offprint from Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Würzburg 20–25 July 2008 edited by Gernot Wilhelm Winona Lake, Indiana eisenbrauns 2012 © 2012 by Eisenbrauns Inc. All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America www.eisenbrauns.com Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Rencontre assyriologique internationale (54th : 2008 : Würzburg, Germany) Organization, representation, and symbols of power in the ancient Near East : proceedings of the 54th Rencontre assyriologique internationale at Wuerzburg, 20–25 July 2008 / edited by Gernot Wilhelm. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-1-57506-245-7 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Middle East—Civilization—To 622—Congresses. 2. Middle East— Politics and government—Congresses. 3. Middle East—Antiquities— Congresses. 4. Assyria—Civilization—Congresses 5. Assyria—Politics and government—Congresses. 6. Assyria—Civilization—Congresses. I. Wilhelm, Gernot. II. Title. DS41.5R35 2008 939.4—dc23 2012019372 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48–1984. ♾ ™ Contents Vorwort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Das Ansehen eines altorientalischen Herrschers bei seinen Untertanen Walther sallaberGer L’exercice du pouvoir par les rois de la I ère Dynastie de Babylone: problèmes de méthode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dominique Charpin Verwaltungstechnische Aspekte königlicher Repräsentation: Zwei Urkunden über den Kult der verstorbenen Könige im mittelassyrischen Assur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . eva CanCik-kirsChbaum Bild, Macht und Raum im neuassyrischen Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dominik bonatz Die Rolle der Schrift in einer Geschichte der frühen hethitischen Staatsverwaltung . . . . . . . . . . . . . . theo van Den hout W o r k s h o p : Collective Governance and the Role of the Palace in the Bronze Age Middle Euphrates and Beyond . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . aDelheiD otto Archaeological Evidence for Collective Governance along the Upper Syrian Euphrates during the Late and Middle Bronze Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . aDelheiD otto Textual Evidence for a Palace at Late Bronze Emar . . . . . . . Daniel e. fleminG Die Rolle der Stadt im spätbronzezeitlichen Emar . . . . . . . . betina faist Les « Frères » en Syrie à l’époque du Bronze récent: Rélexions et hypothèses* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . sophie Démare-lafont Organization of Harrâdum, Suhum, 18th–17th Centuries b.C., Iraqi Middle Euphrates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Christine kepinski . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix . xi . xvii . 1 . . . . 21 . . . . 33 . . . . 51 . . . . 73 . . . . . . 85 . . . . . . 85 . . . . . . 87 . . . . . . 101 . . . . . . 111 . . . . . . 129 . . . . . . 143 Contents Ein Konlikt zwischen König und Ältestenversammlung in Ebla . . . . . . 155 Gernot Wilhelm Workshop: The Public and the State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . eva von DassoW The Public and the State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . eva von DassoW From People to Public in the Iron Age Levant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . seth sanDers Administrators and Administrated in Neo-Assyrian Times . . . . . . . simonetta ponChia The Babylonian Correspondence of the Seleucid and Arsacid Dynasties: New Insights into the Relations between Court and City during the Late Babylonian Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . roberto sCianDra La liste Lú A et la hiérarchie des fonctionnaires sumériens . . . . . . . alexanDra bourGuiGnon Königslisten als Appellativ-Quellen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pavel ČeCh From King to God: The NAMEŠDA Title in Archaic Ur. . . . . . . . . . petr Charvát The Uses of the Cylinder Seal as Clues of Mental Structuring Processes inside Ur III State Machinery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . alessanDro Di luDoviCo EN-Priestess: Pawn or Power Mogul? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Joan GooDniCk Westenholz Die Uruk I-Dynastie—ein Konstrukt der Isin-Zeit? . . . . . . . . . . . . Catherine mittermayer Neue Erkenntnisse zu den königlichen Gemahlinnen der Ur III-Zeit . . marCos suCh-Gutiérrez Ĝeštinanna und die Mutter des Šulgi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . frauke Weiershäuser Vom babylonischen Königssiegel und von gesiegelten Steinen . . . . . . susanne paulus Marduk and His Enemies: City Rivalries in Southern Mesopotamia. . . J. a. sCurloCk Text im Bild — Bild im Text: Bildmotive als Bedeutungsträger von Machtansprüchen im hellenistischen Mesopotamien? . . . . . . karin stella sChmiDt The Tablet of Destinies and the Transmission of Power in Enūma eliš . karen sonik Aššur and Enlil in Neo-Assyrian Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . spenCer l. allen . . 167 . . 167 . . 171 . . 191 . . 213 . . 225 . . . . 249 . . . . 257 . . . . 265 . . . . 275 . . . . 291 . . . . 313 . . . . 327 . . . . 347 . . . . 357 . . . . 369 . . . . 377 . . . . 387 . . . . 397 Contents “The Charms of Tyranny:” Conceptions of Power in the “Garden Scene” of Ashurbanipal Reconsidered . . . . . . . . . . . mehmet-ali ataç Les archers de siège néo-assyriens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fabriCe y. De baCker King’s Direct Control: Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Oicials . . . . . . . . . . . . . peter Dubovsky Triumph as an Aspect of the Neo-Assyrian Decorative Program . . . . . . natalie naomi may Local Power in the Middle Assyrian Period: The “Kings of the Land of Māri” in the Middle Habur Region . . Daisuke shibata Women, Power, and Heterarchy in the Neo-Assyrian Palaces . . . . . . . saana svärD Organising the Interaction Between People: a New Look at the Elite Houses of Nuzi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DaviD kertai Les femmes comme signe de puissance royale: la maison du roi d’Arrapha. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . briGitte lion Power Transition and Law: The Case of Emar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lena fiJałkoWska The Representatives of Power in the Amarna Letters . . . . . . . . . . . J. mynářová Herrscherrepräsentation und Kult im Bildprogramm des Aḥirom-Sarkophags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . h. niehr Religion and Politics at the Divine Table: The Cultic Travels of Zimrī-Līm Cinzia pappi The City of Ṭābatum and its Surroundings: The Organization of Power in the Post-Hammurabi Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . shiGeo yamaDa The Horns of a Dilemma, or On the Divine Nature of the Hittite King . . Gary beCkman The Power in Heaven: Remarks on the So-Called Kumarbi Cycle . . . . . Carlo Corti anD franCa peCChioli DaDDi Die Worte des Königs als Repräsentation von Macht: Zur althethitischen Phraseologie. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . paola DarDano Treaties and Edicts in the Hittite World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . elena DeveCChi Luxusgüter als Symbole der Macht: Zur Verwaltung der Luxusgüter im Hethiter-Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mauro GiorGieri anD Clelia mora . . . 411 . . . 429 . . . 449 . . . 461 . . . 489 . . . 507 . . . 519 . . . 531 . . . 543 . . . 551 . . . 559 . . . 579 . . . 591 . . . 605 . . . 611 . . . 619 . . . 637 . . . 647 Contents Autobiographisches, Historiographisches und Erzählelemente in hethitischen “Gebeten” Arnuwandas und Mursilis . . . . . . . . . . manfreD hutter The (City-)Gate and the Projection of Royal Power in Ḫatti . . . . . . . . . J. l. miller Hethitische Felsreliefs als Repräsentation der Macht: Einige ikonographische Bemerkungen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . zsolt simon “. . . Ich bin bei meinem Vater nicht beliebt. . .”: Einige Bemerkungen zur Historizität des Zalpa-Textes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . béla stipiCh Dating of Akkad, Ur III, and Babylon I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . peter J. huber Cuneiform Documents Search Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WoJCieCh JaWorski Fluchformeln in den Urkunden der Chaldäer- und Achämenidenzeit . . . . JürGen lorenz Arbeitszimmer eines Schreibers aus der mittelelamischen Zeit . . . . . . . behzaD mofiDi nasrabaDi Siegel für Jedermann: Neue Erkenntnisse zur sog. Série Élamite Populaire und zur magischen Bedeutung von Siegelsteinen. . . . . . . . . . . GeorG neumann Did Rusa Commit Suicide? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . miChael roaf Über die (Un-)Möglichkeit eines “Glossary of Old Syrian [GlOS] ” . . . . . . Joaquín sanmartín Adapas Licht . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . illya vorontsov Early Lexical Lists and Their Impact on Economic Records: An Attempt of Correlation Between Two Seemingly Diferent Kinds of Data-Sets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . klaus WaGensonner . . 665 . . 675 . . 687 . . 699 . . 715 . . 735 . . 739 . . 747 . . 757 . . 771 . . 781 . . 795 . . 805 Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. King’s Direct Control: Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Oicials Peter Dubovsky rome The oice of qēpu oicials has been known in Assyrian and Babylonian administration for a long time. 1 This paper intends to examine the role of qēpu oicials in the Neo-Assyrian Empire, taking into consideration the Neo-Assyrian letters and inscriptions. The spelling of the term qēpu has been preserved in various forms. The irst group of spellings represents the variants of the Neo-Assyrian contraction in the form of qēpu, such as qé-e-pu (SAA VII 128: 6) or qe-pu (SAA V 38: 9). Besides the Neo-Assyrian form the term has been also preserved in a Neo-Babylonian form qīpu, written qí-pi (plural; SAA XVII 43: r.1) or the term is written in the form of logograms such as LÚ.TIL.LA.GÍD.DA (SAA XVII 22: 8) 2. The term itself is an adjective derived from the verb qiāpu (qâpu) and means “trustworthy, trusted.” 3 The translation of this term also varies: English German Royal deputy (SAA II 5: r. iii 6) Kommissar (Ashurb. Prism A I: 110; A IV: 104; B I: 57.68; B II: 23) Legate (SAA I 84: 6–7) Staatskommissar (San Nicolò, Prosopographie, 24) Delegate (Prosopography 2/II, 810) Vorsteher (Borger, R. Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, 99 r.47) Inspector (Tiglath-pileser III Summ. 4:26′) Statthalter (Borger, R. Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, 108 r. iii:13); in the previous passage the term Statthalter was used for lúpāḫātimeš; 99 r.47). Oicials (SAA XVI 96:14) Overseer (Sack 1995, 427) The variety of translations indicates that Assyrologists, in their translations, prefer to underline speciic responsibilities of qēpu oicials to translating the term mechanically by using the same word. The inal remark of our introduction regards the occurrences of this term in Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian letters and inscriptions. The texts mentioning 1. CAD Š, 263–8. 2. For other combinations of logograms see ibid., 264. 3. Ibid., 263. 