the two letters sent by Iṣī-Sumuabi, king of Terqa, both instructively read: “Donot procrastinate about the city, the irrigated areas, and the watch posts.” 33 Thisbroad statement demonstrates that Yasīm-Mahar was responsible to the king forthe whole of the city and its surroundings. One of the letters (Tab T05B-42) showsthat Yasīm-Mahar was also responsible for the collection of the tax-barley in the re-gion, reading “Do not procrastinate about collecting the tax-barley.” 34 The greetingformulae in two other letters include statements such as, “it is well with the gate ofyour (Yasīm-Mahar’s) office ( ekallum).” 35

Being under some influence of the district governor (šāpiṭum) of Qaṭṭunān (seeabove), most probably Yasīm-Mahar represented the city of Ṭābatum by performingthe office of sugāgum. According to previous studies, under Mari rule, a sugāgum was nominated from each town or tribal community to serve as its local representa-tive in its dealings with the royal house of Mari. 36 A sugāgum is attested in a con-

tract of Terqa from the time of Iṣī-Sumuabi, 37 so the institution of sugāgum musthave survived under the rule of Terqa in the post-Hammurabi period. I shall con-sider the status of Yasīm-Mahar, comparing it with that of the sugāgum of Ṭābatummentioned in a letter from the time of Zimri-Lim, king of Mari, ARM 27, no. 107 (Bi-rot 1993: 183–6). That long letter was sent to the king from Zimri-Addu, the gover-nor of the Qaṭṭunān district. I will summarize the contents, adding some comments:

(1) The letter opens with a description of the arrangements in place duringthe time of the previous district governor, Zakira-Hammû: Previously, Zimri-Limthe king had ordered the 2/3 mina of silver allotted to the city of Ṭābatum to bepaid by a man named Hammûtar, who the context suggests was then the sugāgum,and Hammûtar had paid it to Zakira-Hammû, who was then the governor of theQaṭṭunān district. (ll. 1–6)

Since in the subsequent lines the letter deals with the change of the sugāgum at Ṭābatum, it is clear that Hammûtar was holding that office. L. Marti published

32. This regional unity was not only in the political field, but also in the cultural one, as is seen bythe use of a common set of month names in Mari, Terqa, and Ṭābatum. For this, see Yamada 2008: 58–9,and Yamada forthcoming A.

33. a-na URU.KI sa-la-hi-im ù ma-aṣ-ṣa-ra-tim ni-di a-hi-im la ta-ra-aš-ši (Tab T05B-42, ll. 4–9 // Tab T05B-43, ll. 4–5). For sal(a)hum, see Durand 1988: 338, n. 20; Eidem 1991: 133–134; Charpin1993/94: 8 (salhû); Durand 1998: 86, 522–3.

34. a-na še-im GUN šu-ud-di(sic!)-nim ni-di a-hi-im la ta-ra-aš-ši (ll. 8–9).35. a-na KÁ É.GAL-li-ka šu-ul-mu(-um) (Tab T05B-44, l. 6; Tab T06–1, ll. 6–7). The word ekallum

may mean a relatively small structure that served for his office.36. Nakata 1987; Fleming 2004: 64–76; Charpin 2007: esp. 170–73; Marti 2008: esp. 10–19.37. Rouault 1984: Text 9, l. 23: 1/2 GÍN bi-na-I[ŠDA]R? su-ga-gu.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54



the receipt made out for his payment of the sugāgūtum-tax (Marti 2008: no. 53) thatvirtually proves his status as sugāgum. 38

(2) From here on Zimri-Addu, the sender of letter, explains the problems he iscurrently facing: He had replaced Zakira-Hammû as the governor of the Qaṭṭunān

district, and Hammûtar had paid the silver to him in the previous year. (ll. 7–8a)(3) However, the king Zimri-Lim had recently nominated a certain Yashadumto the post of sugāgum at Ṭābatum (ana sugāgūt Ṭābatimki uwa’’er), so Zimri-Adduexplained to Yashadum about the accepted arrangement and asked him to pay thesilver. (ll. 8b-14a)

(4) Then the members of Patakhim (DUMU.MEŠ Patakhim), which appear tohave consisted of a major clan of the city of Ṭābatum and related persons, 39 of which

Yashadum was probably the leader, assembled and discussed the matter. (obv. 14b-18, followed by a break of a few lines)

Though their decision remains unclear due to the break, it appears to have beennegative against the payment of the silver, as suggested by their quoted statement,“If we pay that silver now, [we must pay it (?)] in the future days constantly.” 40

