The Babylonian chronicles - Universiteit Leiden

TheBabylonianchroniclesThechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippainacomparativeperspective

MariëtteWesselss1023039MasterthesisAssyriology

�1

Tableofcontents

PageAbbreviations 3

Periods 4 Introductionandmethod 5-9

Introducingthecorpus 10-12

Periodsanddynastiesinthechronicles 13-16

Subjectsinthechronicles 17-25

Placesinthechronicles 26-32

Kingsinthechronicles 33-40

Timespanofthechronicles 41-43

Reoccurringsentencesinthechronicles 44-46

Godsandreligioninthechronicles 47-50

Appearanceofthechronicles 51-54

Conclusion 55-56

Bibliography 57-62

�2

Abbreviations

ADRTI Hunger,H.andSachsA.J.(1988).AstronomicalDiariesandRelated TextsfromBabylonia,volumeI.Vienna.

BM BritishMuseum

Glassner,MC Glassner,J.(2004).MesopotamianChronicles.Atlanta.

Grayson,ABC Grayson,A.K.(1975).AssyrianandBabylonianChronicles.New York.

VanderSpek,BCHP VanderSpek,R.J.(2004).BabylonianChroniclesfromthe HellenisticPeriod.http://www.livius.org/babylonia.html.

�3

http://www.livius.org/babylonia.html

Periods 1

AkkadDynasty 2334-2154

ThirdDynastyofUr 2112-2004

LarsaDynasty 2025-1763

FirstDynastyofIsin 2017-1794

OldAssyrianPeriod ca.1900-1750

FirstDynastyofBabylon 1894-1595

FirstDynastyoftheSealand unknown

MiddleAssyrianPeriod ca.1300-1100

KassiteDynasty 1374?-1155

SecondDynastyofIsin 1157-1026

SecondSealandDynasty 1025-1005

BaziDynasty 1004-985

ElamiteDynasty 984-979

UncertainDynasties 978-748

Neo-AssyrianDynasty 744-612

Neo-BabylonianDynasty 626-539

PersianEmpire 538-331

MacedonianRulers 330-307

SeleucidDynasty 305-65BCE

ArsacidDynasty 250BCE-228CE

Informationretrievedfrom:Oppenheim1964:335-347;VandeMieroop2007:302-317.1

�4

Introductionandmethod

InfirstmillenniumBCEBabylonia,agroupofscholarscompiledtextsthatarenowknownas

chronicles.Thedocumentstheyleftbehindgivevaluableinsightsinhowthesescholars

viewedtheirhistoryandunderstoodcontemporaryevents.Thecorpusofchroniclescanbe

viewedasadistinctgenreofBabylonianhistoriography .Thechroniclesnarrateeventsfrom2

thetimeofSargononwards,thismeansthatthechroniclethatportraystheoldesteventis

abouttheperiod2334to2279BCE ,andthechroniclethatdescribesthelatesteventisabout3

theperiod123to88BCE,thisisintheParthianperiod,duringthereignofMithradatesII .4

TheBabylonianchroniclesthusnarrateaperiodofmorethan2000years.Ina2012articleby

C.WaerzeggersithasbeenproventhatthechroniclesdonotsolelycomefromBabylon,but

thattherearealsochroniclesfromBorsippa .InthefieldofAssyriologyithasbeenassumed5

foralongtimethatallthechroniclesoriginatedinBabylon;asBabylonwasthecapitalof

Babylonia,andtheprovenanceofthesetextswasunknown.However,Borsippawasthesister

cityofBabylon,andanimportantcityforscholars,asNabû-scribalgodandsonofMarduk-

wasthepatrondeityofBorsippa.InthescholarlyworldofAssyriology,therehasbeena

vibrantdiscussiononthechroniclessincethepublicationofthefirstchronicleonwards .6

Assyriologistsdonotseemtoagreeontheplaceofpublication,themeaningofthetexts,the

historicalaccuracy,orhowtheyshouldbeinterpreted.Inthisthesis,lightwillbeshedupon

thesediscussionpoints.

Thechroniclesdonotonlycomefromdifferentcities,butalsofromadifferenttime,the

chroniclesfromBorsippawerewrittenintheNeo-Babylonianperiod(626-539)whilethe

chroniclesfromBabylonweremostlywrittenduringtheHellenistic(330-65BCE)and

Parthianperiods(250BCE-228CE),whicharetheperiodsinwhichthelibraryoftheEsagil

templeflourished.Hence,thereisadifferenceintheplacewherethechronicleswerewritten,

butalsoadifferenceintime.Theresearchquestionforthisthesisis:‘AsbothBabylonand

Borsippapublishedchronicles,dothecitiesbelongtothesamechronicletraditionoristhere

morethanonechronicletraditioninBabylonia?’Thisquestiongivesthepossibilitytoexplore

Nexttochroniclesashistoriographicmaterial,kinglists,epics,andannalscanalsobedistinguished.2

ChronicleABC20A3

ChronicleBCHP204

Waerzeggers20125

ThefirstchronicleswerepublishedbyS.Smithin1924:Babylonianhistoricaltexts.6

�5

andcomparethechroniclesfrombothcitiesinfullrespect.Ifsimilaritiescanbefoundinthe

chroniclesfrombothcitiesthatwouldindicatethattherewereno-orlittle-changesintime

andspace.Similaritiesinthechronicleswouldmeananongoingtraditionspanningseveral

hundredyears.Ifthereareno-orlittle-similaritiesinthechroniclesfromboththecitiesthis

wouldindicatethatthescribaltraditionhadchangedoverthedecades,orthatthereare

differencesbetweenthecities.Localdiversityandchangesovertimecouldbediscoveredin

thechronicles.

Therearepresently44Babylonianchronicles,29ofthesechroniclescomefromBabylonand

fifteenchroniclesoriginatedinBorsippa.The29chroniclesfromBabylonaremostlywritten

intheEsagiltemple,onlytwoofthesechroniclesdonothaveaclearprovenance .Sinceithas7

beenproventhattherearetwoscribalcenters,itshouldbestressedthattheBabylonian

ChronicleSeries,asintroducedbyA.K.Grayson,isnolongerviable.Hesuggestedthat

chroniclesABC1-7areexcerptsfromoneseries,ascanbeseeninthefactthattheseven

chroniclescomplementeachother .However,theso-calledseriescannotbeaseriesasthe8

chroniclescomefromdifferentcitiesandwereprobablywritteninadifferenttime.MC16,MC

17 andABC7camefromBabylon,whileABC2-6originatedinBorsippa.Whilethechronicles9

fromBabylonhavemostlybeenfoundintheEsagiltemple ,thechroniclesfromBorsippa10

comefromprivatearchivesownedbypriestsfromtheEzidatemple.Becausetherewasno

overarchingtemplearchiveinBorsippa,acollectionofprivatearchivescanbefound

throughoutthecity.Fouroftheprivatearchivescontainedchronicles:theRe’i-alpi,Ilia,

AtkuppuandBeliya’uarchives.Inthisthesis,theyaresubdividedintotwogroups,theRe’i-alpi

group,whichcontainstheRe’i-alpi,IliaandAtkuppuarchivesandconsistsoffourchronicles

andtheBeliya’ugroup,whichconsistsofelevenchronicles.Thereasonforthesubdivisioninto

twogroupsis-asWaerzeggerspointedout-thattheRe’i-alpigroupcontainschroniclesthat

Waerzeggers2012:288,thesechroniclesareMC16andMC17.7

Grayson1975:8-9.8

MC16andMC17aretheABC1chronicles,GraysontreatedABC1A,BandCasonechronicle,while9

GlassnerconsideredABC1A+CandABC1Btobetwodifferentchronicles.

Clancier2009:447-448.ThisdoesnotapplytoMC16andMC17,whoseprecisearcheological10

findingplaceisunknown,thoughitiscertainthatitoriginatedinBabylonascanbeseeninthecolophon.

�6

aremoreinclinedtowritefromareligiousperspective,whilethechroniclesfromtheBeliya’u

grouptendtonarratedetailedinformationabouthistoricalandcurrentevents .11

Inordertobeabletogiveananswertotheresearchquestion,ashortexplanationoftheterm

‘chronicles’isneeded.Overtheyears,Assyriologistshaveusedseveraldefinitionstoexplain

‘chronicle’.However,thereisnotoneaccepteddefinition .Thedefinitionofchroniclethatwill12

beappliedinthisthesisis:ahistoriographicdocument,withasmainfeaturechronological

order.Otherfeaturesthatcanbefoundinchroniclesare:itiswritteninproseinthethird

person,thechroniclerhadtobeaspreciseaspossible,andbrevitywasthenorm .13

Asthedefinitionof‘chronicle’isnowestablished,thecorpuscanbeintroduced.Aswas

alreadymentionedearlier,thecorpusconsistsof44chronicles,29originateinBabylon,and

fifteencomefromBorsippa.Intheappendixeverychroniclethatisimportantforthisthesis

canbefound.TheBorsippeanchronicleshavealreadybeenintroducedbyWaerzeggersinthe

article‘TheBabylonianChronicles:ClassificationandProvenance’.Thechroniclesfrom

Babylonhavebeenpublishedinseveralbooksandarticles.ThemostrecentpublicationisbyJ.

Glassnerin2004,‘MesopotamianChronicles’ .In1975,thefirstcomprehensivebookwithall14

theavailablechronicleliteraturewaspublishedbyA.K.Grayson .R.J.vanderSpek 15 16

published20chroniclesin2004thatwereLateBabylonianinnature.Wheneverachronicleis

mentioned,theabbreviationofthefirstpublicationisused.

Inher2012article,Waerzeggersmentionsthat:“Amorethoroughstudyofliterarypatterns,

narrativestyle,andideologyisneededtoidentifytheexistenceoffurtherdifferences,ifany,

betweenthetwosub-groups” .Thisisinpartwhatthisthesiswillbeabout.Thetwogroups17

fromBorsippawillbecomparedwitheachother,andwiththechroniclesfromBabylon.The

discoverythattherearetwocentersofwritingprovidesawayoflookingatthetwocities

Waerzeggers2012:293-29511

Brinkman1990:76n.18;Waerzeggers2012:287.Eventhoughthisisaprobleminthefieldof12

Assyriology,itwillnotbesolvedhere.

Glassner2004:37-4913

Glassner2004:MesopotamianChronicles14

Grayson1975:AssyrianandBabylonianChronicles15

VanderSpek2004:http://www.livius.org/babylonia.html16

Waerzeggers2012:29517

�7

http://www.livius.org/babylonia.html

throughadifferentlensandthefactthattheBabylonianChronicleSeriesisnolonger

applicabletothesedocumentssuppliesanewwaytoexaminethem.Intheappendixan

overviewofthechroniclesthatareusedforcomparisoncanbefound.Thereareseveral

themesthatareimportanttoanswertheresearchquestion.Basedonthesethemes,thereare

severalsub-questionsthatmaketheresearchquestionmorecomprehensible.Everytimea

themeisintroduced,ithasasub-questionthathasthesamestructure,namely:Howisthe

theme-asmentionedinthechroniclesfrombothcities-differentorsimilartoeachother?’

Thefirstthemeisabouttheperiodordynastyinwhichthechronicletakesplace.Thistheme

determineswhichperiodsthescholarsfoundmoreinteresting.Thesecondthemeisaboutthe

subjectsthechroniclerswroteabout.Thisthemewillgiveanoverviewofwhetherornotthere

werespecificissuesthatthechroniclersfoundworthytorecord.Thethirdthemeisaboutthe

placesthatarementionedinthechronicles,thisthemewillprovideawaytolookathow

chroniclersviewedtheirowncities-BabylonandBorsippa-butalsowhatcitiestheyfound

moreimportanttodiscuss.Thefourththemeisaboutkingswhoarementionedinthe

chronicles,thisthemewillgiveinsightinspecifickingswhosetaleswereextraordinaryor

worthwritingdown.Thefifththemeisthetimespanofthechronicle,thisthemeisadded

becausechroniclerscouldhavebeenmoreinterestedinlongertimespans,orshorter

timespans.Thesixththemeisaboutre-occurringsentencesinthechronicles.AsGrayson has18

madeclearinhisextensiveresearchonchronicles,thereareseveralsentencesthatoccur

moreoftenindifferentchronicles.Thisthemewillinvestigateastowhythesespecific

sentencesareusedmorefrequentlyandhowthatcametobe.Thesevenththemeisabout

godsandgoddessesandwhetherornottheyoccurinachronicleandwhatroletheyplayed

overall.Thisthemewillgiveinsightintotheroleofgods:whetherornotitchangedovertime,

ifeitherBorsippeansorinhabitantsofBabylonweremoreinclinedtowriteaboutreligion

thantheothercity,andwhythispreferencemighthaveexisted.Theeighththemeisaboutthe

numberoflinesonatablet,thiscouldgiveinsightintotheamountofinformationona

chronicleandthebrevityofadocument.Theninththemeishowmanycolumnsthereareon

onetablet.Thefinalthemeisthesizeofthetablet.Thefinalthreethemeshaveone

overarchingsub-question,namely:‘Howdoestheappearanceofthechroniclesfromboth

citiesdiffersorissimilartooneanother?’Intheappendixthereisaseparateboxinthetables

todescribeifthechronicleisbroken,andifso,whereitisbrokenandhowbadly.Thisisadded

becauseitcoulddeterminewhatandhowmuchmightbemissing.

Grayson197518

�8

Thegoalofthethesisistoprovideaclearunderstandingofhowthescribalactivities

concerningchroniclesinBabylonandBorsippaweredifferentorsimilartoeachother.The

chroniclesprovideauniqueinsightincomprehendinghowchroniclerslookedatBabylonian

history.Thedifferencesandsimilaritiesinthescribaltraditionsofthetwocitieshavenever

beenexamined,thegoalistohavethatexaminedindepth.

Toconcludethischapter:themethodthatwillbeusedinthisthesisisthedivisionofthe

chroniclesinthemesthatarerelevantfortheresearchquestionandthegoalofthethesis.The

conclusionwillgiveacomprehensiveoverviewofthediscussedthemesandthecontentsof

thechronicles.Itwillgivethefinalresultsofwhatthedifferencesandsimilaritiesarebetween

thechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippa.

�9

Introducingthecorpus

Thefollowingtableisanoverviewofthechroniclesthatareusedforthisthesis.Thenamesof

thechroniclesarethesamenamesasusedwhentheywerefirstpublished.Thepublication

number,museumnumber,andacquisitionnumberofthetabletsareprovidedtobeasprecise

aspossible.Thechroniclesaredividedupinthegroupsinthesamewayasinthedatabase.

ThedivisionforBorsippaisbasedonthegroupsasexplainedintheintroduction.Thefirst

chronicleinthegroup-inbothBabylonandBorsippa-isthechroniclethatdescribesthe

oldesteventandthelastchronicledescribesthelatestevent.ThedivisionforBabylonisbased

ontwogroups,thefirstgroupconsistsofMC16andMC17,thesechroniclescannotbe

assignedtotheEsagiltemplewithcertainty.ThesecondgroupinBabyloniscomposedofthe

chroniclesthatarefoundintheEsagiltemple.