449 450 peter Dubovsky qēpu oicials are listed in Table 1. The qēpu oicials were active in all parts and in all the periods of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In order to clarify at least partly this uncertainty in the Neo-Assyrian administrative system, irst, I will study the role of qēpu oicials. The data given here are organized geographically moving from Egypt to Mesopotamia. Within a given geographical area the occurrences of the term qēpu will be studied chronologically. At the end I will draw some conclusions, pointing out the role of qēpu oicials in Neo-Assyrian administration. Qēpu Oficials Active in Egypt Esarhaddon after his conquest of Memphis imposed the Assyrian administrative system on Egypt. The qēpu oicials are, thus, listed among the Neo-Assyrian oficials administrating Egypt (Borger Esarh. 65: r.47). Ashurbanipal’s annals conirm that Esarhaddon, after having conquered Egypt, appointed, besides the kings and the governors, the qēpu oicials over Egypt. Ashurbanipal’s annals also add that Taharqa revolted against Assyria after Esarhaddon’s death and took possession of Memphis. The pro-Assyrian rulers and Assyrian oicials, qēpu oicials included, had to escape, otherwise they faced execution. Ashurbanipal was informed about Taharqa’s revolt and immediately intervened. After his conquest of Egypt he reestablished the kings, governors and qēpu oicials to their oice (Prism A I: 58–116). A few years later Tantamani orchestrated another insurrection against Assyria. Ashurbanipal once again intervened. On his arrival the kings, governors as well as qēpu oicials 4 of Egypt went to meet the king. By kissing his feet they recognized Ashurbanipal’s suzerainty and continued to exercise their oice (Prism A II: 28–48). The qēpu oicials active in Egypt were listed together with the top provincial oicials and thus it can be concluded that the qēpu oicials were of the same rank as local kings and Assyrian governors. As the top Neo-Assyrian oicials of Egypt they were exposed to the same attacks during the anti-Assyrian revolt as the proAssyrian kings and Assyrian governors. Qēpu Oficials Active in the Levant The irst known Neo-Assyrian qēpu oicial was established in the Levant by Tiglath-pileser III. Tiglath-pileser III invaded Syria and Israel in 734–732 b.C. in response to the insurrection led by Damascus and Samaria. The Arabian queen Samsi joined the anti-Assyrian coalition. In the second phase of the Assyrian campaign her camp was devastated and Tiglath-pileser III appointed a qēpu oicial to supervise it. The authority of the qēpu oicial was backed up by 10,000 soldiers (TP III Summ. 4: 26′). The next qēpu oicial, Nabû-ahhe-eriba, was appointed in Tyre during Sennacherib’s reign or later. His name igures in the Niniveh list of donors and contributors (SAA VII 128:6). His contribution was one linen head-cloth and it is listed after the contribution of Ilu-tatlak, the governor of Parsua. The gift of the qēpu oicials is also mentioned in a fragmentary letter SAA XI 32 which lists the gifts of various top oicials. In the preserved part of this the qēpu oicial’s name is Šamaš-[xxx] (SAA XI 32: r.3–4). 5 4. Prism F I 41–42 adds that the qēpu oicials were those still appointed by Esarhaddon. 5. The location of the oicial is unknown. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Oicials 451 The tradition of Tyrian qēpu oicials continued and a later qēpu oicial active in Tyre is mentioned in a treaty concluded between Esarhaddon and Baal, the king of Tyre (SAA II 5). The treaty was concluded sometimes after the destruction of Sidon in 676 b.C. (Borger Esarh. p. 49, 86). 6 In this treaty the Tyrian king Baal was appointed to oversee the Phoenician harbors along the Mediterranean coast. The authority entrusted to Baal was rather large and covered the entire territory of Philistia, two major southern Phoenician ports (Akko and Dor) and extended north up to Byblos. The control of the ports meant, among other things, surveying the trade routes leading to and from these ports (SAA II 5: r. iii 18′–21′). In order to oversee Baal’s activities the Assyrians appointed a qēpu oicial in Tyre. Even though the tablet is quite fragmentary it is possible to draw at least some conclusions regarding the activities of this qēpu oicial. The qēpu oicial could/should 7 attend councils held by the city elders. Moreover, he had to be present when royal letters were opened and read and without him no royal letter could be opened (SAA II 5: r. iii 6′-14′). These two conditions meant that the royal court controlled the convocation of the city council. The royal court could receive regular feedback about the reaction and execution of the orders contained in the royal letters and, if needed, the royal court had at its disposal an eicient instrument guaranteeing the implementation of the king’s wishes. Another qēpu oicial Immaštašu operating in the Levant was stationed in Hamu 8 during Ashurbanipal’s reign. According to the letter SAA XVII 155 Immaštašu was to come and settle down in the city of Hamu after the peace accord had been concluded between two local kings. He had probably some soldiers at his disposal. As in Egypt, in the Levant the qēpu oicials were of the same rank as local kings and governors. Their responsibility covered the military sphere (they had soldiers at their disposal), economic sphere (they controlled the Levantine trade), administrative/information sphere (they were present at the meetings of the city council of Tyre and thus became an important source of information). Qēpu Oficials Active in the North The qēpu oicials were also active along the northern frontier of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Because this territory was exposed to direct or indirect attacks from Urartu, the role of qēpu oicials was to monitor the region. During Sargon II’s reign at least one qēpu oicial was active in Kummu, a vassal state of Assyria. 