(5) Zimri-Addu continues to explain the steps that he took to confront this prob-lematic situation: He promised to allot 5 ikû of field land to each leader of the Pa-takhim clan as a subsistence holding (šukūsātum), an amount equal to what wasgiven to the soldiers (behrum) and other servants (šūt SAG) serving the royal palaceeither on the bank of Euphrates or in the detachment (aliktum) of soldiers placedin the Qaṭṭunān district. He also promised to assign 3 ikû of field land to others ofthe population of the land (DUMU.MEŠ mātim), which seem to refer to other clansresiding in and around Ṭābatum. (r. 1′–9′)

(6) Later, as still no one from Ṭābatum promised to pay the silver, Zimri-Addu

dispatched one man from Qaṭṭunān to Ṭābatum for the land registration (anašassukkūtim). (r. 10′–13′)(7) Then, repeating the above-described plan of land allotment to those people of

Ṭābatum, and mentioning as well as their right to use wells around the field lands,Zimri-Addu asks the king to support this administrative arrangement and to him-self declare to the people of Patakhim that he, the king, is allotting to them 5 ikû ofland from the royal property. (ll. 14′–28′)

This letter reveals several details about the sugāgum-institution specifically atṬābatum in the time of Zimri-Lim. The major points are:

(1) The sugāgum was a permanent office.(2) The sugāgum was nominated directly by the king of Mari from a leading clan

or family of the city.(3) The leader(s) of the sugāgum’s clan, as well as other families residing around

the city, were allotted land by the king, and in return the sugāgum paid silver to theking via the district governor of Qaṭṭunān.

Comparing these points with what is revealed from the texts from Tell Taban,one may reach the following conclusions: The local civil organization, which centered

38. Marti understands the sugāgūtum-tax as a one-time tax in animals paid by tribal leaders specif-ically when they settled newly acquired lands in the time of Zimri-Lim. As Marti persuasively discussed,it was actually paid in installments during a number of years but still different from the usual annualtax (biltum). See especially Marti 2008: 10–7. Two letters of Hammûtar are known from Mari (Guichard

1997: 188, no. 19 [M.11007]; Cadelli 1994: 164–65, no. 88 [A.8551]).39. Birot 1993: 186 further regards it as a group that collectively pays the tax.40. kaspam šâti inanna nišaqqalma ana warkīt ūmī ana kayyantim . . . (ll. 16–17)

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


SHIGEO Y AMADA 600

around the sugāgum-institution, continued unchanged from the time of Zimri-Limto that of Iṣī-Sumuabi in the post-Hammurabi period. Accordingly, one can postu-late with reasonable certainty that Yasīm-Mahar of Ṭābatum was nominated as thesugāgum for representing the local civil society of Ṭābatum 41 and was authorized by

the king of Terqa to hold certain land property of the city of Ṭābatum. The contractof the royal grant from Tell Taban must reflect such an administrative arrange-ment. Thus, Yasīm-Mahar as the bridge between the local society of Ṭābatum andthe central government of Terqa gathered the tax-barley and/or silver and paidthem to the king of Terqa, and presumably performed other services for the royalhouse of Terqa as well.

41. For the process of the nomination, see Villard 1994 and Charpin 2007: 171–172.

References

Bardet, G., et al.1984 Archives administratives de Mari 1. ARM 23. Paris: ERC.

Birot, M.1993 Correspondance des gouverneurs de Qaṭṭunân. ARM 27. Paris: ERC.

Birot, M., et al.1979 Répertoire analytique des Archives royals de Mari, tomes I-XIV et XVIII, Nom pro-

pres. ARM 16/1. Paris: ERC.Cadelli, D.

1994 Lieux boisés et bois coupés. in: Charpin, D. and Durand, J.-M. eds., Florilegiummarianum II: Recueil d’études à la mémoire de Maurice Birot. Memoires de NABU 3.Paris: SEPOA: 159–73.

Cancik-Kirschbaum, E.2009 Ortsnamenreihungen als Quellen zur historischen Geographie: Der Westen des

mittelassyrischen Reiches unter Tukultī-Ninurta I. in: Cancik-Kirschbaum, E. andZiegler, N., eds. 2009: 121–50.

Cancik-Kirschbaum, E. and Ziegler, N., eds.2009 Entre les fleuves - I: Untersuchungen zur historischen Geographie Obermesopota-

miens im 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 20. Glad-beck: PeWe-Verlag.

