¹ All dates are written day.month.year

² For a list of Kandalanu dates, see Weidner, E. F., AfO 16, pp. 38–39Google Scholar; also Borger, R., JCS 19, pp. 62–63Google Scholar.

³ I wish to thank the Trustees of the British Museum for permission to refer to these unpublished texts; also to thank Mr. Alan Millard, who first brought them to my attention. Dr. E. Soliberger has very kindly confirmed the reading of the dates.

⁴ For a list of Sin-šar-iškun dates, see Falkner, M., AfO 16, pp. 308–9Google Scholar.

⁵ According to Professor Goetze this date is probably to be read Nippur (??), –.x.1(?) (Borger, JCS 19 p. 67Google Scholar).

Two new dates provided by Professor Goetze must be added to this list: Sippar 20.ii.2, and 11.i.3, both published in a Sotheby's catalogue (JCS 19 p. 68Google Scholar).

⁶ WZKM LV, pp. 62 ffGoogle Scholar.

⁷ UVB XVIII, p. 57Google Scholar.

⁸ See discussion, p. 142.

⁹ TCL 12, 14Google ScholarPubMed.

¹⁰ See also p. 142, n. 20.

¹¹ Cf. 3d, e, p. 136.

¹² Chronicle of Years; see p. 141.

¹³ Pp. 136–7, 5d.

¹⁴ Professor Goetze's new Sippar date for Sin-šar-iškun, 20.ii.2, confirms the impossibility of this date. See p. 137, n. 5.

¹⁵ Weidner, E. F., AfO 16, p. 39Google Scholar; from JCS 19 p. 63Google Scholar must now be added: Babylon, 14.i.18; Dilbat, 28.xii.19; and a number of year 19 Uruk dates.

¹⁶ Smith, Sidney, Babylonian Historical Texts, pp. 22–26Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Dubberstein, W. H., JNES III, p. 40Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Gadd, C. J., “The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus”, AS 8, pp. 35 ffGoogle Scholar.

¹⁹ At the beginning of his reign Aššurbanipal had restored the temple of the moon god in Harran after a long period of decay and had appointed his youngest brother urigallu priest there (LAR II, p. 377Google Scholar).

²⁰ His accession certainly cannot be dated in 626, well as the chronicle, would equally exclude 625. and the Uruk dates for Nabopolassar years 1–2, as See also p. 139.

²¹ See p. 147.

²² Published in Wiseman, D. J., Chronicles of the Chaldean Kings, 1956Google Scholar.

²³ LAR II, pp. 377–8Google Scholar; Olmstead, A. T., History of Assyria, pp. 411 ffGoogle Scholar.

²⁴ The Assyrian royal house was plagued with succession troubles throughout the seventh century, often connected with the precedence of wives! Esarhaddon, see Olmstead, op. cit., pp. 337 ff., LAR II, pp. 200 ff.Google Scholar; Aššurbanipal, see Olmstead, pp. 386 ff., RCAE 1105, 1217, 1239; LAR II, p. 378Google Scholar.

²⁵ JADD IV 649, 650Google Scholar; see also Kohler and Ungnad, Assyrische Rechtsurkunden, nos. 20, 21; Olmstead, op. cit., p. 627.

²⁶ Provided, as is usually assumed, that the king is the same Sin-šum-lîšir who was Aššur-etillu-ilani's general and protector; see also Poebel, , JNES II, p. 89, n. 3Google Scholar.

It has been suggested that Aššur-etillu-ilani was a young child at the time of his father's death (see inter alia Borger, , WZKM LV, pp. 71–2Google Scholar), but the fact that Sin-šum-lîšir looked after him in his childhood does not necessarily mean that at that time Aššurbanipal was no longer alive. We have the evidence of RCAE 228 and 658 that it was the custom for an official of the king to ‘keep watch’ over a son of the king, in this instance the youngest son of Esarhaddon; the same phrase is used in JADD IV 649, 650Google Scholar.

²⁷ Translation provided by D. J. Wiseman (cf. Wiseman, op. cit., p. 51).

²⁸ Iraq XVII, pp. 69–89Google Scholar; Wiseman, op. cit., p. 5.

²⁹ See below, p. 145.

³⁰ See also ZA IV, p. 136Google Scholar (Sippar); JCS V, p. 19Google Scholar.

³¹ Professor Goetze has now found a tablet in the Yale collection on which he reads the date: Uruk, 24/25.iv.3. Dr. Borger suggests that it may be possible to read the year as 2 (JCS 19 p. 63Google Scholar). No other year 3 or 4 Nabopolassar documents are known from Uruk; the only year 5 text is a siege document.

³² I wish to thank Dr. E. Sollberger who very kindly went through the copies made by Pinches in the British Museum; he informs me that there are none dated to Nabopolassar 3–4.

³³ BM 50105, a very broken text, may read 21+.viii.3; no city is mentioned. I wish to thank Professor Wiseman for this information.