9 A very damaged letter from an unknown writer SAA V 106 indicates that the local inhabitants were not happy with the presence of this qēpu oicial whose name has not been preserved. 10 The tablet mentions that there was a revolt against this qēpu oicial: “The city of Kummu in its entirety cannot stand the royal delegate.” (SAA V 106 14′-15′) It was the pro-Assyrian section of the Kummeans who reported the animosity of the rest of the Kummeans. Naturally in their report the servile Kummeans did not forget to underline their loyalty to the Neo-Assyrian regime. If this 6. SAA II, 29. 7. The verb is missing because the tablet is damaged at this point. 8. The city can be most likely identiied with the Syrian city Hama. 9. Bradley J. Parker, The Mechanics of Empire: The Northern Frontier of Assyria as a Case Study in Imperial Dynamics (Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 2001) 250–1. 10. A proposal has been advanced identifying this qēpu oicial with Aššur-resuwa because the letter speaks about him also. However, this identiication is far from being sure. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. 452 peter Dubovsky letter is combined with tablet SAA 107, then there was even a plot to kill this qēpu oicial. However, this letter is too fragmentary to enable one to draw any clear conclusion. Another qēpu oicial probably active in the North is mentioned in a letter of Ša-Aššur-dubbu sent to Sargon II (SAA V 38). Ša-Aššur-dubbu was a provincial governor of Tušhan. He mentioned that a qēpu oicial came to him together with Duri-Adad, an Assyrian oicial. A part of a qēpu oicial’s name has been preserved [x x]-tú-šú (SAA V 38:5). From the letter it is possible to conclude that provincial governors reported on movements of the qēpu oicials (when they arrived and when they left) and the reconstruction of the broken parts of the tablet suggests that they also reported on what the qēpu oicials said (SAA V 38: 6–7). Qēpu Oficials Active in Raši The region along the foothills of Iranian mountains called Raši, was occupied by the Assyrians during Sargon II’s invasion in 710 b.C.. After having secured the border with Elam, Sargon II’s army turned back and passed through Raši along the piedmont road. The Elamite king controlling Raši avoided a pitched battle with Sargon II and opted to retreat into the Hamrin mountains. Therefore Sargon II had to satisfy himself with passing through evacuated cities (S II Ann 302–3). The control of the region was provided by qēpu oicials. To Sargon II’s reign are dated three letters mentioning a qēpu oicial active in Raši. In the irst letter (SAA XV 35) Nabû-belu-ka’’in 11 received an order from the king to dispatch a letter, probably containing some important information, to Nabû-iqiša and to the qēpu oicial of Raši. The letter is dated to Sargon II’s reign (707 b.C.). 12 From this letter it can be concluded that the qēpu oicials had access to information which was not publicly available. The second letter (SAA XVII 152) also dates to Sargon II’s period. It mentions a captive Elamite deposing his testimony during an investigation before the qēpu oicial of Raši. The testimony of the Elamite saved the life of the sender of the letter. Thus, this letter points to the jurisdictional dimension of the qēpu oicial’s authority. In the third letter the qēpu oicial of Raši received two local oicials, Balassu and Kurrala’u. The letter informs the king about this visit (SAA XVII 153: 13-r.9). The royal court, thus, received detailed reports about the activities of qēpu oicials. A letter from Esarhaddon’s period mentions a qēpu oicial of Raši, Pa’e (SAA XVI 137). When there was pillage in one of the villages, Pa’e sent a messenger to Nippur asking for an explanation and recalling the peace treaty the Nippureans had concluded. This letter and letter SAA XV I 138 indicate that Pa’e, the qēpu oicial of Raši had the authority to give orders to the top oicials of the region such as Nabûra’im-nišešu, the oicial active during Esarhaddon’s reign in eastern regions of the Assyrian Empire as well as to remind the oicials of their responsibility to keep the region in order. 11. Letter SAA XV 35 belongs to the series of letters concerning the Diyala region. For various possibilities determining the role of Nabû-belu-ka’’in in Neo-Assyrian administration see Prosopography 2/II, 816. 12. SAA XV, 13. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Oicials 453 Qēpu Oficials Active in Assur From the complaint of the mayors and elders of Assur mentioning qēpu oicials we can deduce another use of the term qēpu (SAA XVI 96). According to this letter the mayors and elders of Assur were exempt from paying taxes. During the reign of Esarhaddon the people “of the house of the [governor] (of Assur)” appointed some oicials LÚ.qe-ba-a-ni over the Inner City (Assur). The task of these oicials was strictly administrative, i.e. they had to exact corn and straw taxes from the mayors and elders of Assur. Thus, in this letter the term qēpu is used not only for the delegate appointed directly by the king, but also for designating low-ranking oicials appointed by highly-placed Assyrian oicials. Qēpu Oficials Active in Birati Nabû-bel-šumati, was a qēpu oicial active in the city of Birati located on the River Euphrates, north of Sippar, during Sargon II’s reign (SAA I 84; 210; VII 58). His rights and duties were similar to those of provincial governors. He had access to the royal court and could make his appeal to the king (SAA I 210: r.6–11). He not only could, but also had to pay regular visits to the royal court. From a list of precious items issued to visiting delegations we can conclude that during one of the regular visits, he received some golden objects from the king (SAA VII 58: iii r. 21). According to SAA I 84 Nabû-bel-šumati failed to pay a regular visit to the king and received from the king a letter of rebuke asking for an explanation (SAA I 84: 11-r.2). In case of this irregular visit he was irst received by Ṭab-ṣil-Eššara, the governor of Assur (URU.