Charpin, D.1993/94 Compte rendu du CAD Vol. S (1984). AfO 40/41: 1–23.

2002 Chroniques du Moyen-Euphrate 1. Le <<royaume de Hana>>: Textes et histoire. RA 96: 61–92.

2004 Histoire politique du Proche-Orient Amorrite (2002–1595). in: Charpin, D., Edzard,D. O. and Stol, M., Mesopotamien: Die altbabylonishce Zeit, Orbis Biblicus et Orien-talis 160/4, Fribourg - Göttingen: Academic Press Fribourg: 25–480.

2006 Harrâdum entre Terqa et Babylon. NABU 2006 (4): 90–1, no. 89.2007 Chroniques bibliographiques 10. Économie, société et institutions paléo-babyloni-

ennes: Nouvelles sources, nouvelles approaches. RA 101: 147–82.2009 Un itinéraire paléo-babylonien le long du Habur. in: Cancik-Kirschbaum, E. and

Ziegler, N. eds. 2009: 59–74.in press Harrâdum, entre Babylone et le <<pays de Mari>>, in Cancik-Kirschbaum, E. et al.

(eds.), Normierung und Emanzipation: Bausteine für eine Kulturgeschichte des 2 Jts.v. Chr. in Alten Orient. Internationales Symposium zu Ehren von Gernot Wilhelm,Berlin.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54



Charpin, D., & Ziegler, N.2003 Florilegium marianum V: Mari et le Proche-Orient à l’époque amorrite: Essai

d’histoire politique. Mémoires de NABU 6. Paris: SEPOA.Durand, J. -M.

1988 Archives épistolaires de Mari, I/1. ARM 26. Paris: ERC.1994 Administrateurs de Qaṭṭunân. in: Florilegium marianum II: Recueil d’etudes à la

mémoire de Maurice Birot. Mémoires de NABU 3. Paris: SEPOA: 83–114.1998 Les documents épistolaires du palais de Mari, II. LAPO 17. Paris: Éditions du Cerf.

2005 Florilegium marianum VIII: le culte des pierres et les monuments commémoratifs enSyrie amorrite. Memoires de NABU 9. Paris: SEPOA.

2008 Nouveaux textes de Tell Ṭâban. NABU 2008 (2): 55, no. 43.Eidem, J.

1991 The Tell Leilan Archives 1987. RA 85: 109–35.Fleming, D. E.

2004 Democracy’s Ancient Ancestors: Mari and Early Collective Governance. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Forrer, E.1920 Die Provinzeinteilung des assyrischen Reiches. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs.

Grayson, A. K.1991 Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC, I (1114–859 BC). RIMA 2. To-

ronto: University of Toronto Press.Groneberg, B.

1980 Die Orts-und Gewässernamen der altbabylonischen Zeit. RGTC 3. Wiesbaden:Reichert.

Guichard, M.1997 Le sel à Mari (III): Les lieux du sel. in: Charpin, D. and Durand, J.-M. eds., Florile-

gium marianum III: Recueil d’études à la mémoire de Marie-Thérèse Barrelet. Mem-

oires de NABU 4. Paris: SEPOA: 167–200.2003 Divinité des salines mentionnée à Terqa. NABU 2003 (1): 7, no. 8.Guillot, I.

1997 Les gouverneurs de Qaṭṭunân: Nouveaux Textes. in: Florilegium marianum III: Re-cueil d’études à la mémoire de Marie-Thérèse Barrelet. Mémoires de NABU 4. Paris:SEPOA: 271–90.

Heimpel, W.1996 Moroccan Locusts in Qaṭṭunān. RA 90: 101–20.2003 Letters to the King of Mari: A New Translation, with Historical Introduction, Notes,

and Commentary. MesCiv 12. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.Horsnell, M. J. A.

1999 The Year-names of the First Dynasty of Babylon, vol. 2: The Year-Names Recon-

structed and Critically Annotated in Light of their Exemplars. Hamilton. Ontario:McMaster University Press.

Jacquet, A.2011 Florilegium marianum XII: Documents relatives aux dépenses pour le culte. Mem-

oires de NABU 13. Paris: SEPOA.Joannès, F.