UET IV 78Google Scholar may also be dated to Nabopolassar year 3, although Figulla (p. 8) seems to prefer year 6. Figulla also implies that it is from Dilbat, but the sign on the tablet is quite unreadable. I am again indebted to Dr. Sollberger, who informs me that the damaged portion of the tablet is not so large as would appear from the copy, and that there is virtually no room for a second row of wedges to read 6.

³⁴ Edzard, , AfO 19, p. 143Google Scholar; OECT I, Pl. 29; LAR II p. 409Google Scholar; Ebeling, , An. Or. XII, pp. 71–73Google Scholar.

³⁵ LAR II, p. 408Google Scholar; Olmstead, p. 628; RCAE 403.

³⁶ Sin-šar-iškun was also recognized in Dilbat, ? date; Clay, , BRM 1, 42Google Scholar.

³⁷ This cannot be the siege of Nippur known from Oppenheim, , Iraq XVIIGoogle Scholar (Sin-šar-iškun 3); there is no mention of a siege in the chronicle, and more important, it is impossible, on the evidence of the accession year dates, to bring Sin-šar-iškun to the throne in the same year as Nabopolassar. Von Soden (WZKM LIII, p. 319Google Scholar) believes that the name of an Aramaean sheikh, ^mI-ti-ilu, should be read at the end of l. 31. Unfortunately this does nothing to clarify the situation.

³⁸ LAR II, pp. 410 ffGoogle Scholar.

³⁹ See Falkner, M., AfO 17, pp. 100 ff.Google Scholar; also p. 156.

⁴⁰ I am indebted to Professor Wiseman for the date of this tablet. Of the texts mentioned by him in Chronicles, p. 91, n. 1, there is only one dated to Nabopolassar year 4 (BM 47446), and one which is possibly year 3 (see p. 145, n. 33).

⁴¹ On p. 42 this date is given as 16.ix.4.

⁴² Sippar, II.i.3, must now be added. See p. 137, n. 5. There is no positive evidence that Nabopolassar held Sippar between 624 (ZA 4, p. 136Google Scholar; ZA 9, p. 397Google Scholar) and 619 (5.i.7; ZA 4, no. 4). See also n. 40.

⁴³ Now probably to be read Nippur (??). –.x.1 (?) (Bogrer, JCJ 19, p. 67Google Scholar).

⁴⁴ See also von Soden, W., WZKM LIII, p. 319Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Oates, D., Iraq XXIII, p. 9 and XXIV, pp. 12–13Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Oates, D., Iraq XXIV, p. 13Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ van Dijk, J., UVB XVIII, pp. 41–5Google Scholar; 56–7.

⁴⁸ Waterman, L., RCAE 469, 1387, 815Google Scholar; supplementary letters 1–5; inter alia 752–755, 1106. See also, with regard to Ur, Brinkman, , Orientalia 34, pp. 252 ffGoogle Scholar.

For those who would reject the 623 chronology believing the situation in year 10 too complicated, the following chart shows that the same type of political fluctuation obtains in Uruk if one assumes a 627 accession date for Sin-šar-iškun:

⁴⁹ A letter from a century earlier, giving an account of a parley at the gates of Babylon between Assyrian officials and the people barricaded within, illustrates the nature of some of these ‘sieges’. Saggs, H. W. F., Iraq XVII, pp. 23–24Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Waterman (RCAE) suggests that the king is Aššurbanipal, because of the title šar mâtâte, but see Iraq XVII, p. 88Google Scholar (2NT 299) for the application of this title to Sin-šar-iškun.

⁵¹ Translations after Waterman, RCAE.

⁵² Oppenheim, A. L., Iraq XVII, pp. 69–89Google Scholar.

⁵³ Figulla, , UET IVGoogle Scholar; also Brinkman, J. A., Orientalia 34. pp. 255–57Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ See also no. 78, p. 145, n. 33.

⁵⁵ I must record my grateful thanks to Mr. J. E. Reade for many useful suggestions concerning the limmu. The standard reference is Falkner, M., AfO 17, pp. 100–120Google Scholar; the abbreviations used here are hers.

⁵⁶ Another possible ša arki limmu (Si₂) falls within this period, but it is a far less certain one. The wording Sin-šarru-uṣur (amêl) arkû and the fact that the only known date for this eponym is month xi while the known Sin-šarru-uṣur (Si₁) dates fall between months i–x, suggest that Si₁ may have died while in office.

⁵⁷ It must be noted, however, that contemporary documents were never dated by these throne names, as they were by “Kandalanu”. Cf. Brinkman, , Or. 34, p. 255, n. 4Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Esarhaddon Chronicle, rev. l.12; Chronicle of Years, obv. l.5.

⁵⁹ LAR II, pp. 370 ff., 377Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ LAR II, p. 305Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Rassam Cyl., Cyl. A. Sometimes dated 644; Falkner's date is 636.

⁶² “Concerning the entrance of the king my lord into Babylon he spoke. Certainly Bel will act and the king will perform the ritual…” (RCAE 844).

⁶³ UVB XVIII, p. 53Google Scholar

⁶⁴ WZKM LV, p. 74Google Scholar.