ŠÀ-URU), 13 because the latter was responsible for receiving emissaries and other provincial oicials (SAA I 76). Ṭab-ṣil-Eššara informed the king that Nabû-bel-šumati, the qēpu oicial of Birati, came to him to explain why he had been disloyal. In his report Ṭab-ṣil-Eššara even adds that Nabû-bel-šumati was afraid of the royal audience. Nabû-bel-šumati, a qēpu oicial of Birati, also had at his disposal some armed servants to protect his region against the Arab tribes (SAA I 84: r.3–8). Thus, his responsibility was not limited to the city of Birati, but it extended over Sippar, about 200 km distant from Birati, including the city Galṣabri of unknown location and it covered a part of the desert south of the Euphrates. That both SAA I 84 and 210 report on Nabû-bel-šumati suggests that despite the name of his oice qēpu, a trustworthy oicial, the royal court preferred to double-check the activities of their “trustworthy” oicials, using the same mechanisms as they did in the case of provincial oicials. Ṭab-ṣil-Eššara, the governor of Assur, mentions in his letters a Biratean who was a regular provincial oicial. Ṭab-ṣil-Eššara sent him a letter and the Biratean’s task also was to provide security for messengers heading towards the royal court (SAA I 85; 87; 90). Since SAA I 84 mentions the other city rulers, it stands to reason that the Biratean, mentioned in letters SAA I 85; 87 and 90, was the city ruler of Birati. Thus, it can be concluded that Nabû-bel-šumati and his authority was independent of the local structure. 13. His eponym was 716 b.C., i.e. Sargon II’s reign; SAAS II, 47. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. 454 peter Dubovsky Qēpu Officials Active in Ṣibtu From the hands of Ṭab-ṣil-Eššara comes a letter also mentioning the qēpu oficial of the town of Ṣibtu, located in the vicinity of Arrapha (SAA I 97). From this letter we can gain some information about the qēpu oice. The qēpu oicial of Ṣibtu was appointed in this town to survey the surrounding region. The entire area was in trouble and the governor of Arrapha had to send 100 soldiers there. The soldiers were under the command of the qēpu oicial of Ṣibtu who had the exclusive right to use them. According to this letter neither the governor of Arrapha, nor Ṭab-ṣilEššara could get hold of them. Therefore Ṭab-ṣil-Eššara suggested to the king that he send a letter to the qēpu oicial of Ṣibtu and ask him to remove 50 soldiers from under his authority and move them to Assur. Thus, it can be concluded that the qēpu oicial of Ṣibtu was under the direct command of the king and not even the governor of Assur could give him orders. Qēpu Oficials Active in Der Šamaš-belu-uṣur was acting as a qēpu (qīpu) oicial of Der according to letter SAA XVII 120:9. 14 S. Parpola presents very solid arguments for connecting this letter with Sennacherib’s 7th campaign against Elam and thus dating it to 693 b.C.. 15 The letter reports on the diicult period before and after the battle at Bit-Ha’iri, mentioned in this letter (SAA XVII 120: r.11–21), in which the Assyrians defeated the Elamite troops. Šamaš-belu-uṣur, the qēpu oicial of Der, igures in the irst part of the letter. He sent his messenger to Nabû-šuma-lišir 16 and Aqar-Bel-lumur, oficials in Gambulu, warning them of an imminent Elamite invasion (SAA XVII 120: 8–13). At the outset the oicials of Gambulu resisted the qēpu oicial’s orders, but when they learned that the messenger of the qēpu oicial was under king’s orders to mobilize the people from Der as far as the river Nergal (SAA XVII 120: 14–23) they moved people to the fortiied places. The second part of the letter describes the situation after the defeat of the Elamites at Bit-Ha’iri, commenting that the region returned to normal when they learned that “there (was) nothing to worry about” (SAA XVII 120: r.11–21). 14. The identity of Šamaš-belu-uṣur is the theme of debate. Šamaš-belu-uṣur was the sender of letters SAA XV 111–28. According to these letters he was the governor of Der. Two letters of Nabu-duruuṣur are sent to his governor (SAA XV 131, 133 and possibly also XV 129–30). Since the letters of Nabuduru-uṣur and Šamaš-belu-uṣur are interconnected, it is possible to conclude that Nabu-belu-uṣur was the deputy of Šamaš-belu-uṣur. The problem, however, is their dating. There have been advanced two proposals. The irst connects the correspondence of both oicials with the crisis in Ellipi that took place shortly after 707 b.C. (SAA XV, 35); the second connects the letters with Sennacherib’s 7th campaign (694–692 b.C.); see S. Parpola, “A Letter to Sennacherib Referring to the Conquest of Bit-Ha’iri and Other Events of the Year 693,” in Ex Mesopotamia et Syria Lux: Festschrift für Manfried Dietrich zu seinem 65. Geburtstag (ed. Oswald Loretz, Kay A. Metzler, & H. Schaudig; AOAT 281; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2002), 574–6. The former, based on mentioning Dalta’s name (SAA XV 129) is more preferable. Thus, it can be concluded that Šamaš-belu-uṣur, the qēpu oicial of Der, was either a diferent person (less likely), or that the governor of Der became a qēpu oicial seeing the problems in the region. 15. Ibid., 571–4. 