2006 Haradum II: Les textes de la période paléo-babylonienne (Samsu-iluna – Ammi-ṣaduqa). Paris: ERC.

Kessler, K.1980 Untersuchungen zur historischen Topographie Nordmesopotamiens nach Keilschrift

Quellen des 1. Jahretausends v. Chr. Beiheft zum TAVO, Reihe B 26. Wiesbaden:

Reichert.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54


SHIGEO Y AMADA 602

Marti, L.2008 Florilegium marianum X: Nomades et sédentaires à Mari: La perception de la taxe-

sugâgûtum. Mémoires de NABU 11. Paris: SEPOA.Maul, S. M.

2005 Die Inschriften von Tall Ṭābān (Grabungskampagnen 1997–1999): Die Könige vonṬābētu und das Land Māri in mittelassyrischer Zeit. ASJ Supplementary Series 2.Tokyo: The Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq. Kokushikan University.

Nakata, I.1987 Aspects of the Local Government of the Kingdom of Mari. The sugāgum Institution.

Chuo-Daigau Bungakubu Kiyo (Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters Chuo University) 32: 1–33 (Japanese).

Nashef, K.1982 Die Orts-und Gewässernamen der mittelbabylonischen und mittelassyrischen Zeit.

RGTC 5. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Numoto, H.

2006 Excavations at Tell Taban, Hassake, Syria (4): Preliminary Report of the 2005 Win-

ter Season of Work. Al-Rāfidān 27: 1–13 and pls. 1–30.2007 Excavations at Tell Taban, Hassake, Syria (5): Preliminary Report of the 2005 Sum-

mer Season of Work. Al-Rāfidān 28: 1–24 and pls. 1–38.2008 Excavations at Tell Taban, Hassake, Syria (6): Preliminary Report of the 2006 Sea-

son of Work. Al-Rāfidān 29: 1–12 and pls. 1–34.2009 Excavations at Tell Taban, Hassake, Syria: Preliminary Report on the 2007 Sea-

son of Excavations. in: Numoto, H. ed. Excavations at Tell Taban, Hassake, Syria: Preliminary Report on the 2007 Season of Excavations, and the Study of CuneiformTexts, Tokyo: Kokushikan University.

Podany, A.2002 The Land of Hana: Kings, Chronology, and Scribal Tradition. Bethesda, MD: CDL.

Rouault, O.1984 Terqa Final Reports 1: L’archive de Puzurum. BibMes 16. Malibu: Undena.2011 Terqa Final Reports 2: Les textes des saisons 5 à 9. BibMes 29. Malibu: Undena.

Shibata, D.2007 Middle Assyrian Administrative and Legal Texts from the 2005 Excavation at Tell

Taban: A Preliminary Report. Al-Rāfidān 28: 63–74.Stol, M.

1976 Studies in Old Babylonian History. PIHANS 40. Leiden: Nederlands Historisch-Ar-chaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul.

Tsukimoto, A.2003 The Land of Hana and Qatuna: A New Hana-Text in Middle Assyrian Script.

BSNESt 46 (2): 52–70 (Japanese).

Tunca, Ö., et al.2008 Chagar Bazar (Syrie) III: Les trouvailles épigrahiques et sigillographiques de chan-

tier I (2000–2002). Louvain: Peeters. Villard, P.

1994 Nomination d’un Scheich. in: Charpin D. and Durand J.-M. eds. Florilegium mari-anum II: Recueil d’études à la mémoire de Maurice Birot. Memoires de NABU 3. Paris: SEPOA: 291–297.

Wäfler, M.2001 Tall al-Hamīdīya 3: Zur historischen Geographie von Idamaraṣ zur Zeit der Archive

von Mari und Šubat-enlil/Šehnā. OBO 21, Series Archaeologica. Freiburg, Schweiz:Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Wiseman, D. J.1953 The Alalakh Tablets. London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara.

7/17/2019 Yamada2012-RAI54



Yamada, S.2008 A Preliminary Report on the Old Babylonian Texts from the Excavation of Tell Ta-

ban in the 2005 and 2006 Seasons: The Middle Euphrates and Habur Areas in thePost-Hammurabi Period. Al-Rāfidān 29: 47–62.

2010 Administration and Society in the City of Ṭābatum as Seen in the Old BabylonianTexts from Tell Taban. Al-Rāfidān Special Issue 2010: 247–52.

forthcoming A A Pudûm Rotation List from Tell Taban and the Cultural Milieu ofṬabatum in the Post-Hammurabi Period. RA 105 (2011).

forthcoming B An adoption contract from Tell Taban, the kings of the land of Hana, andthe Hana-style scribal tradition. RA 105 (2011).

Yamada2012-RAI54

Documents

Transcript of Yamada2012-RAI54