Name Publicationnumber Museumnumber

Acquisitionnumber

Borsippa:Beliya’ugroup

ShortexcerptfromaBabylonianchronicle1

Fs.Grayson1 BM22115 96-4-9,220

ThechronicleofearlykingsB

ABC20B,MC40 BM96152 1902-4-12,264


Fs.Grayson2 BM29440 98-11-14,73


Fs.Grayson3 BM29297 98-11-12,473

Esarhaddonchronicle ABC14,MC18 BM25091 98-2-16,145

Shamash-shuma-ukinchronicle

ABC15,MC19 BM96273 1902-4-12,385

ChronicleconcerningtheearlyyearsofNabopolassar

ABC2,MC21 BM25127 98-2-16,181

FallofNinevehchronicle ABC3,MC22 BM21901 96-4-9,6

ChronicleconcerningthelateryearsofNabopolassar

ABC4,MC23 BM22047 96-4-9,152

ChronicleconcerningtheearlyyearsofNebuchadnezzar

ABC5,MC24 BM21946 96-4-9,51

ChronicleofthethirdyearofNeriglissar

ABC6,MC25 BM25124 98-2-16,178

Borsippa:Re’i-alpigroup

ThechronicleofearlykingsA

ABC20A,MC39 BM26472 98-5-14,290

Name Publicationnumber

�10

ChronicleoftheKassiteandIsinIIdynasties

ABC25,MC46 BM27796 98-7-11,61

Aneclecticchronicle ABC24,MC47 BM27859 98-7-11,124

TheAkituchronicle ABC16,MC20 BM86379 99-6-10,109

Babylon:ChroniclesfromBabylonthatdonotcomefromtheEsagiltemple

ChronicleconcerningtheperiodfromNabonassartoShamash-shuma-ukin

ABC1A+1C,MC16 BM92502+BM75977

84-2-11,356+83-1-18,1339

ChronicleconcerningtheperiodfromNabonassartoEsarhaddon

ABC1B,MC17 BM75976 83-1-18,1338

Babylon:ChroniclesfromtheEsagiltemple

Chronicleofmarketprices ABC23,MC50 BM48498 81-11-3,1209

Fragmentofachronicleofancientkings

ABCp.192,MC42 BM38284 80-11-12,166

ChronicleP ABC22,MC45 BM92701 82-7-4,38

Religiouschronicle ABC17,MC51 BM35968 Sp.3,504

Naboniduschronicle ABC7,MC26 BM35382 Sp.2,964

ChronographicdocumentconcerningNabonidus

MC53 BM34167,BM34375,BM34896,BM34995

Sp.281,Sp.492,Sp.2,407,Sp.2,519

ChronicleofArtaxerxesIII ABC9,MC28 BM31450 76-11-17,1177

ChroniclefragmentoftheAchaemenidperiod

ABC8,MC29,BCHP1 BM36304 80-6-17,30

ChronicleconcerningAlexanderandArabia

BCHP2 BM41080 81-4-28,627

AlexanderandArtaxerxesfragment

MC31,BCHP4 BM36613 80-6-17,343

KinglistoftheHellenisticperiod

Grayson1980p.98,MC4 BM35603 Sp.3,113

ChronicleconcerningtheDiadochi

ABC10,MC30,BCHP3 BM34660+ Sp.3,143+

RuinofEsagilachronicle BCHP6 BM32248+ 76-11-17,1975+

Junipergardenchronicle BCHP8 BM32266 76-11-17,1994

ChroniclefragmentoftheSeleucidperiod

ABC13A,MC36,BCHP7 BM32310+ 76-11-17,2039+

Museumnumber

AcquisitionnumberName Publicationnumber

�11

ChronicleconcerningAntiochusthecrownprince

ABC11,MC32,BCHP5 BM32440+ 76-11-17,2176+

ChronicleconcerningtheendofthereignofSeleucusI

ABC12,MC33,BCHP9 BM32235+ 76-11-17,1962+

Judicialchronicle MC37,BCHP17 BM47737 81-11-3,442

ChronicleoftheSeleucidperiod

ABC13,MC34,BCHP10 BM32171 76-11-17,1898

PtolemyIIIchronicle BCHP11 BM34428 Sp.551

ChronicleconcerningSeleucusIII

ABC13B,MC35,BCHP12 BM35421 Sp.2,1008

Politaichronicle BCHP13 BM46120 81-7-6,572

Goldtheftchronicle BCHP15 BM32510 76-11-17,2251

Greekcommunitychronicle

BCHP14 BM33870 Rm4,432

Arsacidkingchronicle BCHP19 BM34124 Sp.226

ChronographicdocumentconcerningBagayasha

BCHP18A/B BM35229+ Sp2,791+

Euphrateschronicle BCHP20 BM35031 Sp.2,559

Museumnumber

AcquisitionnumberName Publicationnumber

�12

Periodsanddynastiesinthechronicles

MostofthechroniclesfromBabylonareprobablywrittenintheSeleucidandParthian

periods.IntheseperiodsthelibraryoftheEsagiltempleflourished.Mostofthechronicles

fromBabylonoriginateinthistemple,thereforeitcanbeassumedthatthechronicleswere

affiliatedwiththeEsagiltempleanditsarchives .TheBorsippeanchronicles,ontheother19

hand,aremostlywrittenintheNeo-Babylonianperiod.However,thechroniclesdonotsolely

discusstheseperiods.AllofthechroniclesfromBorsippacombinedgiveaselectedoverview

ofthehistoryofBabyloniafromtheAkkaddynasty(2334-2154)onwards .20

Borsippa:

PeriodsandChronicles

Beliya’uGroup Re’i-alpigroup TotaloftheBeliya’uandRe’i-alpigroup

AkkadDynasty 0 1 1

ThirdDynastyofUr 1 1 2

LarsaDynasty 1 0 1

FirstDynastyofIsin 1 1 2

OldAssyrianPeriod 0 1 1

FirstDynastyofBabylon

3 0 3

FirstDynastyoftheSealand

1 0 1

MiddleAssyrianPeriod

0 2 2

KassiteDynasty 1 1 2

SecondDynastyofIsin

0 2 2

SecondSealandDynasty

0 1 1

BaziDynasty 0 1 1

ElamiteDynasty 0 1 1

UncertainDynasties 1 1 2

Neo-AssyrianDynasty 3 2 5

Neo-BabylonianDynasty

5 1 6



�13

Ascanbeseeninthetable,theRe’i-alpigroupdiscussesmoreperiodsanddynastiesthanthe

Beliya’ugroup,eventhoughtheRe’i-alpigroupconsistsofonlyfourchroniclesandthe

Beliya’ugroupofelevenchronicles.Fromthefiguresinthetableitcanbededucedthatthe

writersoftheRe’i-alpichronicleshadmorehistoricalinterestthanthechroniclerswhowrote

theBeliya’uchronicles.OnlyoneofthechroniclesintheRe’i-alpigroupmentionstheNeo-

Babylonianperiod,whilethisisprobablytheperiodinwhichthechronicleswerewritten.The

Re’i-alpichroniclesinsteadhaveaninterestinancienthistory.ThechroniclesfromtheRe’i-

alpigroupnarratemostoftheperiodsonlyonce,theyalsomostlynarrateonlyonereignfrom

thatspecificperiodordynasty.ThechroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpigroupthuswriteabouta

largeamountofperiodsanddynasties,onlytheydonotwriteabouttheseperiodsand

dynastiesextensively.ThechroniclesfromtheBeliya’ugroupshowadifferentperspective.

Almosthalfofthechroniclesfromthisgroupareabouttheperiodinwhichthechroniclers

lived:theNeo-Babylonianperiod.IncontrasttotheRe’i-alpigrouptheBeliya’ugroupshows

moreinterestincontemporaryeventsthaninhistoricalaffairs.TheBeliya’ugroupportrays

threedynastiesmoreelaboratelythantherest.TheFirstDynastyofBabylonmighthave

interestedchroniclersbecauseofHammurabi,akingwhoruledinthisdynastyandwhose

deedswereconsideredgreat.TheNeo-AssyrianDynastymighthavebeenofinterestbecause

itprecededtheNeo-BabylonianDynasty.WhentheRe’i-alpiandBeliya’ugroupsare

combined,theygiveathoroughoverviewofBabylonianhistory,theycomplementeachother.

TheRe’i-alpigrouphasamoreelaborateoverviewofBabylonianhistory,whiletheBeliya’u

groupfocusesonmorespecificperiodsandelaboratesoncurrentevents.

Babylon:

PeriodsandChronicles

ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance

ChroniclesfromtheEsagiltemple

TotalofchroniclesfromBabylon

FirstDynastyofBabylon

0 1 1

MiddleAssyrianPeriod

0 1 1

KassiteDynasty 0 2 2

SecondDynastyofIsin

0 2 2

UncertainDynasties 2 1 3

Neo-AssyrianDynasty 2 0 2

Neo-BabylonianDynasty

0 2 2

�14

ThetwogroupsthatcanbedistinguishedinBabylondonotgiveascompleteanoverviewof

historicaleventsasthechroniclesfromBorsippa.Theonlydifferencebetweenthetwogroups

fromBabylonisthatthechroniclesfromtheEsagiltempledonotmentiontheNeo-Assyrian

period,insteadthechroniclesmentiontheperiodofUncertaindynasties-beforetheNeo-

Assyrianperiod-andcontinuetowriteabouttheNeo-Babylonianperiod.ThisiswhileMC16

andMC17mentiontheNeo-Assyrianperiodelaborately.ThechroniclesfromBabylondonot

discussasmanyperiodsanddynastiesasthechroniclesfromBorsippa.Theperiodsthatare

discussedaremostlytheperiodsinwhichtheEsagiltempleflourished,orperiodsdirectly

beforethat.ThelibraryoftheEsagiltemplestartedtoflourisharound383BCE,whichcanbe

deducedfromthefactthattheastronomicaldiariescanbedatedfromthisyearonwardsto99

BCE .Theyear383BCEisattheendofthePersianempire,andtheyear99BCEistheendof21

theSeleucidDynastyandthemiddleoftheArsacidDynasty.Becausemostoftheperiodsthat

arediscussedinthechroniclesareaboutcontemporaryevents,itindicatesthateventhough

BabylonisthecapitalofBabylonia-anditcouldhavebeenexpectedthatthechroniclerswere

interestedintheancienthistoryoftheirland-theywerenotasinterestedinBabylonian

historyaschroniclersfromBorsippa .Theymostlywroteaboutcontemporaryevents,and22

onlysomechroniclesareaboutolderperiodsanddynasties.TheArsacidDynastyisan

importantperiodforthelibraryoftheEsagiltemple,nevertheless,thisperiodisonly

discussedinfourchronicles.However,thiscanbeattributedtothefactthatthecorpusof

astronomicaldiariesgraduallyevolvesovertime.InthelatePersianempireandSeleucid

dynasty,notevenhalfoftheastronomicaldiarieshadahistoricalsection,intheArsacid

Dynasty,thisevolvedtoalmostthreequartersoftheastronomicaldiaries.Thehistorical

sectionsinthediariesalsobecamelonger.Thisisanotableobservationasthechroniclegenre

isslowlydisappearingintheArsaciddynasty.Onlythreechronicles-BCHP18-20-arefromthe

periodafter160BCE.Historicalsectionsinolderastronomicaldiarieswereinsertedinthe

PersianEmpire 0 4 4

MacedonianRulers 0 5 5

SeleucidDynasty 0 14 14

ArsacidDynasty 0 4 4

Clancier2009:410-44721


�15

astronomicalandmeteorologicalsections,whileinthefourthcenturyBCE,thehistorical

eventsbecamemoreimportantandgainedasectionoftheirown .23

Toconclude;thereareinherentdifferencesinthechroniclesfrombothcities.Theperiodsand

dynastiesthatoccurinbothcitiesare:FirstDynastyofBabylon,MiddleAssyrianPeriod,

KassiteDynasty,SecondDynastyofIsin,UncertainDynasties,Neo-AssyrianDynasty,andthe

Neo-BabylonianDynasty.Thereasonthattheseperiodsanddynastiesarementionedin

chroniclesfrombothcities,isthattheseperiodsbroughtaboutgreatleaders,greatunrest,or

changes,alltheseeventswererememberedandpasseddownthroughthegenerations.The

chroniclesfromBorsippaprovideanoverviewofimportanthistoricalevents,whilethe

chroniclesfromBabylonmainlyfocusoncurrentaffairsandmentiononlysomeeventsofthe

earlyhistoryofBabylonia.Anotherquitelargedifferenceisthatmorethanhalfofthe

chroniclesfromBabylonfocusontheirowndynasty,whichisinstarkcontrasttothe

chroniclesfromBorsippathatdonotextensivelynarratetheNeo-Babyloniandynasty,while

thechroniclerslivedduringthisperiod.

Pirngruber2013:200-20523

�16

Subjectsinthechronicles

Thesubjectsthatarediscussedinthechroniclesareofadiversenature.Thischapterwill

researchwhetherthechroniclersshowedinterestinspecificsubjects.Thesubjectsinthe

chroniclescouldhavetodowithcontemporaryaffairs,orthewritersmighthavebeen

interestedinhistoricalaffairs,questionsthatariseare:whywerethechroniclersinterestedin

theseaffairs,and:whydidtheychoosetowritedownthesespecificevents?Thischapterwill

hopetofindoutifthereisoneoverarchingtopicunderwhichthevarioussubjectsofthe

chroniclescanbecategorized.

Borsippa:

Ascanbeseeninthetable,thetopicsthatarementionedinthechroniclesdonotshowmuch

variation.ThechroniclersfromBorsippawrotedownspecificeventsconcerningwarsand

campaigns.Fs.Grayson3istheonlychroniclethatdoesnotmentioneitherawarora

campaign.Thefactthatwarsandcampaignsapparentlywereimportanttothechroniclers

raisesseveralquestions:whydidtheychosethesespecificwars?Whydidtheynotwrite

aboutotherevents?Intheperiodstheychosetowriteabout,wasthistheonlystorytotell?

ThefirstanswermighthavetodowithawordthatappearsontwochroniclesfromBorsippa.

Thewordis‘GIGAM.GIGAM’or‘GIGAM.DIDLI’anditoccursonABC14andonABC20A,itmay

betranslatedas‘battles’,‘conflicts’,or‘struggles’.Itiseitherwrittendownattheendofthe

text,orinthemargin.AllthechroniclesfromBorsippahavetodowitheitherbattles,conflicts,

orstruggles,thereforeitcouldbepossiblethat‘GIGAM.GIGAM’or‘GIGAM.DIDLI’mighthave

beenthewordthatthechroniclersfromBorsippausedtodescribethechronicles .Itmight24

thereforealsoaffectthecontentsofthechroniclesandcoverthetraditioninwhichthe

chronicleswerewritten.

Asecondanswertothequestionsmightbeaboutapatternthatcanbedetectedwhenthe

chroniclesarecloselyexamined.InthechroniclesthatarenotabouttheNeo-Babylonian

Subjects Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup TotalofBorsippachronices

Warsandcampaigns 10 4 14

Akitufestival 1 1 2

WallofBabylon 1 2 3

Glassner2004:3824

�17

dynastychaosisabundantlypresent:godsaretakenfromtheEsagiltemple,thereareforeign

powersworkingagainstBabylonia,theAkitufestivaldidnottakeplace,andrebellions

happen.WhentheNeo-Babyloniandynastyarrives,thereisstillwar,butitisorientedfroma

Babylonianpointofview,whichmeansthatitisagainsttheperipheryandsubjectpopulation.

TheonlychroniclewhichiscriticaloftheNeo-BabyloniandynastyisABC16:inthischronicle

theAkitufestivalstilldoesnottakeplace ,eventhoughtheNeo-Babyloniandynastyhas25

started.IntheotherchroniclesthatmentiontheNeo-Babylonianperiod,thekingmostly

executescampaignsanddestroyscities ,whichisseenasapositivedeed.Thechroniclers26

couldhavebeenbiasedbytheirownera,astheNeo-Babyloniankingsbarelydoanything

wronginthewrittenevents.

TheAkitufestivalisanimportantfestivalfortheBabylonians.Theoriginsofthefestivalcan

perhapsbefoundinearlySumeriantimes.Inthebeginningitwascelebratedasan

agriculturalharvestfeast,performedtwiceayear:inthemonthsNisanandTashrit.Asthe

festivalevolved,itbecameacelebrationofthenewyear,anditwasonlyperformedinNisan.In

thefirstmillenniumBCE,itwasnotonlyafestivalofthenewyear,butitalsoacquiredpolitical

prominence.Itmightevenhavebecomeapropagandistictool:topromotestateideology .27

DuringtheNeo-BabylonianDynastythefestivalachieveditsfinalform,itmighthavelastedup

totwelvedaysinthisdynasty.IfeitherMardukorthekingcouldnotbepresentduringthe

festivities,thecelebrationdidnottakeplace.Whenthiswasthecase,thechroniclesoften

makementionofit;forexampleinABC14,ABC7,ABC15,andABC17 .Animportantaspect28

oftheAkitufestivalwasthatNabûhadtobepresentinordertoletitbecommemoratedina

orderlyfashion.ThiscouldhaveappealedtoBorsippeans,asNabûwasthepatrondeityof

Borsippa.

AstrikingaspectofthechroniclesfromBorsippaisthatthewallofBabylonismentionedin

threechronicles:ABC25,ABC24,andFs.Grayson3.ThewallofBabyloniswellknown,ascan

beseenfromthefactthatitisdescribedbyGreekauthorsasHerodotus,Ctesias,and

Cleitarchus.ThecircuitofthewallsofBabylonisprobablyaround18kilometers .Theking29

Seelines1-4,17-23and2725

Thisconcernsthefollowingchronicles:ABC2,ABC3,ABC4,ABC5,andABC6.26

Bidmead2002:1-327

Bidmead2002:1-328

Reade2008:11529

�18

wasresponsibleforthemaintenanceofthecitywalls.Theywerethefirstlineofdefensewhen

acitywasunderattack .ThewallsofBabylonwerethusveryimportantforthecity,and30

whenakingmaderepairstothewalls,itwasmeaningfulenoughtowritedown.

InthechroniclesfromBorsippathereareseveraleventsthatcouldhavebeeninterestingto

inhabitantsofBorsippa.Firstofall,therebellionagainstNebuchadnezzarII(604-562)as

describedinABC5.TherebellionwasledbyBorsippeans .Anothereventthatcouldhave31

appealedtoinhabitantsofBorsippaspecificallyisthereignofNabû-shuma-ishkunas

describedinABC15.Hisreignwasperceivedasbad,andthereforetheBorsippeansmight

havefelttheneedtowriteitdown .InABC24aclashbetweenBabylonandBorsippamight32

havebeennarrated,however,thepassagewhereitwouldbementionedisextremely

fragmentary,ABC24,reverse17mentionsthenameofNabonassar,butitcannotbesaidwith

certaintyifthisiswhatisdescribed .InABC24twokings,namely:Eriba-Mardukand33

Marduk-zakir-shumi,arementioned.TheyactedsympathetictowardBorsippabygrantingtax

exemptionsandrestoringtheirproperty .Furthermore,ABC24takesplaceintheeleventh34

century,thiswasanimportantcenturyforBorsippabecauseinthisperioditbecamethehost

oftheNabûcult,whenthiswasestablishedthecitygainedmorepoliticalsignificance .Afinal35

clueastohowthechroniclesfromBorsippaareappealingtoBorsippeansistheAkitufestival

andtheroletheinhabitantsofBorsippaascribedtoNabû.ThescribalgodNabûwasan

importantparticipantintheAkitufestival,however,thescribesfromBorsippaattributeda

moreactiveroletohimthantheBabylonianscribesdid:thechroniclesfromBabylonaccredit

thekingabigroleduringthefestival .Thiscouldexplaintheinterestofthescribesfrom36

BorsippaintheAkitufestival .Overall,theconclusioncanbedrawnthatthechroniclersfrom37

Borsippawerenotparticularlyinterestedinlocalthemes,althoughtheydidwroteabout

Openheim1964:127-12830

Waerzeggers2012:296-297andfootnote73.31

ThereasonhisreignwasperceivedasbadwasbecausehedidnotcelebratetheAkitufestival,see32

Waerzeggers2012:294.


Waerzeggers2012:296.SeeABC24line2-5:“[duringhis(Marduk-shapik-zeri)reign,thepeopleof34

thecountry]enjoyed[abundance]andprosperity


SeeforexampleABC7,wheretheblamefornotlettingtheAkitufestivalcontinueisplacedonking36

Nabonidus.Seelines5-8,10-12,19-21and23-25.


�19

subjectsthatcouldhavebeenparticularlyinterestingforinhabitantsofBorsippa.The

chroniclesfromBorsippashowaspecificinterestinwarsandcampaignsofkings.Thismight

havetodowiththewordGIGAM.GIGAMorGIGAM.DIDLI.Ifthechroniclersusedthiswordto

describethechronicles,itmighthaveaffectedthecontentsofthechronicles.Thechronicles

fromBorsippahighlightimportanthistoricalevents,somewithspecificlinkstothepastof

Borsippa.

Babylon:

ThechroniclesfromBabylonoftenwriteaboutmorethanonetopic,whichisalsowhatis

incorporatedinthetable.

IncomparisontothechroniclesfromBorsippa,thechroniclesfromBabylonshowmore

variation.However,themostcommonsubjectsarewarandunstableconditions.These

chroniclesshowaveryclearbreakwithwhatthechroniclesfromBorsippahavetooffer.The

chronicleswriteaboutmorelocalizedevents.OftenthesechroniclesshowaBabyloncentered

worldview,whereastheexpectationcouldhavearisenthattheBabylonchroniclesshowa

widerworldviewthantheBorsippachroniclesbecauseBabylonwasthecapitalofBabylonia

andtheymighthavemoresourcesoreventsfromoutsideofBabyloniatowriteabout.Someof

theeventsthatarewrittendown,suchasthejudicialproceedings,ortheofferings,takeplace

inBabylonandareaboutspecificpeoplethatcommittedthecrimes,orperformedthe

offerings.ThetwochroniclesfromBabylonthathavenoclearprovenance-MC16andMC17-

writeabouttheunstableperiodthatprecedestheNeo-AssyrianPeriod.Bothofthese

Subjects ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


Warsandunstableconditions 2 12

Marketprices 0 1

Akitufestival 0 2

Otherfestivals 0 3

Kinglist/accessions 0 2

Restorationofatemple/rubbleisclearedaway

0 4

Offerings 0 6

Judicialproceedings 0 3

Unclear 0 5

�20

chroniclescoverthewarsofBabyloniaandElamagainstAssyria,thedeathofkings,and

uprisingsthattookplaceinthecountries.

WhereasthechroniclesfromBorsippaonlymentiontheAkitufestivalwhenevertheymention

afestival,thechroniclesfromBabylonalsosolelywritedowntheword‘festival’,withoutan

explanationofwhichfestivaltheyimplied.ThiscouldbeanindicationthataSeleucidfestival

wascelebrated.IfaSeleucidfestivalwascelebratedandthechroniclersfounditworthyto

writeabout,thismightraiseseveralquestions,suchas:‘werethechroniclersBabylonian,or

Seleucid?’and‘Whatkindoffestivaliscelebratedhere?’ThechroniclesthatmentiontheAkitu

festivalare:ABC7,ABC17,andABC8,thechronicleswhereanotherfestivalisprobably

celebratedare:ABC13B ,andBCHP15 .ThechronicleswheretheAkitufestivalis38 39

mentionedarechroniclesthatwriteaboutrelativelyearlyperiods;whereasthechronicles

whereprobablyadifferentfestivaliscelebratedalltakeplaceintheSeleuciddynasty.Asall

thechroniclesfromtheEsagiltemplecanbelinkedtothetempleandthustothescholarswho

workedinthetemple,itcanbesaidalmostcertainlythatmostofthechroniclershadtobe

Babylonians.Cuneiformhadtobetaughtfromayoungageonwardsotherwiseitwouldhave

beennearlyimpossibletolearn.ThefestivalswerecelebratedunderSeleucusIIIand

AntiochusV,bythistimetheSeleuciddynastywaswellestablished.ThebeginningofABC13B

isabouttheAkitufestivalandsilverfromtheroyaltreasurywasusedtobuyofferingsforthe

festival .However,attheendofthechronicleanotherfestivalismentioned.Thereisonlyone40

GreekfestivalknowninBabyloniansources-thepuppēfestival-thisfestivalwasprobably

celebratedafterthevictoryofAntiochusIVovertheEgyptiancampaignof169BCE .41

However,thisfestivalisprobablynotthefestivalthechroniclesABC13BandBCHP15write

about.ThefestivalasmentionedinBCHP15couldbetheAkitufestival,however,thiscannot

besaidwithcertainty.ThefactthattheDay-One-Templeismentionedcouldalsoindicatea

festivalforthebeginningofthenewmonth .Thisleadstoastrikingaspect,namelythatthe42

SeleucidrulersmighthavecontinuedcelebratingtheAkitufestival.Whereasinthechronicles

thatdescribeearliertimestheAkitufestivalismentionedoftenwhenitisnotcelebrated,the

Thisfestivalissimplydescribedas:“Afestival[washeldintheland]”.Reverse,line15.38

Thisfestivalisdescribedas:“ThatdayintotheDay-One-Templetheymadeitenter(and)theyputit39

there.Afestivaltheyheld”.Obverse,line4-5.

VanderSpek2004L40

Linssen2004:119-12041

VanderSpek2004O42

�21

chroniclesfromtheSeleucideradonotmentionthisfestivalspecifically,insteaditmightbe

assumedthattheAkitufestivalwascelebrated,butnotonaregularbasis,andthusthe

scholarsdidnotwritedownwhenitdid,ordidnot,takeplace.

Anotherimportantnoteaboutthesubjectsthatthechroniclerswrotedownisthatthe

chroniclesthatwriteabouttheolderperiods tendtowritemoreaboutwarsandcampaigns,43

whereaschroniclesfromtheAchaemenidperiodonwards,aremoreconcentratedonBabylon

ascity.TheclimateinBabylonmighthavebecomelesshostile,eventhoughtherearestill

uprisings,ascanbeseeninBCHP14,whereabattletookplacebetweenthegovernorandthe

peopleoftheland.Thepeopleofthelandisaspecificdistinctionincitizengroups,they

probablyarepartoftheindigenous-Babylonian-population,andtheylivedinthe

countryside .TheyhadalowerstatusthantheGreekcommunity,eventhoughtheGreek44

communityhadcometoBabyloninthereignofAntiochusIV,andthischronicleisfromone

reignlater.Thereasonthattheindigenouspopulationrevoltedagainstthesepeoplewasthat

theywerenotindigenousBabylonianandgotmorerightsthantheyhad,anuprisingisthus

notdifficulttocomprehend.Thereasonastowhychroniclerstendedtowritelessaboutwars

andcampaignsmighthavetodowiththefactthatwhenSeleucusIascendedthethronein

Babylonia,hemadeanewcapitalcity:Seleucia-on-the-Tigris .Thiscitywasmainlyinhabited45

byGreeks,theBabyloniansstayedinBabylon,asdidthescholars.TheEsagiltemplethuswas

nolongerthemostimportantplacewherenewinformationwaswrittenandstored.This

couldbeanexplanationastowhythechroniclesbegantowritemostlyaboutlocalizedevents,

becausethatwastheinformationtheyhadattheirdisposal .Whereasthescholarsinthe46

EsagiltemplefirsthadalltheinformationabouttheBabylonianempirewithinreach,they

werenowlimitedtotheinformationthatwaseitheralreadystoredintheEsagiltemple,or

newinformationthattookplaceintheirdirectsurroundings.Thewarsandcampaignsthat

arepresentinthechroniclesthatwriteaboutearlierperiodscouldbeexplainedbythis

reasoning,asBabylonwasnolongerthecapitalofthecountry,thehostilitiesofforeign

countrieswasnolongerdirectedtowardsthem.

Thesechroniclesare:ABCp.192,ABC22,ABC17,ABC7,MC53andABC9.43

VanderSpek2004N44

Oppenheim1964:40445

EventhoughthereisevidenceofcommunicationbetweentheSeleucidandBabyloniancommunity,46

thechroniclersmighthavechosentowriteaboutlocalizedeventsbecausethatinformationwasusefulorbecausetheastronomicaldiarieshadincreasinglylargerhistoricalsectionsbythistime.

�22

Offeringsarementionedfivetimesinthesechronicles.Thechroniclesinwhichofferingsare

giventogodsalltakeplaceintheSeleucidera.InABC11AntiochusIisstillcrownprinceand

heoffersasheep.EventhoughtheBabylonianscribeusedtheword‘crownprince’todescribe

thetitleofAntiochusI,thetranslationofco-rulermighthavebeenmoreappropriate.Inthe

chronicleAntiochusIpaidspecialattentiontoSîn,themoongod.Areasonastowhyhepays

specialattentiontoSînisunknown .InBCHP6andABC12,aGreekofferingispresented,47

thiscouldhavetodowithfoodthatwaseatenaftertheofferingceremony,thefoodmighthave

belongedtotheactualofferingceremony.Intheeyesofthescribewhorecordedtheevents,

thismighthavebeenan‘offeringintheGreekfashion’ .TheofferingsasdescribedinABC48

13BaremainlyforafestivalthatwascelebratedunderSeleucusIII.Thisfestivalmightalso

havetodowithjuridicalproceedings,asthepriestwhowasresponsiblefortheleftovers

distributedthefoodamongotherlamentationpriests,andhimself.Thisshouldnothappen,as

theleftoversofthefoodofferingshouldbedistributedamongprebendholders.Theking

mighthavegottenangryatthepriest,becausehenowmadedoubleprofitasthepriest

receivedmoneyfromthekingtobuyofferings,andthemeatofferingsflowedbacktothe

temple .InBCHP19afoodoffertoBelandBeltiyawasmade,butalsotothelifeoftheking.49

ThisisanormalBabylonianpractice .Thefinalchroniclewhereanofferingismentionedis50

BCHP18A/B,inthistext,thecontextoftheofferisratherunclear.Therewasafoodoffering

forBel,providedattheSikillagate.Lateron,thereisanotherfoodofferingforBelandBeltiya

attheSikillagate.

Therearetwochroniclesthatcouldhavebeeninfluencedbyastronomicaldiaries.Theseare

ABC23andABC17,thefirstchroniclecoversmarketspricesoveralongtime,whilethelatter

chronicledescribesominousoccurrencesandfestivalsinBabylon.Thetopicsthatare

mentionedinthesechroniclesoftenoccurinastronomicaldiaries.Eventhoughtheremightbe

apossibilitythatthesechronicleswereinfluencedbyastronomicaldiaries,itwouldbe

impossibletosaythatallchronicleshaveadependencyonastronomicaldiaries.The

‘BabylonianChronicleSeries’isdefinitelynotinfluencedbyastronomicaldiaries.WhileMC

16,MC17andABC7originateinBabylon,ABC2untilABC6comefromBorsippa.Sinceno

VanderSpek2004E47

VanderSpek2004F48

VanderSpek2004L49

VanderSpek2004S50

�23

astronomicaldiarieshavebeenfoundinBorsippa,itwouldbeimpossibleforthesechronicles

tohaveanydependencyonastronomicaldiaries .51

AsubjectthatoccurstwiceinthechroniclesfromBabylonareaccessions.AnentireSeleucid

kinglist,MC4,canbefoundamongtheBabylonianchronicles.Thiskingliststartswith

AlexandertheGreatandendsintheParthianerawithDemetriusII.Achroniclethatmentions

SeleucidaccessionsisABC13.IncontrasttoMC4,ABC13doesnotonlymentionaccessionsof

kings,butalsotellspartofthestoriesofthekings.

ThefinaltopicaboutwhichthechroniclesofBabylonwritemorethanoncearejudicial

proceedings.ThechroniclesthatwriteaboutthesetopicsagaincomefromtheSeleucid

period.TheeventsasdescribedinABC13Bwerealreadydiscussedabove.InMC37several

peoplewereaccusedofcommittingacrime,andtheyreceivedthepunishmentofbeingburnt

withfire.BCHP15isonthetheftofgold.Firstafestivalwascelebrated,butthievesstole

moneyandafterwardswereburntwithfire.Thepunishmentthethievesreceivedseemsquite

harsh:however,theystoletempleproperty.Asinmodernlaw,thepunishmentforanoffense

couldvaryfromasimplefine,tothedeathpenalty,dependingonthegravityofthecrime .52

However,thenormalpenaltyforthetheftoftemplepropertyintheNeo-Babylonianperiod

wasafinethatwasequaltothirtytimestheamountthatthethiefhadstolen.IntheSeleucid

era,theonlysourcesthatdealwiththeftoftemplepropertyarethechroniclesthatare

discussedhere .53

Toconclude,thechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippashowsomesimilaritieswhenitcomes

tothesubjectsthatarementionedonthetablets.Thewars,campaigns,andoverallunstable

conditionsissomethingthechroniclesfrombothcitieshaveincommon.However,whereas

thechroniclesfromBorsippamostlynarratestoriesaboutwarsandcampaigns,thechronicles

fromBabylonoftennarratewhathappensintheirhometown,especiallyfromtheSeleucid

eraonwards.ThiswouldindicatethatthechroniclesfromBabylonhaveamoreBabylon

centeredworldview,incontrasttothechroniclesfromBorsippa,whichdemonstrate

knowledgeofwhatisgoingonintherealm.Eventhoughthechroniclesshowsome

similarities,thedifferencesarebig.ThechroniclesfromBorsippacouldbeindicatedwiththe


Westbrook2003:81-8252

Oelsner,Wells,andWunsch2003:962-96353

�24

word‘struggles’orGIGAM.GIGAM,whilethistermwouldonlybeapplicabletohalfthe

chroniclesfromBabylon.

�25

Placesinthechronicles

ThischapterwilltrytofindoutifthechroniclesfromBorsippaandBabylonhaveaspecial

interestinspecificlocations.Moreover,itwillseektofindoutifthechroniclersmighthave

beenbiasedbytheirowncity.Thequestionsthatarisewhenlookingatplacenamesthatoccur

inchroniclesare:‘whyaresomanyplacenamesmentionedinBorsippa?’,’whydokingsof

Babyloniaarebeingreferredtoas‘kingsofAkkad?’and‘arethereplacenamesmentioned

moreoftenthathavenospecialstatus,andifso,whyaretheseplacenamesmentioned?’

Borsippa:

Thetablebelowshowsthemostimportantandmostmentionedplacenamesinchronicles

fromBorsippa,inwhichgrouptheyareused,howoftentheyarementioned,andbetween

bracketsinhowmanychroniclestheyarementioned.

Ascanbeseeninthetable,Akkad,Assyria,andBabylonarethemostusedplacenames.The

chroniclesfromBorsippamentionintotal83differentplacenames.Thereasonmany

differentplacenamesarementionedhastodowiththenumerouscampaignsandwarsthat

thesechroniclesdescribe.Wheneverakingunderwentacampaign,thechroniclerswereso

Placename Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup TotalofBorsippachronicles

Akkad 77(7) 15(4) 92(11)

Assyria 40(4) 19(4) 59(8)

Babylon 33(9) 14(4) 47(13)

Euphrates 14(5) 1(1) 15(6)

Egypt 13(4) 0(0) 13(4)

Elam 9(4) 1(1) 10(5)

Nippur 7(2) 3(2) 10(4)

Baltil 6(3) 3(2) 9(5)

Tigris 8(3) 0(0) 8(3)

Der 5(3) 2(2) 7(5)

Sealand 6(3) 1(1) 7(4)

Borsippa 2(1) 5(2) 7(3)

Sippar 2(2) 4(2) 6(4)

Esagil 1(1) 2(2) 3(3)

Ezida 0(0) 1(1) 1(1)

�26

preciseastowritedownwhatthedestinationofthecampaignorwarwasandthecitiesthat

theyencounteredontheway.ThereasonAkkadismentioned92timesisbecausetheking

wasreferredtoas‘KingofAkkad’.ThetitlethatisusedisLUGALURIki,thistitlehasbeenused

throughoutMesopotamianhistory .Akkadisnotonlymentionedastitleforthekingsof54

Akkad.ItisalsomentionedasdesignationfortheplacenameAkkad.Assyriaismentionedas

geographicaldesignationineightchronicles,thereasonitismentionedoftenisbecauseofthe

hostileenvironmentthechronicleswriteabout,whichisalsothereasonthatBaltilis

mentionedinfivechronicles .AnotherhostileforceinthechroniclesfromBorsippaisElam,55

theElamiteswereresponsibleforuprisingsintheBabylonianempire.Thefinalhostileforce

inthechroniclesfromBorsippaistheSealand.Therearethusfourunfriendlyforces

mentionedinthechroniclesfromBorsippa,whiletherearealotmoreplacenames

mentioned.Thisisaninterestingobservation,sinceinthepreviouschapteritcanbeseenthat

mostofthechroniclesfromBorsippamentionhostileevents,howevertheseeventswerenot

solelybroughtaboutbyopponentsoftheBabylonianempire,butalsoeventsinitiatedbythe

Babyloniankings,suchascampaigns.

InthirteenchroniclesthereisareferencetoBabylon,Babylonthusoccursinmostofthe

chroniclesfromBorsippa.ItisnotreferencedasmuchasAssyriaorAkkad.Thatitoccursin

mostchroniclesshowsonceagainthatthechroniclersfromBorsippawerenotinterestedin

writinghistoryfortheircity,butforBabyloniaascountry.Borsippaisonlymentionedinthree

chronicles,andonlyseventimesintotal,whichisverylittlewhenconsideredthatthewriters

wereprobablyBorsippeanandthechroniclesoriginatedinBorsippa.Evenifthechroniclers

wantedtowriteaboutBabylonianhistoryandnotaboutBorsippahistory,thearchivesthat

thechroniclershadtotheirdisposalmusthavecontainedanastonishingamountof

documentsreferringtothehistoryofBabylonia.

ThetwomostimportanttemplesinBabylonandBorsippaaretheEsagilandEzida.TheEsagil

isthetempleofMardukinBabylon ,whiletheEzidaisthetempleofNabûatBorsippa .56 57

SurprisinglyenoughtheEzidaisonlymentionedonceinallthechroniclesfromBorsippa,

whiletheEsagilismentionedthreetimesinthreechronicles.Thisagainshowsaworldview

Formoreinformationsee:Zadok1985:223-226;Seux1967:302.54

BaltilisadesignationfortheAssyriancapitalAssur,see:Zadok1985:33-35and64.55

George1993:139-14056

George1993:159-16057

�27

fromtheBorsippeanchroniclersthatdoesnotrevolvearoundBorsippa.TheEuphratesand

theTigrisarementionedquiteoften,kingshadtocrosstheserivers-especiallytheEuphrates-

whenevertheywentoncampaign.

Thereareseveralplacenamesthatoccurmoreofteninthechronicles,butarenotaswell

knownastheotherplacenames.ThefirstplacenameisDer,thisisthebordertownbetween

BabyloniaandElam .WheneverDerismentionedinthechroniclesitisaboutrebellionor58

unrest,asgodsweretransported.ThesecondlocationisEgypt.Inthechroniclesitis

mentionedalotinconnectionwiththeirarmy,butalsowhenthekingsmarchedonEgypt,the

pharaohandamassacrearementionedonce.ThethirdlocationisNippur,whichismentioned

inavarietyofcontexts.NippuristheprovincialcapitalintheheartofBabylonia .Thefinal59

placenameisSippar,thistownisaprovincialcapitalintheNorthofBabylonia .Itis60

mentionedtwicewhengodsareinvolved,itisalsodestroyedtwice,andthekingwentfrom

AssyriatoSippartwice,andthekingofAssyria,Tukulti-NinurtaI,conqueredSippar.Asfaras

canberesearched,thereisnospecificreasonastowhythesegeographicallocationsare

mentionedmoreoftenthandifferentplaces,otherthanthattheysimplyplayedalargerrolein

thepoliticalgeographyofBabylonia.Toconclude,thechroniclersfromBorsippaarenot

biasedbytheirowncity.AlltheplacesthatarediscussedintheBorsippachroniclesare

mentionedbecausethechroniclerswantedtobeaspreciseaspossible.

Babylon:

Thetablebelowshowsthemostimportantandmostmentionedplacenamesinchronicles

fromBabylon,inwhichgrouptheyarediscussed,howoftentheyarementioned,andbetween

bracketsinhowmanychroniclestheyarementioned.

Placename ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


TotalofBabylonchronicles

Babylon 32(2) 108(24) 140(26)

Elam 49(2) 9(2) 58(4)

Esagil 0(0) 54(16) 54(16)

Assyria 45(2) 7(1) 52(3)

Zadok1985:117-11858

ParpolaandPorter2001:1059

ParpolaandPorter2001:1060

�28

ThechroniclesfromBabylonmention113differentplacenames,thisismorethanthe

chroniclesfromBorsippamention,however,theBabylongroupconsistsofmorechronicles.

Moreover,mostoftheplacenamesarementionedinchroniclesthatwriteaboutearlier

periods.Thelargeamountofplacenamesthuscanbeascribedtothesamereasonasthelarge

amountofplacenamesmentionedinchroniclesfromBorsippa:thecampaignsandwarsthat

aredescribed.

Babylonismentionedthemostinthesegroups,whichisnotsurprisingasthesechronicles

originateinBabylon.However,thatElamismentionedmostafterBabylonisremarkable,

neverthelessthiscanbeexplainedbythefactthatitismentionedoftenintheMC16andMC

17chronicles.InthesechroniclesElamplaysaverylargeroleashostileforce.TheEsagil

templeisthemostimportanttempleinBabylonia,theplacewhereMardukresides.Asmostof

thechronicleswerewrittenintheEsagiltemple,itisthus-again-notsurprisingthatthis

locationisalsomentionedquiteoften.AssyriaisoneofthehostileforcesintheMC16andMC

17chronicles,intheEsagiltemplechroniclesitisonlyseenasahostileforceinonechronicle,

namely:ABC22.Akkadis-notsurprisingly-againusedthroughoutthechronicles,however,

noneofthechroniclesfromBabylonrefertothekingsas‘kingofAkkad’,whichisabig

Akkad 21(2) 27(6) 48(8)

Borsippa 2(1) 14(6) 16(7)

Tigris 0(0) 11(7) 11(7)

Euphrates 0(0) 8(7) 8(7)

Sealand 2(2) 6(3) 8(5)

Nippur 7(2) 2(2) 8(4)

Uruk 6(1) 2(1) 8(2)

Ezida 0(0) 7(4) 7(4)

Sippar 2(1) 5(3) 7(3)

SeleuciaontheEuphrates

0(0) 6(2) 7(2)

Egypt 4(1) 1(1) 5(2)

Guti 0(0) 4(3) 4(3)

Junipergarden 0(0) 4(3) 4(3)

SeleuciaontheTigris 0(0) 4(3) 4(3)

Sidon 2(2) 2(1) 4(3)

Der 3(1) 1(1) 4(2)

�29

differencewiththechroniclesfromBorsippa.InBabylon,theplacenameAkkadismentioned

somuchsimplybecauseitisdiscussedquiteoften.Borsippaisaplacenamewhichis

discussedmoreinthechroniclesfromBabylonthaninthechroniclesfromBorsippa.Thereis

notoneoverarchingthemethatcanbefoundwhenBorsippaisdiscussed,moreoveritisnot

discussedasasistercity,butmostofthetimementionedasaregularcitywherekingswent.

InonlytwochroniclesitismentionedtogetherwiththeAkitufestival,whichisstrikingasthe

AkitufestivalisimportanttoBabylonians,anditcouldnottakeplacewithoutNabû,whohad

tocomefromBorsippa.

TheTigrisandtheEuphratesbothoccurinsevenchronicles.Theriversarementionedwhen

theyarecrossed,eitherbyhostileforcesorbytheBabylonians.TheTigrisismentionedmore

oftenthantheEuphrates,whichisstrikingastheEuphratesisreferredtomoreofteninthe

chroniclesfromBorsippa.However,inthechroniclesfromBorsippathekingsfrequentlywent

oncampaignstotheWest,theythushadtocrosstheEuphratesonaregularbasis.Areasonas

towhytheTigrisisdiscussedmoreoftenthantheEuphratesinthechroniclesfromBabylonis

that,whentheTigrisismentioneditismostlytoindicatecitiesthatareonthebanksofthe

rivers.InthechroniclesthatnarratelaterperiodstheEuphratesisusedtostatethatacityis

farawaybecauseitisbeyondtheEuphrates .61

TheSealandborderstheArabianPersianGulf .InthechroniclesfromBorsippa,theSealand62

isseenasahostileforce .However,inthechroniclesfromBabylonthereisonlyoneinstance63

inwhichtheSealandcouldbeseenasathreat.InMC42thegodMardukcursedtheSealand,

however,thischronicleisverybrokenanditisthusalmostimpossibletocomprehendwhatis

happening,andhowtheSealandisseenfromtheperspectiveofthechronicler.Intwo

instances,MC16andABC7,thegovernoroftheSealandismentioned.InMC16thegovernor

firstsetsupcampbeforeUr,butlaterfleesfromtheAssyrians.InABC7,theSealandis

mentionedinabrokencontext.InMC17itismentionedthatthegodsoftheSealandhad

returnedtotheirsanctuaries,inthesameyearasepidemicsragedinAssyria.Thegodsmight

havebeenreturnedbecauseoftheepidemics,inthehopethattheywillpass.Thefinal

chronicleinwhichtheSealandoccursisinBCHP19,unfortunatelythecontextisverydifficult

InABC13BandABC13A.61

Zadok1985:226-22762

SeeABC20B,Fs.Grayson3,ABC14,ABC15andABC24.63

�30

tounderstandduetothepoorconditionofthetablet.However,thesentencecouldindicate

thattheSealandwasconqueredbytheArsacidking.

Nippuristhesecondcitythatismentionedmoreofteninthechronicles.Onthreeoccasions

Nergal-ushezibismentionedtogetherwithNippur.HewasaBabyloniankingaround693BCE.

InallbutoneinstancewhenNippurismentioneditisaboutbattleinornearNippur,or

deportationofspecificpeopleortheinhabitantsofthecity.Inthelastinstance-inABC17-a

templeinthedistrictofNippurismentioned.TheEzidatempleismentionedinfourdifferent

chronicles,mostlytogetherwithofferings,andwithothertemplesthatareofimportance.

Sipparisalsomentionedinfourchronicles,thereisnotoneoverarchingreasonastowhythis

cityismentioned.AGreekcity,Seleucia-on-the-Euphrates,ismentionedintwodifferent

chronicles,itisreferredtoas‘theroyalcity’.AnotherGreekcity,Seleucia-on-the-Tigris,the

capitaloftheSeleucidempirefromSeleucusIonwards,ismentionedinthreedifferent

chronicles.Eventhoughwhenthesechronicleswerewritten,Babylonwasnolongerthe

capitalofBabylonia,itisstillstrikingthattheseplacesarenotmentionedmoreoften.There

wasprobablyalothappeningintheGreekcities,foundedbytheHellenisticinhabitantsof

Babylonia,however,thescribesstayedinBabylonanddidnotwriteanythingunusualabout

theGreekcities.EgyptismentionedfourtimesintheMC16chronicle,inalltheinstances

whenitismentionedthecircumstancesarehostile.Gutiisdesignatedwiththedeterminative

‘KUR’,forcountryinthreechronicles:ABC7,ABC8andABC10.Gutimightnotbeseenasa

placenameinABC7,itmightbeseenasapointonacompass,inthiscase,itrefersto

everythingthatiseast .Eventhoughitmightbeaplaceonacompass,thechroniclesmention64

anarmyofGuti,andatownofGuti.TheJuniperGardenisanimportantlocationinBabylon,

whichismentionedquiteofteninLateBabyloniantexts.Inthegardentherewereseveral

buildingsofimportance,suchasthecouncilhouseoftheshatammu,andthekinishtu .The65

JuniperGardenisnotmentionedwithoneoverarchingreason,however,itismentionedonce

whenpeoplehadstolenpropertyfromBelinthegarden.Sidonismentionedinthreedifferent

chronicles,alltheinstancesinwhichitismentionedhavetodowithplunderingandchaosin

thecity.ThefinaltownthatwillbediscussedisDer,itismentionedintwodifferent

chronicles,however,thereasonastowhyitoccursmoreoftenissimplybecauseitwas

destroyedonce,andthegodswerecarriedaway.

Hallo1957:71864

VanderSpek2004H65

�31

Toconcludethispartofthechapter;thechroniclesfromBabylonshowaclearBabylonian

worldview,thechroniclerscontinuetowriteaboutBabyloniaastheonlycivilizationinthe

empire.TheBabylonianwritersclearlywrotemoreaboutaffairsthattookplacecloserto

home,anexplanationforthismightbethattheysimplydidnotknowenoughaboutwhatwas

goingonintherestoftheempire,duetothefactthattheywerenolongerlivinginthecapital,

andthattheymightnotbefirst-classcitizensanymore,astheywereduringthetimeof

Babylonianrule.

Toconclude,ifthechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippaarecompared,thereisagreat

differenceinbothcities.WhereasthechroniclersfromBorsippaaregenerallynotbiasedby

Borsippaandonlywritetheirplacenamedownwhenitisrelevantforthewritingofhistory,

thechroniclersfromBabylonwritemostofthechroniclesfromaBabylonperspective.This

mightbeduetothefactthatthereisagreatdifferenceintimeandplace,whenthechronicles

fromBorsippawerewritten,theBabylonianempirestillwasinplace,whichgavethe

chroniclersfromBorsippaplentyofinformationaboutthespecificdetailsofthecampaignsof

kings.ThechroniclersfromBabylonwroteabouteventsthattookplaceintheirneighborhood.

ThebiggestdifferencebetweenthechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippaandtheplacesthey

mentionisthusthatthechroniclesfromBabylonwritefromtheperspectiveofaninhabitant

ofBabylonduringtheSeleucidera,whilethechroniclersfromBorsippawriteaboutalotof

placesthatarerelevantforthewritingofhistory.

�32

Kingsinthechronicles

ThischapterwilltrytofindoutifthechroniclesfromBorsippaandBabylonhaveaspecial

interestinspecifickings.Questionsthatarisewhenthinkingaboutthekingsmentionedinthe

chroniclesare:inwhichBorsippagrouparemorekingsmentioned,andwhy?Towhichkings

ispaidmoreattention,andwhy?Thischapterwillgiveananswertothesequestions.

Borsippa

Thetablebelowshowsthemostimportantandmostmentionedkingsinthechroniclesfrom

Borsippa,inwhichgrouptheyarementioned,andinhowmanychroniclestheyappear.The

chroniclesfromBorsippamention75differentpeople.IntheBeliya’ugroup43personscanbe

distinguished,whileintheRe’i-alpigroup40differentpersonscanbefound.

Person Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup TotalofBorsippachronicles

Adad-apla-iddina(1067-1046)

0 2 2

Apil-Sîn(1830-1813) 2 0 2

Enlil-bani(1860-1837) 1 1 2

Erra-imitti(1868-1861)

1 1 2

Esarhaddon(680-669) 1 1 2

Marduk-shapik-zeri(1080-1068)

0 2 2

Nabopolassar(626-605)

4 1 5

Nebuchadnezzar(604-562)

2 0 2

Sennacherib(704-681) 1 1 2

Shamash-shuma-ukin(668-648)

2 1 3

Shulgi(2094-2047) 1 1 2

Sîn-shar-ishkun(622-612)

2 0 2

�33

Thekingswhoarementionedmoreoftenaremostlywell-knownkings.Theywillbediscussed

inalphabeticalorder .ThefirstkingwhowillbediscussedisAdad-apla-iddina(1067-1046),66

heismentionedinABC24and25.HewasaparticularlyimportantkingforBorsippa.Whenhe

reignedtheNabûcultandtheEzidatemple,andthusBorsippaasacity,gainedmorepolitical

importance.Therearetwoinscriptionsthatstatethecommemorationofthededicationofa

goldbelttoNabû,whichwasgivenbyAdad-apla-iddina.Theseinscriptionsareexceptional

becausetheywerecopied,andcopiedagain,evenwhenthefirstmillenniumhadbegun .The67

secondkingofthelistisApil-Sîn(1830-1813),heismentionedinFs.Grayson2and3.The

majorityofhisreignwasdedicatedtostrengtheningthedefensesystem .Thethirdkingis68

Enlil-bani(1860-1837),heismentionedinchroniclesABC20Aand20B.Hisstoryis

extraordinaryashebecamesubstitutekingbutmanagedtosurvive,thisstoryiswhatis

writtendowninboththechroniclesinwhichheismentioned .ThefourthkingisErra-imitti69

(1868-1861),heisalsomentionedinABC20Aand20B.HewasreplacedbyEnlil-bani,

however,hediedwhileEnlil-baniwassubstitutekingandthusnevergothisthroneback .70

Esarhaddon(680-669)ismentionedinABC14andABC16.Themostimportanteventthat

tookplaceduringhisreignwastheinvasionofEgypt.EventhoughEsarhaddonwasagood

kingfortheBabylonians-ashebeganreconstructing,redeveloping,andresettlingexiled

Babyloniansinthecountryafterthedevastatingwar-inthechronicleshisimageisnota

positiveone.Hismistake-accordingtotheBabylonianchronicles-wasthathedidnot

celebratetheAkitufestival .Marduk-shapik-zeri(1080-1068)ismentionedinABC24and71

25,inboththesechroniclesitisspecifiedthatherebuiltthewallofBabylonandthatthe

peopleofthecountryprospered.InABC24,oneofthemostimportanteventsfromhisreign

wasdiscussed,namelythatheconcludedapeacetreatywiththekingofAssyria .Marduk-72

shapik-zeriwasalsoanimportantkingforthepopulationofBorsippa,becauseinabuilding

inscriptionitisstatedthatherestoredtheEzidatemple .Nabopolassar(626-605)is73

EventhoughNeriglissar(559-556)hasanentirechronicle(ABC6)devotedtohim,heonlyoccursin66

onechronicleandthereforehewillnotbediscussed.


Leick1999:1868

Leick1999:5369

ABC20A:line31-36,ABC20Bline1-6.70

Leick1999:57-5871

ABC25line27-28,ABC24line2-5.72


�34

mentionedinfivechronicles:ABC2,ABC3,ABC4,ABC5,andABC16.ABC2-5areabouthis

consolidationofpower,hiscampaignswhenheisinpower,andattheendthechangeof

powerfromhimtohisson.InABC16hedoesnotplayaconsiderablerole,itisonly

mentionedthatintheyearofhisaccessiontroublestookplaceinAssyriaandAkkad.

NabopolassarisanimportantBabylonianking,hebeganrestorationworksthroughout

Babylonia,heestablishedwell-guardedfrontiers,anddefeatedopponents,mostnotablythe

victoryoverAssyria .Becauseheisawell-knownkingandwasofgreatimportanceforthe74

prosperityoftheBabylonianempireitisnotsurprisingthathisstoryiswrittendowninsuch

amanner.Nebuchadnezzar(604-562)ismentionedinchroniclesABC4and5.Inthese

chronicles,histimeascrownprinceandyoungkingaredocumented.Hemainlycontinuesthe

workofhisfather.Hewasaverywellknownking,thishadtodowiththefactthathisreign

wasoneofthelongestinBabylonianhistory,whenthisisconsidered,itissurprisingthathe

doesnotoccurmoreofteninthechronicles.However,mostoftherestorationthattookplace

duringhisreigntookplaceinBabylon ,andthechroniclersfromBorsippamightthusnot75

havehadaccesstotheinformationnecessarytowriteitdown.Sennacherib(704-681)is

mentionedinchronicleABC14andABC16.Inboththechroniclesthesamesentence

mentioninghisnameoccurs.InthissentenceitismentionedthattheAkitufestivaldidnot

takeplaceduringhisreign .SinceSennacheribwasanAssyriankingthismighthavebeena76

waytoplaceblameonhimandotherAssyrianrulers.Shamash-shuma-ukin(668-648)is

mentionedinthreechronicles:ABC14,ABC15,andABC16.InABC14itisonlymentioned

thatitwasthefirstyearofhisreign,inABC15thereisnothingspecificallymentionedabout

hisreignexceptthathewentoncampaignintheseventeenthyearofhisreign.Shamash-

shuma-ukinwasanimportantkinginthehistoryofBabylonia,hetriedtostandupagainst

AssurbanipalinfavoroftheBabylonianpopulation.Inthechroniclesitismentionedthat

duringhisreignatleasttwoAkitufestivalstookplace .Shulgi(2094-2047)ismentionedin77

ABC20AandFs.Grayson1.Heisawell-knownkinginBabylonianhistory,hehadoneofthe

longestreigns,herestructuredtheentireBabylonianbureaucraticsystem,andhewenton

manycampaigns.InFs.Grayson1hiscampaignsarementioned,whileinABC20Aitis

narratedthatheprovidedfoodforEridu,butcarriedawaybootyfromtheEsagilandBabylon.

ThefinalkingthatwillbediscussedforthechroniclesfromBorsippaisSîn-shar-ishkun

Leick1999:112-11374

ThewallofBabylon,Ishtar-gate,ziggurat,andtheEtemenankiarealllocatedinBabylon.75

ABC14line34-38,ABC16line1-7.76

Inthefirstandsixteenthyear.77

�35

(622-612),heoccursinABC2andABC3,inthechronicleshedoesnotplayabigpart,itis

simplysaidthathefledwithhisgarrison andthathedied .78 79

Thepreviouslydiscussedkingsaremostlywell-knownkings,orhadprovidedspecial

attentionforBorsippa.NabopolassarandShamash-shuma-ukinstandoutastheyare

mentionedrespectivelyfiveandthreetimes.Thechroniclerswroteaboutkingsthatdidnot

alwaysplayalargeroleinBabylonianhistory,butwereimportantforBorsippa.Nabopolassar

standsout,astherearechroniclesspecificallydedicatedtohim,however,hisstorymighthave

beenwell-knownasithappenedinordirectlybeforethelifetimeofthechroniclers.

Babylon

Thefollowingtable showsthemostimportantandmostmentionedkingsinthechronicles80

fromBabylon,andinwhichgrouptheyarementioned.ThechroniclesfromBabylonmention

100differentpeople.InthechroniclesthatdonotcomefromtheEsagiltemple31distinct

peoplecanberecognized,whileinthechroniclesfromtheEsagiltemple69differentpersons

canbefound.Thereisnotonesinglepersonthatismentionedinboththegroups.Inthetable

therewillthusnotbea‘total’column,asthereisnoneedforit.

Person ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


AlexandertheGreat(330-323) 0 4*

AntiochusI(281-260) 0 5*

AntiochusV(164-162) 0 2

Arsaces(250-248) 0 3*

Hallushu-inshushinakI(698-693)

2 0

Humban-nikashI(743-717) 2 0

Humban-nimena(691-689) 2 0

Kudur-nahhunte(692) 2 0

KurigalzuII(1332-1308) 0 2

Merodach-baladanII(721-710and703)

2 0

ABC2line3.78

ABC3line44.79

*ThesekingsarealsomentionedinMC4,however,becausethisisakinglistitwillnotbespecifically80

explainedwhenthekingsarediscussed.�36

Thekingswhoarementionedmoreoftenarenotnecessarilywell-known.TheElamitekings

thatarementionedinthechroniclesthatdonotoriginateintheEsagiltemplehavenotlefta

bigmarkonBabylonianhistory.Theperiodinwhichtheyruledisfilledwithchaosand

constantwarfare.Thekingswhoarementionedmoreofteninthechroniclesthatoriginatein

theEsagiltemplearemostlywell-knownkings.

ThefirstkingthatwillbediscussedisAlexandertheGreat(330-323).Hewasawell-known

ruler.Heoccursinfourdifferentchronicles,intwoofthosechroniclesheistheprotagonist.In

ABC8hisroleisunclear.However,inthebeginningofthechronicle-whichisbroken-the

battleatGaugamelaismentioned .BCHP2isverybroken.However,inthechroniclehe81

receivedgiftsfromtheBabylonianpopulation,whichcouldindicatethathecouldbeseenasa

favorableruler.ThethirdchronicleinwhichAlexandertheGreatismentionedisMC31,this

chronicleisheavilydamagedandtheroleofAlexandertheGreatisdifficulttoestablish,

however,thedocumentmightbeabouttheBabylonianpopulation.Theyweremourningfor

Alexander.EventhoughmostofthechroniclesinwhichAlexandertheGreatismentionedare

verybroken,ageneraltendencyofhospitalitytowardsAlexandertheGreatcanbefound;

whichcanbeseeninthemourningandthepresentingofgifts. AntiochusI(281-260)wasthesecondrulerintheSeleucidDynasty.Hewasawell-known

Mushezib-Marduk(692-689) 2 0

Nabonassar(747-734) 2 0

Nabonidus(555-539) 0 2

Nergal-ushezib(693) 2 0

SargonII(721-705) 2 0

Seleucus(epistates) 0 2

SeleucusI(305-281) 0 4*

SeleucusII(245-226) 0 3*

SeleucusIII(225-223) 0 3*

Sennacherib(704-681) 2 0

Shutruk-nahhunteII(716-699) 2 0

Tiglath-pileserIII(744-727) 2 0

VanderSpek2004A81

�37

rulerandoftenoccursinthechronicleswiththetitlecrownprince .InBCHP6,heoversees82

repairworktotheEsagiltemple,apparentlythereisanomensignwhenlightningstrikesthe

Eridu ,however,itisuncommontotranslateIZIŠUBwithlightningstrike,thesentenceis83

thusprobably‘firebrokeoutinEridu’.Inthiscasethereisnoattestationofanomen.InABC

13A,AntiochusIinspectedatempleandheengagedinbattle.InABC11,heperformsboth

goodandbaddeedsfortheBabylonians,whichshowsanimageofduality.Ontheonehandhe

institutedregularofferingsforSîn,andbowstohim.Ontheotherhand,hesettles

MacedoniansinBabylonandraisestaxesonnativeBabylonians.InMC37,AntiochusIis

mentionedbecauseduringhistimeascrownprincetherewasajudicialtrialinwhichpeople

wereburntwithfire.

AntiochusV(164-162)wastheninthkingoftheSeleuciddynasty.ItispossiblethatinBCHP

15,hismurderiswrittendown.However,thepartofhismurderisbadlydamaged,anditthus

cannotbesaidwithcertainty.InBCHP14theGreekcommunityinBabylonismentioned,this

communitywasestablishedduringthereignofAntiochusIV,thepredecessorofAntiochusV.

ThechroniclespecificallymentionsuprisingsbetweentheGreekcommunityand‘thepeople

oftheland’.Thiscouldindicatethathisreignwasnotseenaspositivebythechroniclersfrom

Babylon.

Arsaces(250-248)wasthefirstkingoftheArsaciddynasty.InBCHP19afoodofferingis

madeforhimandthegreatgods:BelandBeltiya.InBCHP18A/BthenameofArsacesis

writtendownattheendofthedocumenttoindicateregularobservationsduringhisreign.

However,thisdocumentisprobablynotfromhisreign,butonlywritesdown,exceptionally

detailed,observationsthattookplaceduringhisreign.Thechroniclesdonotsharedetails

abouthislife.

Hallushu-inshushinakI(698-693),Humban-nikashI(743-717),Humban-nimena(691-689),

Kudur-nahhunte(692)andShutruk-nahhunteII(716-699)wereallElamitekingswhoare

mentionedinMC16and17.Theydonotplayaparticularbigroleinthechronicles.Theyare

mentionedwheneverthereareuprisingsorifoneofthemdies.Thechroniclesmentionthem

becausetheyareofsignificancefortheperiodinwhichthechroniclestakesplace,notbecause

Althoughco-rulermightbeabettertranslation.82

VanderSpek2004F83

�38

thechroniclersfromBabylonhadaspecialinterestinthem.Thisistheperiodwherealotof

warstookplace.

KurigalzuII(1332-1308)wasaKingintheKassitedynasty.InABC23hisnameisspecifiedto

notespecificmarketpricesduringhisreign.Areasonastowhyhisreignwaschosenmight

havesomethingtodowiththattherewasonlyinformationavailableabouthisreign.InABC

22heistheprotagonistoftheepicthatiswrittendowninthechronicle .Hiskingshipisalso84

thesubjectofseverallaterBabylonianepics .85

ThereareseveralBabylonianandAssyriankingswhoplayedanimportantpartinthehistory

ofBabylonia,butwereonlymentionedintheMC16and17chronicles.Thesekingsare

Merodach-baladanII(721-710),Mushezib-Marduk(692-689),Nabonassar(747-734),Nergal-

ushezib(693),SargonII(721-705),Sennacherib(704-681)andTiglath-pileserIII(744-727).

MostofthesekingshadanimpactontheendingoftheNeo-Assyrianempireandthe

beginningoftheNeo-Babylonianempire.Itisthusstrangethattheyonlyoccurinthese

chroniclesandthereisnomentionoftheminthechroniclesthatcomefromtheEsagiltemple.

Areasonforthisremainsunclear,however,itcouldbethatthisstorywaswidelyknown,and

sincetheMC16and17chroniclesareveryelaboratetherewasnoreasontowritethisstory

down.ThechroniclersfromtheEsagiltemplemightthusmayhavebeenawareoftheMC16

and17chronicles.

Nabonidus(555-539)wasthelastkingoftheBabylonianempire,inthelibraryoftheEsagil

templetherearemanydocumentsdedicatedtohim.ThereisapossibilitythatNaboniduswas

notseenaseitheragoodorabadrulerinABC7orMC53,butthatscholarsofthistime

grantedspecialattentiontohimbecausehewasthelastkingoftheNeo-Babylonianempire,

theymighthavewrittenabouthimtocreateanimage-neitherpositivenornegative-ofthe

lastBabylonianruler .86

TheroleofSeleucustheepistatesisunclear.InBCHP11thetroopsofSeleucustheepistates

wereslaughteredwhenhearrivedinBabylon.Anepistateswasagovernor,accordingtoBCHP

11,hewasthegovernorofSeleucia.

ABC22isanunusualchronicle,becauseitstartsoutasachronicle,however,inthemiddleit84

becomesanepicwithKurigalzuIIasprotagonist.

Leick1999:9585


�39

SeleucusI(305-281)wasthefirstkingoftheSeleucidera.Heismentionedinthree

chronicles.InABC10thebeginningoftheSeleucidempireisrecorded.Thediadochifightwith

eachotherandSeleucusIestablishedcontroloverBabylonia.InABC13Aitismentionedthat

hehadgonebeyondtheEuphratesonamilitarycampaign,perhapsinIndia .InABC1287

anothermentionismadeofamilitarycampaign,thedeathofSeleucusIisalsowrittendown

inthischronicle.HediedwhiletryingtogaincontroloverMacedonia .SeleucusIwasan88

importantfigureinthehistoryofBabyloniaandthetransitionfromBabyloniantoHellenistic

power.

SeleucusII(245-226)wasthefourthkingoftheSeleucidera.DuringhisreigntheSeleucids

lostalotoflandbecauseoftheThirdSyrianWar .Eventhoughthiswasofgreatimportance,89

thechroniclesdonotmentionthisevent.MC37isaboutjudicialconsequences,whileABC13

isaboutaccessionsduringtheSeleucidera.

ThelastkingofimportanceforthechroniclesfromBabylonisSeleucusIII(225-223).Hewas

thefifthkingoftheSeleucidera.InABC13hissuccessionissimplymentioned,however,ABC

13Bisentirelydedicatedtohim.Thechronicleitselfisaboutfoodofferings.

ThechroniclesfromBabylondonothaveaspecificinterestinparticularkings.Alexanderthe

Great,AntiochusIandSeleucusIstandoutastheyarementionedmoreoften.However,they

arekingswhoarewell-knownandwhoseroleintheHellenisticperiodwasofgreat

importance.Thechroniclershadnospecificinterestinkingswhowereofgreatimportancefor

theearlierhistoryofBabylonia.

Toconclude:thechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippadifferinthattheymentionotherkings.

ThekingswhoarementionedmoreofteninthechroniclesfromBorsippa,donotplayabig

roleinthechroniclesfromBabylon.Thereareseveralkingsthatstandout,however,these

kingsarewell-knownandtheirstoriesstandout.

VanderSpek2004G87

Leick1999:14288

Leick1999:14289

�40

Timespanofthechronicles

ThischapterwilltrytofindoutifthechroniclesfromBorsippaandBabylondescribeevents

overlongerperiodsoftimeorinshorterperiods,andthereasonastowhytheremighthave

beenapreferenceforashorterorlongertimespan.

Borsippa

ThetablebelowshowsthetimespanofthechroniclesfromBorsippa,andinwhichgroupthey

arementioned.

AscanbeseeninthetablethechroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpigrouphaveatendencytodescribe

longerperiodsoftime.ThechroniclesfromtheBeliya’ugroupontheotherhanddiscussmost

ofthetimeonereign,partofareign,orthetransitionofonereigntothenext;theonly

exceptionisABC20B.ThechroniclesfromtheBeliya’ugrouparemoredetailedthanthe

chroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpigroup,becausetheymentionshortperiodsoftime.Allthe

chroniclesoftheRe’i-alpigroupdiscussmorethanonereign,theyhavealongtimespan.

WhenthetwogroupsarecomparedthereisacleardistinctionbetweentheRe’i-alpiand

Beliya’ugroup.Aswasmentionedintheintroduction,thechroniclersfromtheBeliya’ugroup

tendtonarratespecificinformationabouthistoricalandcurrentevents.Thechroniclersfrom

thisgrouptendtowritetheirchroniclesmoredetailed,itexplainstheshortperiodsoftime

thesechroniclesdiscuss.AreasonastowhythechroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpigroupdescribe

longerperiodsoftimeisdifficulttoestablish.Itmighthavetodowiththefactthatallthe

chroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpigroupcomefromdifferentarchivesandwerethereforeinclined

Timespan Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup TotalofBorsippachronicles

300yearsormore 1 2 3

Between100and299years

0 1 1

Between40and99years

2 1 3

Between30and39years

1 0 1

Between10and19years

3 0 3

Between1and9years

4 0 4

�41

tonarratelongerperiodsoftime,sothearchivewouldhaveatleastonedocumentthat

describesalongerperiodoftime.

Babylon

ThetablebelowshowsthetimespanofthechroniclesfromBabylon,andinwhichgroupthey

arementioned.

AscanbeseeninthetablethechroniclesfromBabylondescribemostlyveryshortperiodsof

time.ThechroniclethathasthelongesttimespanisABC23,unfortunatelythischronicleis

damaged.Moreover,itisachroniclethatdescribesaperiodlongbeforethechroniclersstarted

writingintheEsagiltemple.Ashortertimespanforachronicleindicatesthatitisprobably

aboutacontemporaryevent,asallthechroniclesthatdescribeone,two,orthreeyearsare

fromtheAchaemenidandSeleucidperiods.Thechroniclershadinformationaboutthisevent

andcouldthusdescribedetails,however,theylackedinformationabouteventsthathappened

alongtimeago.Thefinalthreecolumnsinthetable-23chroniclesintotal-areabout

chroniclesthatdescribeonereignorpartofareign,thisisanotherindicationthatthe

chroniclerswerenotabletogetasmuchinformationaboutthepastofBabylonia,asBabylon

wasnolongerthecapital.However,thiscannotbesaidwithcertainty.Thelaterchronicles

mightbepartofanotherschoolortraditionofchroniclewriting.

Toconclude:thetimespandiscussedinthechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippadiffers

greatly.ThechroniclesfromBorsippadescribelongerperiodsoftimeandentirereignsorthe

transitionsofonereigntothenext;thechroniclesfromBabylonmainlyfocusonspecificparts

ofreigns.ThechroniclersfromBorsippaprobablyhadmoreinformationabouttheNeo-

Babylonianempireattheirdisposal,andtheywereabletodescribeeventsaboutthenotso

Timespan ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


TotalofBabylonchronicles

600yearsormore 0 1 1

Between100and200years

0 2 2

Between50and99years

2 1 3

Between10and16years

0 5 5

Twoorthreeyears 0 4 4

Oneyear 0 14 14

�42

recentpast,whilethechroniclersfromBabylonprobablydidnothaveanelaboratearchiveat

theirdisposalandpreferredtowriteaboutcontemporaryevents.Thelittleinformationthey

hadaboutthehistoryofBabyloniawasgatheredanddescribedinseveralchronicleswith

extremelylongtimespans.

�43

Reoccurringsentencesinthechronicles

Inthischapteridenticalsentencesthatreoccurinvariouschronicleswillbediscussed.These

sentencesappearindifferentgroupsfromallthecities.Thischapterwillinvestigatewhich

chronicleshaveoverlappingsentences,andhowthepossibleexchangecouldhavetakenplace.

Borsippa:

IntheBeliya’ugrouptherearefourchroniclesthatcontainsentencesthatareduplicatedor

havevariationsinotherchronicles.OutofthesefourchroniclesABC14isunusual;itcontains

duplicatedsentencesorsentenceswithvariationsthatcanbefoundinotherchroniclesfrom

BabylonandBorsippa.ThereisalargeamountofsentencesinABC14thatarealsopresentin

MC16andMC17;thiscouldindicatethatoneofthechroniclerscopiedfromtheother

chronicle.AreasonforthiscouldbethatMC16,MC17andABC14sharedthemajorityof

theirmaterial,becausetheywriteaboutthesameperiod,theremightbearealisticpossibility

thatthesechronicleshadacommonsource .Asseveralchronicleshavesentencesthat90

emergeintheMC16andMC17chronicles,itcouldbethatthesechronicleshadan

overarchingaspect,otherchroniclescouldhaveusedthisspecificchronicleasanexample

chroniclethatcontainedtherecenthistoryofBabylonia.Ifthiswasthecaseitwouldexplain

whyotherchroniclescontaininformationthatisfrequentlywrittendownonMC16andMC

17.ABC14andABC15haveonesentencethatoccurswithslightvariationsinother

chronicles,thissentenceis:“Nabûdoesnotcome,andBeldoesnotcomeout”.Thissentence

mightbeafixedexpression,whichwouldexplainwhyitoccursinbothchroniclesfrom

BabylonandBorsippa.ThisspecificsentencedoesnotoccurintheMC16andMC17

chronicles,itthuscannothavebeencopiedandre-copiedfromthischronicle.

OtherchroniclesintheBeliya’ugroupthatcontainreoccurringsentencesorvariationson

sentencesareFs.Grayson1andABC20B.Boththechronicleshaveduplicatedsentencesfrom

chronicleABC20A.Fs.Grayson1onlyhasasmallvariationinasentence,whileABC20Bhas

anentiresectionduplicatedfromABC20A.BecausethesechroniclesallcomefromBorsippa,

itcouldbepossiblethatthechroniclershadaccesstootherarchivesintown,andthuswere

abletocopyorreadotherchronicles.Furtherevidenceforthistheorystemsfromthefactthat

ABC20AandABC20Bsucceedeachother.ThelastsevensentencesofABC20Bareexactlythe

Brinkman1990:88-95.ThisisnotonlythecaseforchroniclesMC16,MC17andABC14,itmight90

alsobetrueforotherchronicles,asmostofthechroniclesfromthisperiodhaverepetitiouspassagesandverbalsimilarities.

�44

sameasthefirstsevensentencesofABC20A,thusprovidingameanstoletthesespecific

chroniclescontinueeachother.

TheRe’i-alpigroupprovidesonechroniclethatisespeciallyinteresting:ABC16.Itcontains

sentencesthatalsooccurinMC16andMC17.ABC16haslinesthatoccurintwochronicles

fromtheEsagiltemple,thesechroniclesareABC17andABC7,howevertheselinesare

standardlinestoindicatethattheAkitufestivaldidnottakeplaceandthatneitherBelnor

Nabûwentout,aswasmentionedearlier.BecauseABC16,ABC17andABC7areall

interestedintheAkitufestivalandtheappearanceofBelandNabû,itcouldbedeductedthat

thechronicleswereprobablynotrelatedtoeachother,butwerewritingdownfixed

expressionstoindicatethattheAkitufestivalwouldnotcontinue.

ThedifferentarchivesthatcanbefoundinBorsippawereprobablyallincontactwitheach

other.ThebiggestevidenceisthatABC20AandABC20Barefromdifferentgroupsbutstill

complementoneanother.

Babylon:

TheMC16andMC17chroniclesaresimilartoeachother .MC17isalmostthesameasMC91

16.ItisworthnotingthattherearenoduplicationsorvariationsofMC16andMC17inthe

Esagiltemplearchives.Asdiscussedpreviously,thechroniclesfromBorsippaandMC16and

MC17haveoverlappingsentences.Inthechapteronperiodsanddynastiesanexplanationcan

befound:becauseMC16andMC17andtheEsagiltemplechroniclesdiscussdifferent

periods,itwouldnothavemadesensetohavereoccurringsentencesfromtheMC16andMC

17chroniclesintheEsagiltemplearchive.MC16andMC17mightbeasummarychronicleto

covertheperiodofAssyriandomination .92

MostofthechroniclesfromtheEsagiltemplethathaveduplicationsorvariationsinother

chronicles,havetheseduplicationsandvariationswithotherchroniclesfromtheEsagil

temple.ThisdoesnotapplytoABC17andABC7,thesechroniclesalsohavesentencesthat

areformulatedthesamewayintheRe’i-alpiandBeliya’ugroups .Theotherchroniclesfrom93

theEsagiltempleareallchroniclesfromtheSeleucidperiod.Thechroniclesaboutthe

SeeBrinkman1990:88-9591

VanderSpek2008:28192

Thissentenceis:“Nabûdoesnotcome,andBeldoesnotcomeout”.Asdiscussedabove,thissentence93

mightbeafixedexpression.�45

Seleucidperiodoftenareaboutthesamesubjects,thereforethechroniclersprobablyusedthe

samesourcestowritedownevents,whichexplainstheduplicationsandvariations.Outofthe

seventeenchroniclesthatmakeupthedocumentsabouttheSeleucidperiodthereareeight

chroniclesthathaveduplicationsorvariations .Eventhoughsomeofthesedocumentsare94

aboutthesamerulersorevents,mostofthesubjectsthatarediscussedinthechroniclesfrom

theEsagiltemplearenotrelatedtoeachother.Therearethustwotypesofintertextualityin

thechroniclesfromBabylon,inthechroniclesfromtheSeleucidperiodthechroniclersoften

writeaboutthesamesubjectsandsharedmaterial,whilethesecondformofintertextualityis

theuseofthesameformulationtodescribedifferentevents.

InthechroniclesfromBabylonfourdistinctgroupscanberecognized.Thefirstgroupconsists

oftheMC16andMC17chronicles,thesechronicleshaveoverlapswitheachotherandwith

chroniclesthatcomefromBorsippa.ThesecondgroupconsistsoftheABC17andABC7

chronicles,theycontainreoccurringsentenceswitheachotherandwithtwochroniclesfrom

BorsippathathavethereoccurringsentenceaboutBelandNabû.Thethirdgroupconsistsof

theSeleucidchroniclesthatcontainduplicationsandvariationswithotherchroniclesfromthe

Seleucidperiod.Thelastgroupconsistsofthechroniclesthatdonothaveduplicatesor

variationswithinotherchronicles.

Inconclusion;therearebothdifferencesandsimilaritiesinthechroniclesfromBorsippaand

Babylon.InthechroniclesfromBorsippa,itcanbeseenquiteeasilythatthearchivesinthis

citywereincontactwitheachother,moreover,theycooperatedandsharedtheirwork.This

canbeseeninthemanyreoccurringsentences,butaboveall,intheABC20BandABC20A

chronicles,whichsharealargepartoftheirchronicle.ThechroniclesfromBabylondonot

sharethesesimilarities,acleardistinctioningroupscanbemade.TheMC16andMC17

chroniclesareanimportantkeyinthechroniclestory.Itisquotedquiteofteninthechronicles

fromBorsippa,itmightsuggestthatthischroniclewasanexamplechronicleforthechaotic

perioditdescribes,whichcouldbethereasonthatitisreferredtointhechroniclesfrom

Borsippa.

Thesechroniclesare:ABC10,BCHP6,ABC13A,ABC11,ABC12,MC37,BCHP11andBCHP15.See94

thedatabaseforwhichlinesareduplicated.�46

Godsandreligioninthechronicles

ThischapterwillgiveinsightsinthedifferencesoftheroleofreligioninBorsippaand

Babylon.Questionsthatarisewhenlookingatthissubjectare:‘aretheredifferencesinwhich

godsarementionedinthechronicles?’and‘aretheredifferencesintherolethatthegodsplay

inthechronicles?’Adistinctioncanbemadeconcerningtherolethatgodsplayinthe

chronicles,anactiveroledenotesthatagodisaparticipantinthechronicles,whileanon-

activeroledenotesthatagodismentionedinthechroniclebutnotperformsanactivity

himself.

Borsippa

InthechroniclesfromBorsippa,moregodsarementionedthancanbeseeninthetable,

howevertheyareonlymentionedonceandarenotexaminedhere,astheydonotplayan

importantrole.Ascanbeseeninthetable,Bel/MardukandNabûarethegodswhoare

mentionedthemostinthechronicles.Thisisnosurprise,asNabûisthemostimportantgod

inBorsippa,andMardukisthemostimportantgodinBabylonia.Thegodswhoarementioned

moreofteninthechroniclesareusuallymentionedwhentheyeitherleaveorenteracity,

althoughEnlilismentionedwhenhistemplewasdesecratedandwhenathronewasmadefor

him .Bel/MardukandNabûareusuallymentionedwhentheyleaveorenteracity,although95

Gods Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup Total

Enlil 1 1 2

AnutheGreat 2 0 2

GodsofAkkad 2 1 3

Bel/Marduk 8 13 21

Nabû 5 7 12

GodsofBorsippa 1 1 2

Roleofthegods Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup Total

Notactive 7 3 10

Notpresent 4 0 4

Active 0 1 1

SeechronicleABC20BandABC24.95

�47

templerestorationandnewfurniturearealsomentionedoccasionally.Theonechronicle

whereagodisanactiveparticipantiswhenMardukbecomesangryatSargon,thishappensin

ABC20A.SargonbuildsacounterpartofBabylonnexttoAgade.Laterinthechronicle,Bel

becomesangryagainatShulgibecausehetookawaypropertyoftheEsagil.

ItappearsasthoughthegodsplayabiggerroleinthechroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpigroup.

BothMarduk/BelandNabûarementionedmoreofteninthesechronicles,andthereisone

chroniclewhereMarduk/Belisanactiveparticipant.Moreover,therearefourchroniclesin

theBeliya’ugroupwherenogodsarementioned.TheRe’i-alpigrouphasamorereligious

approachthanthechroniclesintheBeliya’ugroup.

Babylon

InthechroniclesfromBabylonmoregodsarementionedthanareshowninthetable,

however,onlythegodswhoarementionedmorethantwotimeswillbediscussed.Marduk/

Belismentionedthemost,asheisthemostimportantgodofBabylonthiscomesasno

surprise.NabûismentionedthemostafterMarduk/Bel,thisisalsonotsurprisingasNabûis

Gods ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


Total

GodsofUruk 3 0 3

Bel/Marduk 3 28 31

GodsofAkkad 1 2 3

Sîn 0 12 12

Shamash 0 6 6

Adad 0 3 3

GreatGods 0 6 6

TheGods 0 3 3

Nabû 0 18 18

Beltiya 0 5 5

Roleofthegods ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


Total

Notactive 2 14 16

Notpresent 0 10 10

Active 0 3 3

�48

thesonofMarduk/Bel.Sînismentionedtwelvetimes,howeverinABC11heismentionedsix

timesbecauseAntiochusascrownprinceentershistemplesandbowsbeforeSîn.InMC53

Sînismentionedfourtimes,inthischroniclethecommandmentofSînwasreadaloudand

Nabonidusdecidedtodedicatehisdaughtertohim.Shamashismentionedsixtimes,butin

MC53heismentionedfivetimes,itthusmightgiveabiasedindicationoftheimportanceof

Shamash.ThischronicleisaboutthereignofNabonidus,andShamashplayedabigrole

duringhisreign.Thedesignation‘GreatGods’isusedsixtimes,astrikingaspectofthistermis

thatitisusedthroughoutthechronicles,itoccursinBCHP19,achroniclethatwritesabout

theArsaciddynasty;butalsoinABCp.192,whichwritesaboutanearlyperiod .Becausethe96

chronicleswriteaboutdifferentperiods,itcannotbesaidwhothesegodsare.Beltiyais

mentionedfivetimes,shewasthespouseofBel,sheisonlymentionedincontactwithBel.

AdadhasanactiveroleinABC17,inthischroniclehegrowls .Intheotherchronicleshedoes97

notplayabigrole.Thedesignation‘thegods’isusedthreetimes,thisdesignationisusedin

twochroniclesfromtheSeleucidperiod,inthesedocuments,thegodsthattheSeleucids

worshippedcouldbemeant,especiallyinBCHP11.Inthischronicle,itismentionedthatthe

godswerenotfearedbytheHaneans.InABC17anofferingtablewasmadeforthemand

sacrificesweregiven,inthischroniclethegodsofthetempleinwhichthesacrificeswere

givenareprobablymeant.Innoneofthechroniclesthegodsplayanactiverole.TheGodsof

UrukareonlymentionedinMC16,inthisdocumenttheyaremovedaroundfromAssyriato

Uruk.TheGodsofAkkadarementionedintwochronicles,MC16andABC7,theirroleisnot

active,theyaremovedaround.

InmostofthechroniclesfromBabylonthegodsdonotplayanactiverole.Thechroniclesin

whichthegodsarenotpresentaremostlyaboutlaterperiods.Thereasonthatgodsarenot

mentionedasofteninthesechroniclesisprobablynotbecausechroniclershadlessattention

forthesegodsbutbecausecelebrationsastheAkitufestivaldidnottakeplaceonaregular

basisandtheSeleucidrulersdidnotsolelycelebratedtheirfestivalsatBabylon.Thethree

chronicleswheregodshaveanactiveroleareallchroniclesthatwriteabouttheNeo-

Babylonianperiodorperiodsbeforethat.InthechroniclesfromBabylonadistinctioninthree

subdivisionscanbemade,thefirstsubdivisionconsistsofthechroniclesfromtheSeleucid

period,thesecondsubdivisioniscomposedoftheMC16andMC17chronicles,andthefinal

PerhapsthefirstorsecondSealanddynasty.96

Thisisindicativeofathunderstorm.97

�49

subdivisionisthegroupofchroniclesthatdonotfitwithinthefirsttwosubdivisions.Inthese

threesubdivisionsdifferentgodsarementioned,andthegodsplayadifferentrole.

Toconclude,thechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippaarenotverydifferentfromeachother.

Eventhoughinmostofthechroniclesthegodsdonotplayabigrole,theyarepresent.This

showsthatthechroniclerswerenotindifferenttothegods .Thechroniclersmightalsohave98

thoughtthateveryeventthattookplacewasdivinelyordained ,whichmightexplainwhy99

godsarenotmentionedineverychronicle,itmightalsoexplainwhythechroniclesfromboth

citiesarenotverydifferentfromeachother.InbothBabylonandBorsippaBel/Mardukand

Nabûarethemostimportantgods,nexttothedesignation‘godsofAkkad’theyaretheonly

godsthatarementionedinbothcities.TheroleofthegodsandthefactthatNabûandMarduk

areequallyimportantaresimilarities.However,therearealsodifferencesinthecities:therole

ofthegods,andthegodswhoarementionedaredifferentinthecities,neverthelessthese

differencescanbeattributedtothedifferenttimesandperhapsadifferenttraditioninwhich

thechronicleswerewritten.

VanderSpek(2008:284)arguesthatgodsdonotplayaroleinthechronicles,however,thisisnottrue.98

Drews1975:4599

�50

Appearanceofthechronicles

Thischapterwillfocusonthephysicalappearanceofchronicles:thelengthofthechronicles,

whetherornotthetabletwasdividedincolumnsandthesizeofthetablet.Thediscussionof

columnswillbegininthepartaboutthechroniclesfromBabylonasthechroniclesfrom

Borsippaareallsinglecolumnchronicles.

Borsippa

Ascanbeseeninthetable,thechroniclesfromBorsippashowavarietyinlength.The

shortestchronicleisonlyfourlineslong,whilethelongestchroniclehas78lines.Boththese

chroniclesarefromtheBeliya’ugroup.TheBeliya’ugroupcontainsfourchroniclesthatare

shapedlikeNeo-Babylonianbusinessdocuments .TheBeliya’ugroupisquitediversewhen100

itcomestotheamountoflinesthechroniclersusetodescribetheeventsonthechronicles.

TheRe’i-alpigroupisverydifferent,thechroniclesinthisgroupareallquitelong.Moreover,

theamountoflinesonthechroniclesrangesfrom27to38,thismeansthattheyareall

approximatelythesamelength.Thetableshowsquiteclearlythatthechroniclershada

preferredamountoflinestowritedownastory:between24and49lines.

Ascanbeseeninthetable,therearetwochroniclesintheBeliya’ugroupthatareeitherreally

Linesofthechronicle Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup Total

4-8 3 0 3

24-28 3 1 4

37-49 4 3 7

78 1 0 1

Size Beliya’ugroup Re’i-alpigroup Total

2.8x3.7cm 1 0 1

Between4.2x5.6and4.5x6.2cm

2 2 4

Between5x3.4and5.5x7.6cm

4 1 5

Between5.7x4.3and5.9x8.5cm

3 1 4

13.2x6.9cm 1 0 1

Thesechroniclesare:ABC15,ABC2,ABC4andABC6.100

�51

small,orreallybig.Thechroniclesareallapproximatelythesamesize,exceptforthesmallest

andlargesttablet.Thetabletwiththeleastamountoflines alsohasthesmallestsize,and101

thetabletwiththemostlines hasthebiggestsize.Allthechroniclesinbetweenhave102

differentsizes,accordingtotheamountoflinesthatthechroniclerswantedtowritedown.

ThechroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpiandBeliya’ugroupdonotdiffergreatlyfromoneanother.

TheoneexceptionisthelongchronicleandthethreesmallerchroniclesintheBeliya’ugroup.

Therestofthechroniclescontainmoreorlessthesameamountoflinesandhavethesame

size.

Babylon

ThechroniclesfromBabylondonotshowagreatvarietyinlines.Thechroniclesthathaveless

than40linesaremostlychroniclesthatwriteaboutthelaterperiods,whilethechroniclesthat

havemorethan40lineswriteaboutearlierperiods.MC16andMC17havealotoflines.MC

16contains184lines,thisisthechroniclewiththemostlines.ABC9isthechroniclewiththe

leastamountoflines:8.Acleardistinctioncanbemade:thechronicleswiththeleastamount

oflinesallnarrateeventsthattakeplaceinlaterperiods,whiletheMC16andMC17

chroniclesandthechroniclesfromtheEsagiltemplethatwriteaboutearlierperiodsareall

relativelylong.

Linesonthechronicle ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


Total

1-10 0 3 3

11-20 0 7 7

21-30 0 6 6

31-40 0 5 5

41-70 1 2 3

71-90 0 3 3

101+ 1 1 2

ThistabletisFs.Grayson3,itcontainssixlines,eventhoughFs.Grayson1hasfourlinesof101

chronicle,thereare26linesintotalonthetablet.

ABC3102

�52

ThechroniclesfromBabylondiffertoalargeextentwhenitcomestothesizeofthetablet.

Moreover,thereisnocorrelationbetweenthenumberoflinesonatabletandthesize.Some

chroniclesonlyhave20linesbutcanstillhavealargesizeandtheotherwayaround.MC16

andMC17arequitebig,buttheycontainalotoflines.IntheEsagiltemplechroniclesmostof

thechroniclesarebetween5x3and8x11centimeters,thisseemsquitebigfortheamountof

linesthatarewrittendownonthesechronicles.Thereareseveralpossibilitiesastowhythis

happened.Firstofall,thechroniclesfromBabylon-whencomparedtothechroniclesfrom

Borsippa-areprobablywritteninalaterperiod,andthechroniclersmighthaveneededmore

spacetowritethedocuments.Secondly,thewritingstylemighthavechangedoverthe

decades.Thirdly,conventionsonwritingmighthavechanged.

Thecolumnsonthechroniclesshowaninterestingperspective.MC16,MC17,ABC22,ABC

17,ABC7,MC53andABC10 areallfourcolumntablets.Thesechronicleswriteabout103

earlierperiods,moreoverthedocumentshavemanylines.Thereasonthatthesechronicles

Size ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


Total

Between3x4.5and4.9x6.5cm

0 2 2

Between5x3and5.7x7cm

0 7 7

Between6x3.8and6.6x10cm

0 5 5


0 4 4


1 4 5

Between11x5.5and14x14cm

0 3 3

Between17x11and19.3x15.8cm

1 2 3

Columns ChroniclesfromBabylonwithnoclearprovenance


Total

1 0 22 22

4 2 5 7

VanderSpek2004C:ABC10isprobablyafourcolumnchronicle.103

�53

mighthavefourcolumnswhiletheotherchroniclesonlyhaveonecolumnmightsimplybe

duetothefactthatthesechroniclesarelongerthantheotherchronicles.

TheMC16andMC17chroniclesandthechroniclesfromtheEsagiltemplediffergreatlyin

size,linesonthetabletsandcolumns.However,thiscanbeeasilyexplainedbythefactthatthe

MC16andMC17chronicleshavemoreinformationonthetabletsthantheotherchronicles

fromBabylon.

Inconclusion,whenthechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippaarecomparedthereisquitea

bigdifference.Firstofall,theamountoflinesontabletsfromBabylondiffersmorethanthe

linesonthechroniclesfromBorsippa.Thesizeofthetabletsalsodiffersgreatlypercity,there

mightbeseveralreasonsforthedifferencesbetweenthecities:styleorconventionsmight

havechangedoverthedecades,theremightalsobeapossibilitythattheprofessionof

chroniclerwasindecline,orprofessionalchroniclerwritinghadbecomemoreintertwined

withthewritingofastronomicaldiaries.TherearesixchroniclesfromBabylonthathavefour

columns,whereasBorsippadoesnothaveanychronicleswithmultiplecolumns.Toconclude,

thedifferencesfromthechroniclesinBabylonandBorsippaaresogreatthatitmightpointto

acompletelydifferentchroniclegenre.

�54

Conclusion

Thegoalofthisthesiswastoprovideanunderstandingofhowthescribalactivities

concerningthechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippaweredifferentorsimilartoeachother,

andtofindoutiftherewasonecenturylongtraditionormultipletraditionswithinthe

chroniclegenre.Iftherearesimilaritiesinthechroniclesitwouldindicatethattherewere

eitherlittleornochangesinspaceandtime,whereasifdifferencescanbefoundinthe

chroniclesitwouldindicatethatthescribaltraditionhadchangedoverthedecades,orother

differencesarepresentinthecities.

ThetwogroupsinBorsippashowcleardifferences.Thetwogroupstogethergiveacombined

overviewofBabylonianhistory.Inthethemesonplaces,subjects,andappearancethetwo

groupsdonotdifferalotfromeachother.However,inthethemeonperiodsanddynastiesthe

Beliya’ugroupfocusesmoreoncurrenteventswhiletheRe’i-alpigrouphasamoreelaborate

overviewofBabylonianhistory.InthethemeonkingstheRe’i-alpigroupgivesmoreattention

tokingswhoperformedgreatdeedsforBorsippa,whiletheBeliya’ugroupdocumentsmostly

actionofkingswhoareinpowerduringtheirtime,especiallyNabopolassar.Inthethemeon

thetimespanofachronicletheRe’i-alpigrouphasingenerallongertimespansthanthe

chroniclesfromtheBeliya’ugroup.Aswastobeexpected,theRe’i-alpigrouphasamore

religiousapproachinthethemeongodsandreligionthantheBeliya’ugroup .104

ThethemesthatarediscussedshowthatthechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippahavea

completelydifferentstyle.Thedifferenceinstyleissoobviousitmightpointtoacompletely

differentgenre.Thesameterm-chronicle-mightnotbeapplicable.Inthechapterwhere

periodsanddynastieswerediscusseditshowedthatthechroniclersfromBorsippafocused

onhistoricalaffairs,whereastheBabylonianchroniclesfocusedmostlyoncurrentaffairs.This

differencebecamemoreclearinthechapterswherethedifferentsubjectsandplacesthatthe

chronicleswriteaboutwerediscussed.AsBabylonwasnolongerthecapitalintheSeleucid

empire,thechroniclersmostlyhadinformationathandthatwasdeliveredthroughroyal

correspondence,whichmeantthattheynolongerhadfirsthandinformation,butwerekept

updatedvialetters.Asaconsequencetheywrotemoreaboutlocalizedevents.Thechronicles

fromBorsippa,ontheotherhand,wroteaboutaffairsthathappenedinthewholeempireand

abouthistoricevents.Anotherbigdifferencecanbefoundinthefactthatchroniclesfrom

AswasalreadymentionedintheintroductionthechroniclesfromtheRe’i-alpigrouphaveamore104

religiousperspectivethanthechroniclesfromtheBeliya’ugroup.�55

BabylonoftenhaveshortertimespansthanchroniclesfromBorsippa,whichusuallywrite

aboutlongerperiodsoftime.Thechapteraboutre-usedsentencesshowsmanyclear

differencesbetweenBabylonandBorsippa.InBorsippaitcanbeseenthatthearchivesinthe

cityworkedtogetherandprobablyexchangedmaterial.InBabylonthreedistinctgroupsthat

sharematerialcanberecognized:theMC16andMC17chronicles,thechroniclesfromthe

Acheamenidperiod,theSeleucideraandtheArsaciddynasty,andthechroniclesaboutthe

olderperiods.Thechapteraboutthephysicalappearanceofthechroniclesdoesnotgivean

answertothequestionastowhatwasanormalsizeforachronicle,oraboutthenumberof

linesonatabletthatwasnormal.Inthischapterthereweremanydifferencesbetween

BabylonandBorsippa,butdifferenceswithinthecitiescouldalsobefound.Thetwowriting

centersarenotverydifferentwhenitcomestothethemesaboutkingsandgodsinthe

chronicles.However,whenitcomestokings,bothcentersofwritinghavenospecificinterest

inanyking.Areasonastowhytherearenotmanydifferencesinthegodsandreligionchapter

mightbethatthechroniclersthoughtthateveryeventwasdivinelyordained.

Theresearchquestioncanbeansweredasfollows:thereisnotonecenturylongtradition

spanningthedifferenttimesinwhichthearchivesofBabylonandBorsippawerewritten.

WherethechroniclesfromBabylonarecloselyaffiliatedwiththeastronomicaldiaries,the

chroniclesfromBorsippaarenotaffiliatedwithanothergenreofwriting.Thereisthusmore

thanonechronicletraditioninBabylonia.Thedifferencesbetweenthechroniclesfrom

BabylonandBorsippaarelarge,eventhoughboththecentersofwritinghavedelivered

chronicles,adistinctionbetweenchroniclesfromBabylonandchroniclesfromBorsippa

shouldbemade.ThechroniclesfromBorsippahaveawiderworldview,thechronicles

describetheoldesteventsandmentionthehighlightsofBabylonianhistory,whereasthe

chroniclesfromBabylonmostlynarratecontemporaryevents.ChroniclersfromBorsippahad

accesstoarchivesallovertheircity-andprobablytosomeextentalsohadmaterialattheir

disposalthatwasinBabylonatsomepoint-andthushadtheopportunitytowritedown

eventsfromthetimeofSargononwards.ThechroniclersfromBabylon,ontheotherhand,had

nosuchmaterialattheirdisposal.Babylonwasnolongerthecapitaloftheempireinthe

Seleucideraandtheywerethuslimitedtowritingdownlocalizedandcontemporaryevents.

AsthechroniclesfromBabyloncomefromalaterperioditmightalsobethatthefunctionof

writinghistoricaleventsmighthavechanged.Thegenreofchroniclesmightbeapplicableto

thedocumentsfromboththecities,however,thechroniclesfromBabylonandBorsippa

shouldbedividedintoasub-genreforchroniclesfromBorsippa,andandasub-genreforthe

chroniclesfromBabylon.�56

Bibliography

Bidmead,J.(2002).TheAkītuFestival:ReligiousContinuityandRoyalLegitimationin

Mesopotamia.Piscataway:GorgiasPress.

Boiy,T.(2004).LateAchaemenidandHellenisticBabylon.Leuven:Peeters.

Brinkman,J.A.(1990).TheBabylonianChronicleRevisited.In:Abusch,T.,Heuhnergard,J.and

Steinkeller,P.LingeringoverWords,StudiesinAncientNearEasternLiteratureinHonorof

WilliamL.Moran.Georgia:ScholarsPress.73-104.

Brinkman,J.A.(1995).Glassner'sMesopotamianChronicles.JournaloftheAmericanOriental

Society115(4),667-670.

Clancier,P.(2009).LesBibliothèquesenBabyloniedansladeuxièmemoitiédu1ermillénaireav.

J.-C.Münster:Ugarit-Verlag.

DelMonte,G.F.(1997).TestidallaBabiloniaEllenistica.Pisa:IstitutiEditorialiePoligrafici

Internazionali.

Drews,R.(1975).TheBabylonianChronicleandBerossus.Iraq37,39-55.

Finkelstein,J.J.(1963).MesopotamianHistoriography.ProceedingsoftheAmerican

PhilosophicalSociety107(6),461-473.

Foster,B.R.(2005).BeforetheMuses,anAnthologyofAkkadianLiterature.3rded.Bethesda:

CDLPress.

George,A.R.(1993).HouseMostHigh:TheTemplesofAncientMesopotamia.WinonaLake,

Indiana:Eisenbrauns.

George,A.R.(1996).StudiesinCulticTopographyandIdeology.BibliothecaOrientalis53,

363-395.

Glassner,J.(2004).MesopotamianChronicles.Atlanta:SocietyofBiblicalLiterature.�57

Grayson,A.K.(1975).AssyrianandBabylonianChronicles.LocustValley,NewYork:J.J.Augustin

Publisher.

Grayson,A.K.(1980-1983).KönigslistenundChroniken.In:Edzard,D.O.Reallexikonder

Assyriologie6.Berlin:WalterdeGruyter.86-135.

Hallo,W.W.(1957).Gutium.In:Weidner,E.ReallexikonderAssyriologie3.Berlin:Walterde

Gruyter&Co.708-720.

Hunger,H.andSachs,A.J.(1988).AstronomicalDiariesandRelatedTexts,VolumeI,Diariesfrom

652B.C.to262B.C.Vienna:VerlagderÖsterreichischenAkademiederWissenschaften.

Leick,G.(1999).Who’sWhointheAncientNearEast.London:Routledge.

Linssen,M.J.H.(2004).TheCultsofUrukandBabylon:theTempleRitualTextsasEvidencefor

HellenisticCultPractice.Leiden:Brill.

vandeMieroop,M.(2007).AHistoryoftheAncientNearEastca.3000-323BC.2nded.Oxford:

BlackwellPublishing.

Millard,A.(1994).TheEponymsoftheAssyrianEmpire.Sastamala:VammalanKirjapainoOy.

Oelsner,J.,Wells,B.andWunsch,C.(2003).Mesopotamia:Neo-BabylonianPeriod.In:

Westbrook,R.AHistoryofAncientNearEasternLaw,volumetwo.Leiden:Brill.911-974.

Oppenheim,A.L.(1964).AncientMesopotamia:PortraitofaDeadCivilization.Chicago:The

UniversityofChicagoPress.

Parpola,S.andPorter,M.(2001).TheHelsinkiAtlasoftheNearEastintheNeo-AssyrianPeriod.

Sastamala:VammalanKirjapainoOy.

Pirngruber,R.(2013).TheHistoricalSectionsoftheAstronomicalDiariesinContext:

DevelopmentsinaLateBabylonianScientificTextCorpus.Iraq75,197-210.

�58

Reade,J.E.(2008).EarlytravellersontheWonders:suggestedsites.In:Finkel,I.Land

Seymour,M.J.Babylon:MythandReality.London:TheBritishMuseumPress.112-117.

Rochberg,F.(2000).ScribesandScholars:ThetupsarEnumaAnuEnlil.In:Marzahn,J.and

Neumann,H.AssyriologicaetSemitica.FestschriftfürJoachimOelsner.Münster:Ugarit-Verlag.

359-375.

vanSeters,J.(1983).InsearchofHistory,HistoriographyintheancientWorldandtheoriginsof

BiblicalHistory.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress.

Seux,M.-J.(1967).ÉpithètesRoyales:AkkadiennesetSumériennes.Paris:LetouzeyetAné.

Smith,S.(1924).BabylonianHistoricalTexts.Londen:Methuen&Co.

Sollberger,E.(1962).TheTummalInscription.JournalofCuneiformStudies16,40-47.

Sollberger,E.(1967).TheRulersofLagash.JournalofCuneiformStudies21,279-291.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004A).TheAlexanderChronicle(BCHP1).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-alexander/alexander_02.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly

2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004B).ChronicleconcerningAlexanderandArabia(BCHP2).Available:

http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-arabia/arabia_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly

2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004C).TheDiadochiChronicle(BCHP3).Available:http://www.livius.org/

cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-diadochi/diadochi_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004D).AlexanderandArtaxerxesfragment(BCHP4).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-arses/arses_1.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004E).ChronicleconcerningAntiochusandtheSintemple(BCHP5).

Available:http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-antiochus_sin/

antiochus_sin_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.�59

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004F).RuinofEsagilachronicle(BCHP6).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-ruin_esagila/ruin_esagila_01.html.Lastaccessed17th

July2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004G).Antiochus,Bactria,andIndia(BCHP7).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-india/antiochus_india_01.html.Lastaccessed17th

July2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004H).JuniperGardenChronicle(BCHP8).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-juniper/juniper_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly

2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004I).EndofSeleucusChronicle(BCHP9).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-end_seleucus/seleucus_01.html.Lastaccessed17th

July2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004J).TheSeleucidAccessionsChronicle(BCHP10).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-dynastic/dynastic_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly

2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004K).PtolemyIIIChronicle(BCHP11).Available:http://www.livius.org/

cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-ptolemy_iii/bchp_ptolemy_iii_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004L).SeleucusIIIChronicle(BCHP12).Available:http://www.livius.org/

cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-seleucus_iii/seleucus_iii_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004M)."Politai"Chronicle(BCHP13).Available:http://www.livius.org/cg-

cm/chronicles/bchp-politai/politai_1.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004N).GreekCommunityChronicle(BCHP14).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-greeks/greeks_01.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004O).GoldTheftChronicle(BCHP15).Available:http://www.livius.org/

cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-gold/theft_1.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.�60

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004P).DocumentonLandandTithes(BCHP16).Available:http://

www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-tithes/tithes_1.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004Q).JudicialChronicle(BCHP17).Available:http://www.livius.org/cg-

cm/chronicles/bchp-jud/jud_1.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004R).ChronographicDocumentsconcerningBagayasha(BCHP18A/B).

Available:http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-bagayasha/bchp-bagayasha1.html.

Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004S).ArsacidKingChronicle(BCHP19).Available:http://www.livius.org/

cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-arsacid/arsacid_king_1.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2004T).EuphratesChronicle(BCHP20).Available:http://www.livius.org/

cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-euphrates/euphrates_1.html.Lastaccessed17thJuly2014.

VanDerSpek,R.J.(2008).BerossusasaBabylonianChroniclerandGreekHistorian.In:Van

DerSpek,R.J.StudiesinAncientNearEasternWorldViewandSociety.Bethesda:CDLPress.

277-318.

vanderSpek,R.J.(2009).Multi-ethnicityandethnicsegregationinHellenisticBabylon.In:

Derks,T.andRoymansN.eds.,EthnicConstructsinAntiquity:theroleofpowerandtradition.

Amsterdam.101-115.

Waerzeggers,C.(2012).TheBabylonianChronicles:ClassificationandProvenance.Journalof

NearEasternStudies71/2,285-298.

Waerzeggers,C.(2015).Facts,Propaganda,orHistory?ShapingPoliticalMemoryinthe

NabonidusChronicle.In:JasonM.SilvermanandCarolineWaerzeggerseds.PoliticalMemory

inandafterthePersianEmpire.SBLANEM13.Atlanta:SBLPress.95-124.

Walker,C.B.F.(1982).BabylonianChronicle25:achronicleoftheKassiteansIsinIIdynasties.

In:vanDriel,G.etal.ZikirShumim:AssyriologicalStudiesPresentedtoF.R.Krausonthe

OccasionofhisSeventiethBirthday.Leiden:Brill.398-417.�61

Walker,C.B.F.(2004).ThreeBabylonianChroniclesandScientificTexts.In:Frame,G.Fromthe

UpperSeatotheLowerSea:StudiesontheHistoryofAssyriaandBabyloniainHonourofA.K.

Grayson.Leiden:NederlandsInstituutvoorhetNabijeOosten.203-212.

Westbrook,R.(2003).Introduction:TheCharacterofAncientNearEasternLaw.In:

Westbrook,R.AHistoryofAncientNearEasternLaw,volumeone.Leiden:Brill.1-90.

Wiseman,D.J.(1956).ChroniclesofChaldaeanKings(626-556B.C.):IntheBritishMuseum.

London:TheBritishMuseum.

Zadok,R.(1985).RépertoireGeógraphiquedesTextesCuneiformsVIII:GeographicalNames

AccordingtoNew-andLate-BabylonianTexts.Wiesbaden:Dr.LudwigReichertVerlag.

�62

The Babylonian chronicles - Universiteit Leiden

Documents

Transcript of The Babylonian chronicles - Universiteit Leiden