16. Nabu-šuma-lišir, the sender of the letter, was the governor of Gambulu. His seat was DurAbihara, the capital of the province of Gambulu, established during Sargon II’s twelfth campaign (710 b.C.); Ibid., 567. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Oicials 455 To this period, most likely, belongs a fragmentary letter SAA XV 142. 17 The sender of this letter objected to the commands received from the qēpu oicial at Der who asked him for 2,000 men. The sender did not feel free to ignore the qēpu oicial’s order and appealed to the king, explaining why he was not able to provide the men. From these letters we can conclude that the qēpu oicial of Der was appointed to prepare Sennacherib’s 7th campaign and to administer the region prior to the campaign. He had access to information hidden from the provincial governors, was empowered by the king to master the troops for the royal campaign and to give orders to provincial governors. Nabu-šuma-lišir, the governor of Gambulu, was afraid to disregard the qēpu oicial’s commands. Qēpu Oficials Active in Kitipata In the list of the envoys from Iran Buzî, a qēpu oicial of the city of Kitipata, is mentioned (SAA XI 31: 3–4). The name Buzî is probably of Iranian origin. The report most likely comes from the reign of Sargon II or later. 18 Qēpu Officials Active in Babylonia The most numerous references to qēpu oicials come from Babylonia. The qēpu oicials were active in this region through most of the Neo-Assyrian period and had diferent kinds of responsibilities. Sargon II The activities of qēpu oicials in Babylonia during Sargon II’s reign are well attested in the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian letters. After the conquest of Babylonia in 710 b.C. Sargon II appointed several qēpu oicials to control the region. TCL 3 73 mentions that the king (Sargon II) appointed a qēpu oicial over Parsumaš in order to keep the land safe. 19 SAA XVII 26: 7 20 and SAA XVII 30: r.19′ mention the qēpu oicials active in Babylonia. The former was sent by Bel-iqiša, active during the reign of Sargon II; the latter is too damaged to enable one to draw any conclusion regarding the date. A diferent picture of the qēpu oicials active in Babylonia is presented in SAA XVII 59, addressed to Sargon II. According to this tablet there was a letter sent to the king giving the impression that it had been written by Nabû-taklak, a highly-placed Neo-Assyrian oicial active in Bit-Dakkuri during the reign of Sargon II. However, the commander of the fortresses of Šabhanu warned the king that that letter had been written by Nabû-taklak’s qēpu oicials. According to this report the qēpu oficials asked the king to remove the prefect (šaknu) of Bit-Dakuri. It can thus be concluded that the Neo-Assyrian high oicial Nabû-taklak had some qēpu oicials who were either associated with him or under his authority. Moreover, the qēpu oficials had authority to suggest to the king that he remove the prefect (šaknu) of the 17. Since in both cases the qēpu oicial of Der is mentioned and both letters deal with the same issue – mustering the men – it stands to reason that both letters are dated to the same period. 18. Prosopography 1/II, 357–8. 19. CAD Š, 265. 20. He might have been a lower-ranking qēpu oicial since there is a suix -šu “his”. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. 456 peter Dubovsky region. Finally, the letter indicates that even the qēpu oicials were closely watched and the royal court received information about their dubious activities. Another letter, SAA V 261, from Sargon II’s period mentions a qēpu oicial whose name was Musani. 21 He was appointed a qēpu oicial of a city whose name has not been preserved (SAA V 261: r.3′). This letter from an unknown sender speaks about the qēpu oicial and reports that “he (the qēpu oicial) sleeps in his house” (SAA V 261: r.4′). Another group of Sargon II’s qēpu oicials was appointed to oversee the Babylonian temples. After Sargon II’s conquest the Babylonian temples between Zabban and Sippar were inspected. The inspection was conducted by Bel-iddina. Once the inspection was completed, the temples were entrusted to Nabû-ahhe-bullit›, the qēpu oicial of the temple Esaggil (SAA XVII 43: r.4). Sennacherib The qēpu oicials were also present in Babylonia during Sennacherib’s reign acting as witnesses to business transactions. From this period is preserved the loan document SAA VI 150. In the contract it is stated that 5 ½ minas of silver belonging to Dumuqâ have been given to Balassu, the qēpu oicial and to ive other oicials. The money had to be returned within two years. If not, then the oicials would have to pay 5 shekels for one mina every month. This contract indicates that the qēpu oicials were not exempt from the rules regulating loan contracts. On the other hand the qēpu oicial may have been a witness to a legal transaction as well. Similarly Riba-ahhe, the qēpu oicial of Kar-Šamaš, is listed among the witnesses to the purchase of a vineyard in Tursana (SAA VI 188: r.7′). The contract is dated to Sennacherib’s reign. 22 A similar document (SAA XII 96) mentions that a qēpu oicial, whose name has not been preserved, was a witness to the donation by Nabû-sakip to the temple of Nabû. This qēpu oicial had been put in charge of two temples in Babylonia, one dedicated to Nabû and the other to Ninurta. Esarhaddon To Esarhaddon’s reign is dated letter SAA XIII 178 in which Šuma-iddin, probably a priest from Babylon, informs the king about recent events in Babylonia. He reports that three servants (grooms) of a qēpu oicial whose authority extended over Borsippa made an appeal to the king. The grooms were dispatched to the royal court. A short investigation conducted by Šuma-iddin justiied the appeal of these servants. The servants were to denounce the qēpu oicial, their master, saying that he had hidden two fugitives from Assyria in his house and then sent them to Borsippa. The denunciation was secret and the king was asked to act before they might learn about it and escape. Šuma-iddin, even though the transgression of the qēpu oicial was clear, did not feel authorized to intervene and capture the fugitives since they were under the aegis of the qēpu oicial. Therefore Šuma-iddin asked the king to send his messenger who was authorized to intervene. Even though the qēpu oficials were entrusted with authority, which no local oicial could ignore, they were also closely watched even by their own servants. On the other hand only the king 21. According to Zadok the name is of Aramaic origin. If this were true then this would be an example of a non-Assyrian qēpu oicial; cf. Prosopography 2/II, 771. 22. SAA VI, 11. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Oicials 457 could lift the immunity of the qēpu oicials; the executor of king’s will could have been a royal messenger. Letter SAA XIII 181 indicates that the qēpu oicial operating during Esarhaddon’s reign in Babylonia had power to appoint local oicials, however, the appointments was made together with Šamaš-iddin. 23 The largest group of Esarhaddon’s qēpu oicials acted as the supervisors of the Babylonian temples. After Sennacherib’s destruction of Esaggil in 689 b.C., Esarhaddon committed himself to rebuilding this temple complex in Babylon. At least one qēpu oicial supervised the construction. His authority was not only to oversee the work but also to stop it as well as to regulate the oferings in the temple. Letter SAA XIII 179 reports on the command of this qēpu oicial to stop construction work. His words were endowed with royal authority (SAA XIII 179: 16′). The sender of this letter is evidently not pleased by this prohibition and defended himself by listing all the works he had done so far. However, he did not dare to ignore the qēpu oicial’s command and thus the regular oferings to Bel were stopped in the temple. Another group of the temple qēpu oicials is found in the correspondence of the Neo-Assyrian high oicial Mar-Issar who was appointed to reorganize temple activities in Babylonia during Esarhaddon’s reign. During this period several qēpu oicials were appointed in the local temples (cf. SAA X 352–5 24). Lines SAA X 364: r.4–8 conirm the presence of the qēpu oicials in at least four major Babylonian temples (Sippar, Cutha, Hursagkalama and Dilbat). According to Mar-Issar’s letter Esarhaddon concluded a loyalty agreement (adû) with the qēpu oicials (SAA X 354: 19–27) and Mar-Issar gave them their shares (SAA X 354: 10–2) and they took fright when the situation became too diicult (SAA X 352: r.7–9). According to this letter the qēpu oicials serving in the Babylonian temples seemed to be under the authority of Mar-issar. However, Mar-issar’s authority was limited and without the presence of the qēpu oicials he could not check the gold in the temple of Uruk (SAA X 349: e.27-r.10). That this group of qēpu oicials were not completely independent is also suggested by the following letter. During the visit of the bodyguard Nergal-šarru-uṣur and the deputy of Laharite four qēpu oicials were removed and new qēpu oicials were appointed. According to Mar-Issar’s letter the qēpu oicials were removed at royal order (SAA X 364: r.4–8). The qēpu oicials of the Neo-Babylonian temples also attended personal and oicial business matters outside of Uruk. In the Neo-Babylonian temples the authority and power of qēpu oicials was lower than the authority of the šatammu oicials. 25 23. Because letter SAA XIII 181 comes probably from the hands of Šuma-iddin it possibly depicts the proile of this qēpu oicial in Babylon. First he had high authority over the construction works and oferings (SAA 179). Moreover, he could appoint local oicials. The appointment of the oicial seemed to have been of little use since he was afraid of the son of Dakuru who had frightened some towns in Babylonia. Finally, if letter SAA 179 also belongs to this group then this qēpu oicial played a double game. On the one hand he transmitted the king’s orders, but on the other hand he hid two Assyrian fugitives (SAA XIII 178). 24. A qēpu oicial is mentioned in letter SAA X 353: r.17. But this part of the tablet is so badly damaged that it is impossible to reconstruct anything out of it. Since he was mentioned in the letter sent by Mar-Issar, it is possible to conclude that the qēpu oicial was a qēpu oicial serving in one of the Babylonian temples. 25. For bibliography see R. H. Sack, “Royal and Temple Oicials in Eanna and Uruk in the Chaldean Period” in Vom Alten Orient zum Alten Testament: Festschrift für Wolfram Freiherrn von Soden zum 85. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. 458 peter Dubovsky Ashurbanipal Ashurbanipal used the qēpu oicials to control Babylonia as well. After having settled the problems in Babylonia caused by the insurrection of his brother Šamaššumu-ukin, Ashurbanipal installed qēpu oicials (in plural) in Babylonia (Prism A IV: 104). The qēpu oicials were appointed together with the governors (LÚ.GAR). Letter SAA IV 310 witnesses a query dated to Ashurbanipal’s reign. The query was performed to obtain a conirmation to appoint a man whose name was inscribed on the tablet sent to the oice of the royal delegate in a Babylonian temple. The result of the query was unfavorable. This tablet indicates the importance given to the appointment of a qēpu oicial – the choice case of a qēpu oicial, who was to perform his activity in a temple, was consulted by means of query. Similarly, the removal of the qēpu oicial was also connected with a query described in SAA VIII 316: 18-r.3. Munnabitu, a Babylonian astrologer active during Esarhaddon’s or Aššurbanipal’s reign recommends removing some high oicials including a qēpu oicial. This removal is recommended as the interpretation of the eclipse of the moon. Thus, the appointment as well as the removal of qēpu oicials was connected with queries and sign readings. Sin-shum-lishir Several other letters mention the presence of qēpu oicials at contracts. Thus, letters SAA XIV 163 and 164 26 indicate some special rights of the qēpu oicials in loan contracts. These two contracts prevent the qēpu oicial and his prefect from having the usufruct of even the half of the ield. Since these two oicials are explicitly prohibited from having usufruct of the ield it can be concluded that in some cases the qēpu oicial and his prefect could enjoy usufruct of the ield even if it was transferred to a diferent owner. Conclusion From the collection of data given above we can draw following conclusions. The term qēpu oicial designates two diferent kinds of oicials: the lower-ranking qēpu oicials and higher-ranking qēpu oicials. The irst kind of oicials is quite rare in the Neo-Assyrian documents (see the case of Assur in SAA XVI 96). The latter is used more frequently and designates the oicials appointed directly by the king often by means of a query. These higher-ranking qēpu oicials were active in the economic sphere (for example they oversaw the Mediterranean trade); in the religious sphere (they oversaw the reconstruction of the Babylonian temples and controlled the cultic activities), in the administrative sphere (they assumed the role of the provincial governors and the city rulers), in the military sphere (they had soldiers at their disposal and were involved in preparation of the royal campaign) and in the intelligence sphere (they became an important source of information). Thus the duties and the responsibilities of the higher-ranking qēpu oicials depended on the speciic missions they were entrusted with. In terms of their responsibilities some of the qēpu oicials were on Geburtstag Am 19. Juni 1993 (ed. O. Loretz & M. Dietrich; AOAT 240; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1995) 428. 26. The texts are dated to 622 b.C. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. 459 Neo-Assyrian Qēpu Oicials Table 1: The occurrences of the term qēpu in the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian corpus. Name [x x]-tú-šú Location Date Source (SAA) Arabia (Samsi) TP III TP III Summ. 4:26′ He came to Tušhan Sargon II V 38 Kummu Sargon II V 106; 107(?) Raši/Araši Sargon II XV 35 Raši/Araši Sargon II XVII 152 Der Sargon II XV 142 Šamaš-belu-uṣur Der Sargon II XVII 120 Plural Bit-Dakkuri Sargon II XVII 59 Nabû-bel-šumati Birati Sargon II I 84; 210; VII 58 Ṣibte Sargon II I 97 Babylonia Sargon II XVII 26 Babylonia Nabû-ahhe-bullit Babylon Nabû-ahhe-eriba Tyre Balassu Riba-ahhe Kar-Šamaš Tyre Sargon II XVII 30 Sargon II XVII 44 Sargon II/Senn. XVII 17 Sennacherib VII 128 Sennacherib VI 150 Sennacherib VI 188 Esarhaddon II 5 Esarhaddon XVIII 203 Borsippa Esarhaddon XIII 178 Egypt Esarhaddon Borger Esarh. 65 r. 47; Ashurb. Prism A I 58–116 Babylon Esarhaddon XIII 179 Babylonia Esarhaddon XIII 181 Plural Babylonia Esarhaddon X 352–355 Plural Babylonia Esarhaddon X 364 Babylonia Esarh./Ashurb. VIII 316 Immaštašu Hamu Ashurbanipal XVII 155 Egypt Ashurbanipal Ashurb. Prism A II 28–48 Babylonia Ashurbanipal Ashurb. Prism A IV 104 Assur Ashurbanipal IV 310 Heart of Assyria (contract of Nabû-iqbi from Niniveh) Sin-shum-lishir XIV 163; 164 Babylonia XII 96 Šamaš-[xxx] XI 32 ? ? XV 357 ? ? XVI 92 ? ? XVII 170 Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. 460 peter Dubovsky the level of the city rulers, some on the level of the provincial governors and others even above the provincial governors. Because the responsibilities of the qēpu oicials depended on their mission, their position in the Neo-Assyrian administrative system also depended on this speciic mission. To understand the position of the qēpu oicials in Neo-Assyrian administration it is useful to divide the Neo-Assyrian administrative system into two major branches: the Assyrian branch and the local branch. The Assyrian branch was represented by the governors, their deputies, etc. The local branch represented local kings, vassals, elders, city rulers etc. Besides this regular structure the Assyrians used special oicials to control and supervise certain areas or, if needed, to support, control or oversee some links in the regular administrative structure. For these purposes there were designated two kinds of oicials: short-term oicials and long term oicials. The former were appointed for a concrete mission that lasted for a limited time-period. To this group belong the royal messengers and body guards (ša-qurbūti). Typical representatives of the long-term oicials were the qēpu oicials. They were appointed by the king to accomplish certain missions lasting a longer period, often several years. Finally the Neo-Assyrian qēpu oicials like other high-ranking oicials were also human beings and despite the name of their oice (the trustworthy oicials) they were also exposed to corruption. Thus the Neo-Assyrian court checked the activities of their trustworthy oicials as well. The royal court used the same methods to control the activities of their qēpu oicials as they did to control the other provincial oicials. Offprint from: Gernot Wilhelm, ed., Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale © Copyright 2012 Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved.