The Lower Stratum Families in the Neo-Assyrian Period (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East)

The Lower Stratum Families in the Neo-Assyrian Period

Culture and History of the Ancient Near East Founding Editor

M.H.E. Weippert Editor-in-Chief

Thomas Schneider Editors

Eckart Frahm, W. Randall Garr, B. Halpern, Theo P.J. van den Hout, Irene J. Winter

VOLUME 27

The Lower Stratum Families in the Neo-Assyrian Period by

Gershon Galil

LEIDEN • BOSTON 2007

This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Galil, Gershon. Lower class families in the Neo-Assyrian period / Gershon Galil. p. cm.—(Culture and history of the ancient Near East ; Vol. 27) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-90-04-15512-1 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Working class families—Assyria. 2. Working class—Assyria. 3. Family— Assyria. 4. Assyria—Social life and customs. I. Title. HQ506.G35 2007 331.0935—dc22 2007060855

ISSN 1566-2055 ISBN 978 90 04 15512 1 © Copyright 2007 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands

To my qinnu Shoshi and Noa

CONTENTS

List of Tables .............................................................................. Preface ......................................................................................... Abbreviations ..............................................................................

xi xiii xv

Introduction ................................................................................

1

PART ONE Chapter One The Sources ................................................................................ A. Types of documents .......................................................... B. Date of documents ........................................................... C. Provenance of the texts .................................................... D. The division of the texts into groups for discussion ........ E. The publication of the documents ................................... F. The “Harran Census” ...................................................... Appendix A: The sources by Types of Documents .................. Appendix B: The texts from Nineveh according to their geographical setting .......................................................... Chapter Two A Survey of the Lower Stratum Families .................................. A. Slaves ................................................................................. B. Pledged Persons ................................................................. C. “Land and People” ........................................................... D. Royal Grants and private votive donations ...................... E. The “Harran Census” ...................................................... F. Deportees and Displaced Persons .................................... G. Recipients of Rations ....................................................... Appendix A: Tables 1–17 ..........................................................

19 19 19 22 22 23 28 32 45

47 47 86 94 109 117 136 152 156

viii

contents

Chapter Three The Terminology, the Formulation of the Texts, and the Status of the People ................................................................ A. Slaves ................................................................................. B. Pledged People .................................................................. C. “Land and People” ........................................................... D. Royal Grants ..................................................................... E. The “Harran Census” ...................................................... F. Deportees and Displaced Persons .................................... G. The Order of the Family Members and its Status ......... Appendix A: Sales of People ..................................................... Appendix B: Sales of “Land and People” ................................ Appendix C: The Terminology and the Formulation of the Texts ............................................................................

188 188 199 205 211 214 224 226 228 241 243

PART TWO Chapter Four Family Types ............................................................................... A. Families whose type is clear .............................................. B. Families whose type is unclear .........................................

259 260 268

Chapter Five Family Size .................................................................................. A. Slave Families .................................................................... B. Pledged Families ................................................................ C. “Land and People” ........................................................... D. Royal Grants ..................................................................... E. The “Harran Census” ...................................................... G. Deportees and Displaced Persons .................................... H. Summary ...........................................................................

273 273 277 277 280 280 286 287

Chapter Six Marriage Patterns ....................................................................... A. The Slave Families ............................................................ B. Pledged Families ................................................................ C. “Land and People” ........................................................... D. Royal Grants ..................................................................... E. The “Harran Census” ......................................................

292 293 294 294 294 295

contents

ix

F. Deportees and Displaced Persons .................................... G. Recipients of Rations ....................................................... H. Summary ...........................................................................

298 300 300

Chapter Seven Childless Families ........................................................................ A. Slaves ................................................................................. B. Pledged people .................................................................. C. “Land and People” ........................................................... D. Royal Grants ..................................................................... E. The “Harran Census” ...................................................... F. Deportees and Displaced Persons .................................... G. Summary ...........................................................................

302 303 304 304 305 305 306 306

Chapter Eight Children’s Age ............................................................................ A. Slave Families ..................................................................... B. “Land and People” ............................................................ C. Royal Grants ...................................................................... D. The “Harran Census” ....................................................... E. Deportees and Displaced Persons .....................................

309 311 312 313 313 315

Chapter Nine Single-Parent Families ................................................................ A. Single-Parent Families versus Monogamous and Polygamous Families ......................................................... B. Families without a Father versus Families without a Wife/Mother ..................................................................... C. Reasons for the Existence of Single-Parent Families ....... D. Single-Parent Slave Families ............................................. E. Single-Parent Pledged Families ......................................... F. Single-Parent Families listed in Sales and Lists of “Land and People” .............................................. G. Single-Parent Families enumerated in the Royal Grants ..................................................................... H. Single-Parent Families enumerated in the “Harran Census” ............................................................................. I. Single-Parent Families of Deportees and Displaced Persons ............................................................................... J. Single-Parent Families of Rations Recipients ..................

319 319 320 321 323 324 324 325 325 325 326

x

contents

Chapter Ten Numerical Proportions among Family Members ...................... A. Men ¤ Women ................................................................. B. Sons ¤ Daughters ............................................................ C. Other family Members ..................................................... D. Male ¤ Female .................................................................

327 328 328 329 329

Chapter Eleven The Number of Generations in the Family .............................. A. Slaves ................................................................................. B. Pledged people .................................................................. C. “Land and People” ........................................................... D. Royal Grants ..................................................................... E. The “Harran Census” ...................................................... F. Deportees and Displaced Persons ....................................

334 336 337 338 339 339 340

Summary .....................................................................................

342

Bibliographical Abbreviations ............................................... Indices I. Index of Sources ............................................................. Cuneiform Sources .......................................................... Biblical Sources ................................................................ II. Index of Names ............................................................... Personal Names ............................................................... Place Names .................................................................... God Names ...................................................................... III. Index of Terms ............................................................... Akkadian and Sumerian Terms ...................................... Aramaic Terms ................................................................ Hebrew Terms ................................................................. IV. Index of Subjects .............................................................

353 373 373 383 384 384 392 393 394 394 396 396 397

LIST OF TABLES

Table Table Table Table Table Table

1: 2: 3: 4: 5: 6:

Table 7: Table 8: Table 9: Table 10: Table 11: Table 12: Table 13: Table 14: Table 15: Table 16: Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

17: 18: 19: 20: 21: 22: 23: 24: 25: 26: 27: 28: 29:

Slave Families ............................................................ Slave Families: Broken/Unclear Texts ...................... Pledged People .......................................................... Pledged People: Broken/Unclear Texts .................... “Land and People” (A. Legal Transaction) .............. “Land and People” (A. Legal Transaction): Broken/Unclear Texts ............................................... A Schedule of “Land and People” ........................... Royal Grants of Land or Tax Exemption to Ofcials ...................................................................... Royal Grants of Land or Tax Exemption to Ofcials: Broken/Unclear Texts ............................... Royal and Private Votive Donations to Temples ..... The “Harran Census”—A. Families ........................ The “Harran Census”—A. Families: Broken/Unclear Texts ............................................... The “Harran Census”—B. “Fathers and Sons” ...... The “Harran Census”—B. “Fathers and Sons”: Broken/Unclear Texts ............................................... Deportees and Displaced Persons ............................. Deportees and Displaced Persons: Broken/Unclear Texts ............................................... Rations of Barley and Their Recipients .................. The Terminology used to Dene the People ........... Guarantee Clauses .................................................... The Profession of the People .................................... Family Types ............................................................. Families of Type B3 .................................................. The Unclear Type Families ...................................... Family Size: Slaves .................................................... Family Size: Pledged People ..................................... Family Size: Land and People .................................. Family Size: Royal Grants ........................................ Family Size: Harran Census ..................................... Family Size: Harran Census—Father and Sons .......

157 160 162 163 164 165 167 168 170 171 173 177 179 180 181 183 186 193 195 197 263 266 268 274 278 279 281 283 284

xii Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

list of tables 30: 31: 32: 33: 34: 35: 36: 37: 38:

The Number of Sons ................................................ Family Size: Deportees and Displaced People ......... Family Size: Summary .............................................. Family Size: Summary (Before 681 B.C.) ................. Family Size: Summary (After 680 B.C.) ................... Childless Families ...................................................... Children’s Age ........................................................... Numerical Proportions among Family Members ..... Numerical Proportions among Family Members: Males versus Females ................................................ Table 39: The Number of Generations in the Family .............

285 287 289 290 291 307 318 332 333 341

PREFACE

I wish to express my deep gratitude to Professor B. Halpern and to Professor E. Frahm, editors of the series Culture and History of the Ancient Near East, for accepting the book for publication in it. Professor Frahm also made many helpful comments. This is my third book published by Brill, and it is my pleasure to point out that from volume to volume I have seen great advances in numerous respects. My appreciation is owed to the editors of Brill in Boston: Mr. Michael Klein Sworming, Acquisitions Editor, Mr. Igor Nemirovsky, Editor, and Mr. Michael J. Mozina, Production Editor, for their efforts, patience and efciency. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Professor M. F. Fales for discussing with me several issues studied in this book, and to my colleagues, Professor B. Oded, Professor M. Heltzer and Professor M. Malul, who kindly read the manuscript and made signicant comments. I express my thanks to Dr. Karen Radner for sending me the translation of a few unpublished texts from Aššur; and I also thank Mr. Murray Rosovsky for helping me to improve my English style. My teacher, the late Professor H. Tadmor followed the book’s progress with great enthusiasm. He pointed out the importance of presenting a completely different perspective on the Neo-Assyrian Empire, observing Neo-Assyrian society through the eyes of the members of the lower stratum and not concentrating solely on the outlook of the king and his ofcials. Unfortunately, Professor Tadmor died less than a year ago, and it is very frustrating that he did not live to see the book. May he rest in peace, and may his memory be for a blessing. Last but not least I wish to thank my wife Shoshi, and our daughter Noa for their patience, friendship and love. On more than one occasion Noa has jokingly referred to this book as her younger brother, about to be born. So now after a long pregnancy, and a successful birth, I present it to my beloved daughter on the occasion of her fth birthday. Gershon Galil University of Haifa 27.11.2006

ABBREVIATIONS

Bibliographical Abbreviations are presented below on pp. 353 ff. Other Abbreviations A

siglum of texts in the Aššur collection of the Istanbul Arkeoloji Müzeleri A siglum of texts in the collection of the Oriental Institute, University of Chicago A1–A5 Family Types, see Chapter IV AN III Adad-nÏrÊri III Ar. cap. Aramaic caption Ass siglum of texts excavated in the German excavation in Aššur Ass Assurbanipal (in tables 1–17) Ašš. Aššur AV average at attaché B bÊtussu = young girl, nubile B1–B3 Family Types, see Chapter IV BM siglum of texts in the collection of the British Museum BR brother Bu siglum of texts in the collection of the British Museum C1–C2 Family Types, see Chapter IV CT Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum D daughter DeZ siglum of texts in the National Museum of Deir ez-Zor DÖr-Kat. DÖr-Katlimmu Esa Esarhaddon F father fPN female personal name FT family type fSl female slave G ša zizibi, ina UGU-(hi) zi-zi = suckling child

xvi GA, GAB GP GS GT IM K Ki M MAss MÍ.TUR MM ND

Nin. O P pir, pirsu PN RA. Rm S S II Sen SH Si Sl Sm S n. d. Â T TS TP III U VAT W

abbreviations see G grand total of persons grandson grand total siglum of texts in the Iraq Museum, Baghdad siglum of texts in the collection of the British Museum siglum of texts in the collection of the British Museum mother siglum of texts excavated in the German excavations at Assur 1990 young girl siglum of texts in the collection of the Mosul Museum siglum of texts excavated in the British excavations at Nimrud (Kalhu), see Wiseman, 1953; Parker, 1954; Parker, 1957; Parker, 1961 Nineveh siglum of texts in the Royal Museum of Art and History, Brussels total of persons see U personal name rations siglum of texts in the collection of the British Museum son Sargon II Sennacherib siglum of tablets excavated in the German excavations at Tell Sheikh Hamad = DÖr-Katlimmu = Magdalu sister slave siglum of texts in the collection of the British Museum sons not described as G, U, 3, 4, 5, Éa Éa = Éa/uhurtu = young, adolescent, adult total total of sons Tiglath-pileser III UD = pirsu = weaned child siglum of texts in the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin wife

abbreviations 3 4 5

child of 3 spans’ height child of 4 spans’ height child of 5 spans’ height

xvii

INTRODUCTION

The social structure of the Neo-Assyrian Empire has been discussed extensively in the literature. Dozens of studies have been devoted to various aspects of this subject, but to date no monograph has studied all the evidence concerning the family in the period under consideration.1 Many studies have treated social stratication in the Neo-Assyrian Empire in particular, and in the Ancient Near East in general, and several major views have been put forward. Soviet researchers, continuing in the path of Karl Marx, including Jakobson, Diakonoff, and Dandamaev, divided that society into three main classes, upper, middle, and lower, according to two principal criteria: ownership of the means of production and organization of labor.2 By their approach, members of the upper class were the owners of the means of production (primarily land). They did not engage in productive labor but lived of the prots deriving from the productive labor of their workers and their slaves, the members of the lower class. The upper class was small in size, but was exploitative and ruled society. It consisted of the royal family, the senior bureaucracy at the palace and the temples, and also the big landowners, merchants, and businessmen. Members of the middle class were owners of means of production who did engage in productive labor. They did not exploit the labor of others, nor was their labor exploited by others. This class consisted mainly of free farmers and craftsmen. Members of the lower class lacked means of production, and engaged in productive labor for their masters in the upper class. They were exploited by the upper class and depended on them economically. This class consisted of free people and “semi-free” people, including tenants and day-laborers, as well as slaves.

1 For previous studies on the structure of the society of the Neo-Assyrian Empire see: Jakobson, 1969a; Jankovska, 1969; Postgate, 1969; van Driel, 1970; Zablocka, 1971; Diakonoff, 1972; Garelli, 1972; Gelb, 1972; Zablocka, 1972; Fales, 1973; Diakonoff, 1974; Postgate, 1974a; Fales, 1975; Peoírková, 1978; Gelb, 1979; Oded, 1979 (Ch. V); Postgate, 1979; Grayson, 1982; Fales, 1984; Fales, 1984a; Zablocka, 1986; Postgate, 1987a; Roth, 1987; Fales, 1989; Postgate, 1989; Zaccagnini, 1989a; Fales, 1990a; Snell, 1993; Zaccagnini, 1994; Postgate, 1995; Fales, 1997; Radner, 1997 (Ch. VII); Galil, 1998; Garelli, 1998; Jas, 2000a; Radner, 2000; van Driel, 2000; Fales, 2001. 2 See Jakobson, 1969a; Diakonoff, 1972, esp. pp. 42, 47–48; Dandamaev, 1984, esp. pp. 658–659.

2

introduction

A different approach was taken in the studies by Gelb.3 In his opinion, society in the Ancient Near East was divided into three different classes: the upper, the “semi-free serfs”, and the slaves. The upper class and the slave class were small in size, while the serf class was the main layer in society. However, Gelb maintained that in economic terms it was preferable to divide this society into two classes: the ruling class and “all the rest”:4 In the economic sense, we may very well distinguish not three, but two classes, the master class and the rest of the population. The latter would include all the dependent labor, composed not only of serfs and slaves, but also of the so-called free peasantry and craftsmen, who, while theoretically free and independent, sooner or later became dependent on the large landowners for water, draft animals, seed grain, and other means of production.

The major difference between these two approaches lies in the status of the free farmers and the craftsmen: in Gelb’s thinking, these two groups in fact belonged to the lower, subservient class, not to the middle class. Gelb indeed divides the society in the Ancient Near East into classes, but he also stresses, rightly, that the use of the term “class” is problematic, as the polarity of the “classes” in the Ancient Near East was not as pronounced as in the Greek-Roman period or among the various castes in India.5 In my opinion, the denition of the socioeconomic status of some of the families in the Neo-Assyrian period is particularly problematic, because, for example, there were craftsman families whose heads serve as goldsmiths, as masters of the goldsmiths guild, and as mayors in the Assyrian administration.6 In Gelb’s view they were “craftsmen”, so they should apparently be numbered among “all the rest”. But despite their being craftsmen, it is clear that such a family was part of the “master class” even by Gelb’s denition, because the family head also held a senior post in the Assyrian administration. Furthermore, we have evidence of craftsmen owning land and slaves. So what class did they belong to? According to the Soviet school they were seemingly of the middle class because they were possessors of a

3

See Gelb, 1972; Gelb, 1976; Gelb, 1979. See Gelb, 1972, p. 92 and also pp. 49–51. 5 See Gelb, 1972, p. 92. 6 For example, SÒn-na’di was master of the goldsmiths of the Aššur temple and mayor of the Aššur Gate. For his family see Radner, 1999, pp. 15–18; PNA, p. 1136b(16). For another example see Radner, 1999, pp. 21–22, 178–182; PNA, p. 574a(19). 4

introduction

3

craft who engaged in productive labor; but in fact they were of the upper class because they exploited the labor of their slaves.7 In my study I divided society in the Neo-Assyrian Empire into two main strata: the lower stratum on the one hand, and the middle and upper stratum on the other. The main yardstick for this division was ownership of means of production. People assigned to the lower stratum were in the great majority of cases (with a few exceptions) devoid of means of production. Similarly, this stratum did not serve in the royal administration, not even as low-level ofcials. By contrast, members of the middle and upper stratum were owners of the means of production, and most of them did serve in the royal administration, on its various levels, in both the palace and the temple sectors. True, we have little evidence of a private sector in the Neo-Assyrian Empire generally, and of free peasants in particular, as Postgate has correctly pointed out.8 Yet the existence of free peasants and of free craftsmen in the period under discussion cannot be denied. Poor peasants were forced to sell their land, usually to wealthy Assyrian ofcials, who sometimes purchased entire villages. But free peasants endured, usually the strong and well based ones who managed to survive and did not lose their land. As for the yardstick of organization of labor, and exploitation of the labor of members of other classes—people belonging to the lower stratum (tenants, slaves, and wage-laborers) indeed worked in productive labor, and their masters and employers beneted from their labor. However, at least regarding some of the tenants, we shall try to suggest a rather different denition of the nature of the economic ties between them and the owners of the land they tilled, and I am not convinced that the Marxist term “exploitation” denes the essence of these relations well. In light of the model proposed for understanding the social stratication in the period under review, my study is divided into two principal parts, to be published as two separate volumes. In the rst I treat families belonging to the lower stratum, which, as stated, were almost entirely without means of production; in the second volume families

7 For the social stratication of the societies in the Ancient Near East see also Weber, 1921, pp. 22, 31–32, 209; Gordon, 1953, pp. 17–28; Wittfogel, 1964, pp. 405–408; Brentjes, 1968, pp. 45–68; Steiner, 1972, pp. 191–205; Gaál, 1988; Vargyas, 1988; Rossides, 1997, pp. 22–32; 40–41; Reviv, 1993, pp. 5–42; Jaruzelska, 1998, pp. 18–21. Cf. also Breen—Rottman, 1995, pp. 12–16; 22–58. 8 See Postgate, 1989.

4

introduction

belonging to the middle and upper stratum are the subject. In the latter volume additional criteria will be proposed for distinguishing the middle and upper stratum from the lower one, including the amount of assets held by the family and the administrative standing of the family head. Obtaining a post in one of the two chief ruling systems (the palace and the temple) carried, as we know, many direct and indirect benets, whose economic sway was no less than that of ownership of means of production. The quality of the evidence concerning the families belonging to these two main strata is decidedly different: the families of the lower stratum are for the most part mentioned only once. In a single text some three families gure on average. Mostly we know nothing of the history of this family prior to its sole mention, and the source offers us a picture of the situation at one time only. However, in many cases the text mentions all members of the family, including wives, daughters, other family members, including brothers and sisters, and more. Regarding the middle and upper stratum, only in few cases we possess a full picture of all family members; usually only a list of some of the men of the family can be reconstructed, while the wives and daughters appear extremely rarely; still, a diachronic, not just a synchronic picture of the families of the middle and upper stratum can be drawn. Members of these families are usually mentioned in several sources, and at times a good idea can be obtained of the nature and scope of their dealings, of their life expectancy, and of their careers.9 The inscriptions that have come down to us from the Neo-Assyrian period were written principally by members of the middle and upper stratum; namely scribes who belonged to the two ruling systems. Not surprisingly, the searchlight of the writers of the royal inscriptions shone mainly on the king, and most of the thousands of letters written in that period focus on him, his ofcials, and his priests.10 By contrast, these sources offer relatively sparse information about members of the lower stratum at that time: slaves and “pledged” people, “farmers” and “gardeners”, shepherds and tenants. But the legal transactions, and also the administrative texts, contain many data illuminating the families of the lower stratum. This allows a thorough examination of the 9 The inheritance documents are very important sources for reconstructing the Neo-Assyrian families of the middle and the upper strata. For a study of these texts see Akerman, pp. 232–237. 10 See Parpola, 1981, pp. 117–141; Fales, 2001, pp. 99–102.

introduction

5

size, structure, and socio-economic status of these families; and many questions can be answered: what terminology is used for dening these families, what family types existed in that period, what was the size of the families, what were the patterns of the marriage, and so on. Before turning to a brief summary of the structure of my study, I shall deal shortly with a few essential questions: what is a family and in which cases a group of persons may be dened as a family? And what was the degree of freedom of the lower stratum families in the Neo-Assyrian Empire?

What is a Family and in which Cases a Group of Persons May be Dened as a Family? A “family” may be dened as a kinship group containing a number of people dened by others as a “family” or dening themselves as a “family”, whether blood ties exist among them or not; for kinship is primarily a sociological, not a biological afnity. Later in the discussion we shall attempt to determine which group is not a “family” and what was the outlook of the contemporaries on these questions. In which cases a group of persons may be dened as a family? A. In most texts covered in my study the relationships of the people listed in the text are explicitly detailed. The head of the family is usually noted by his personal name, and rarely also by his father’s name and/or his profession and/or his origins. After him are enumerated the members of his family, including his wife, his son, his daughter, his brother, his sister, his mother, with a note of the relationship that clearly ties the family head to each one of its members (or several of them). In all these cases it is easy to determine that we are indeed dealing with a family. B. In cases where the family head is mentioned by his personal name (a man or a woman) and this is immediately followed by a boy or a girl (all the more so a baby boy or girl), without any relationship being stated, it is reasonable to suppose that the text is describing a family. C. In a few cases the family head’s name is mentioned and next to it an adult family member without the relationship, for example, “PN, woman; a total of two persons”. In these cases it is most likely that a family is listed; yet this is not certain, and it depends on an overall examination of the nature of the text, its formulation and the terminological usages current in it. By contrast, if men and women are listed by the personal names one after the next, there is no way of deciding the connection

6

introduction

between them; and it is unclear if they are a family, or individuals without any kinship ties. D. Sometimes a text notes the name of a family head, followed only by a general count of the family members (at times this indication is given by the Aramaic caption too). In these cases it cannot be determined for sure that we have a family here, although it is possible. At times the head of the family is counted in the total number of family members, and at times he is not (this can be reckoned from the formulas indicating both the number of souls and the grand total, and it also emerges from summaries containing the number of families enumerated in the text). In these cases too the determination of whether it is a family depends on an overall examination of the nature of the text, and of the terminological forms applied in it. E. In a few cases it is noted explicitly that a number of people constitute a family, indicated by the term É = bÏtu or qinnu, which also mean family (for these terms see also chapter III below, a discussion on the terminology). In these cases this is evidently a family, even if the text does not specify the relationships between its members. F. Should not two (or more) brothers (or a brother and a sister) be designated a family? Or are they perhaps not a “family”? The response of modern sociology is clear: two brothers are not a family, and they are dened by what sociological research terms “no family”. But the response of the people of the Ancient Near East is different. We have examples in which the scribe states expressly that the brother and sister, or the two brothers, are a family (see, e.g., SAA XI 154: a brother and sister are dened as qinnu). In this case I preferred to take the approach of modern sociology, and not to include a brother and sister in the enumeration of families, unless it was a case of a married man whose brother lived with him (see a detailed discussion in chapter IV on family types). G. Rarely there is a mixed enumeration of single people and families. But as a rule the scribes separated the singles from the families, noting the fact of a person being single after his personal name. So usually, if several people are enumerated between two families it is reasonable to think that they are a “family”, although this requires an examination of terminological usages of the scribe in the given text. H. By contrast, I do not count as a family a number of slaves listed by their personal names in successive order, such as in texts in which the family property is divided among brothers. This is because there is no proof that these men and women constituted a family, even if their names are followed by a total, as this gure counts all the slaves inherited by one of the sons. I. In three cases we nd a master who has taken a woman for

introduction

7

his slave. I reckoned these three couples as families, as the amount of money that was paid indicates that these were grown-up maids. In one case it is even noted by the Aramaic caption: “Wife of PN”, that is, she was already regarded as his wife. By contrast, in several documents we nd that a father has bought a little girl, sometimes an infant, and plans to marry her to his son (see e.g., CTN III 47). I did not consider these cases families for obvious reasons. J. Other people mentioned in a text with a tie to the family head were counted as members of the family; they include not only brothers, sisters, and a mother, but also brothers’ sons and sisters’ sons, daughters-in-law, grandchildren, and others, all of them were probably considered an inseparable part of the family. In cases of slaves of slave families, presumably these were families which when they had been free kept slaves, and now after they had become impoverished and bound, their slaves went with them, and their master did not see t to separate them. K. In the family count I included also single-parent families, a man or a woman with his/her child or several children. Similarly I included families consisting of only a son with his mother (apparently a widow), with the son (not the mother) established as family head. L. I did not count several nuclear families as a “multiple-family kinship group” unless the connection among the nuclear families was explicitly noted in the text.

What was the Degree of Freedom of the Lower Stratum Families in the Neo-Assyrian Empire? Presumably, few will argue with the assertion that the families to be discussed in this volume of my study were indeed of the lower stratum in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Still, it is doubtful that there will be general agreement regarding the degree of freedom of these people, and the nature of their relationship with their masters or employers. Some scholars will argue (and have argued in the past) that all of them were slaves.11 Others will maintain that some or most of them were not slaves, but free or semi-free. Researchers have adopted a variety of terms to dene the status of these people, among them pseudosklaven, tied cultivators, helots, servile labor force, populazione servile, unfree workmen, semi-free population, dependent persons, serfs, and

11

See Zablocka, 1971; Zablocka, 1972; Zablocka, 1986.

8

introduction

glebae adscripti.12 In some cases dening a family’s degree of freedom is not particularly difcult. I refer to sales of people, documenting a family being sold and passing from the hands of one master to another. These legal transactions are well known and have been discussed in extenso in research.13 Most people enumerated in these texts are dened as slaves, generally by two common terms, ARAD and GEMÉ (for a detailed discussion of the terminology used in these texts see chapter III below). These people were deemed the property of their master, like any other chattel. They were marked by having the name of their purchaser branded onto their hand or some other part of their body. They mainly lived in or near their master’s house, and were not allowed to come and go without his permission.14 These sales usually noted slaves passed from hand to hand, not people bound for the rst time. The sold slave belonged to his new master, and his former owner could not buy him or her back without the agreement of the new master or without a detailed stipulation to this effect on the sale.15 Another group relatively easy to dene is the pledged people: those who were placed in the creditor’s hand as a security for debt. It is not always clear if these people were free or slaves before being consigned as a pledge.16 If they were slaves before, their status did not change during the period in which they were pledged, and after payment of the debt they returned to their previous master. If the debt was not paid they remained with the creditor, likewise with slave status. In other texts it is clear that the pledged people were not slaves, but free people. In these cases a real change takes place in the status of the pledged person, for he in fact becomes the slave of his holder, and he was usually obliged to work for him, in lieu of or in addition to the interest payable on the loan. At the same time, the pledged person was unlike an ordinary slave because he who held him was not allowed to sell him to anyone else, and must return the pledge to his owner once the latter paid off his debt.

12 See Johns, ADB, p. 24; Zablocka, 1971, p. 156; Diakonof, 1974; Fales, 1975; Fales, 1979, p. 206; Postgate, 1979, p. 193; Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 585, 659; Dandamaev— Lukonin, 1989, p. 152; Renger, 1995, p. 308; van Koppen, 2001, p. 475. 13 See Postgate, 1976, pp. 11–22; Radner, 1997, pp. 315–356. 14 See Gelb, 1972; Diakonoff, 1974, pp. 45–78; Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 67–80; Radner, 1997, pp. 202–248, with earlier literature; Baker, 2001, p. 23. 15 See Postgate, 1976, pp. 28–29. For “restricted conveyances” see SAA VI 1: r 5–9; 132: 9–10; 257: r 3–4. 16 For pledged persons see Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 137–180; Radner, 1997, pp. 371–383; Radner, 2001, pp. 269–271.

introduction

9

In a few texts the previous status of the pledged people is made clear, but in others it is not certain if they were previously slaves or free. I chose to study the pledged families separately, and in comparison with families belonging to other groups in the lower stratum, aware that some of them could have been slave families, and knowing that some had been free families before they were pledged. In any event, at least regarding families that formerly had had the status of free people, there is clearly a new socio-economic status, a kind of intermediate position between slaves and free people. As the texts about these pledged people were not broken up, it is reasonable to suppose that these families eventually became slaves. It has to be recognized then that in the Neo-Assyrian Empire a group existed (apparently relatively small) of pledged people, between free people and slaves, and these families denitely belonged to the lower stratum in Neo-Assyrian society. Matters are far more complicated concerning sales of “Land and People”. What is the status of the persons and the families listed in these texts? Are they slaves? Are they free? Are they semi-free? These questions probably cannot be answered with any certainty, nor is it even clear if the status of all the people who feature in these texts was identical.17 In any event, several notions may be put forward on this subject; some of them have already been raised in research. Apparently, the people mentioned in these sales of “Land and People” were slaves18 as they were “sold” along with the land, and were recorded with the land in the inventory of sold property. Likewise these people were evidently not the owners of the land but workers on it (although sometimes they did own some of the property: see text no. 87, below). It may similarly be argued that there would be no point in recording the people unless they were property, that is, slaves. At the same time, it is conceivable that they would be recorded on the deed even if they were not slaves but tenants, as land was worth more when sold with “permanent workers” (tenants) than without them. An analogy for this could be the purchase of a factory with skilled workers who know their work well, as against acquiring one with no workers at all, where they have to be brought in from elsewhere and trained for the job in new surroundings.

17 See Johns, ADB, pp. 24–25; van Driel, 1970; Ellis, 1976, p. 145; Oded, 1979, pp. 95–98, 114. 18 In Mendelsohn’s opinion they were “slaves pure and simple” (1949, pp. 110–111). For a same opinion see Zablocka, 1971, p. 156; Zablocka, 1972, p. 212.

10

introduction

Against the assumption that the people listed in sales of “Land and People” were slaves, the following arguments can be raised. A. The usual terms signifying slaves (ARAD, GEMÉ), which are very common in sales of people, are very rare in sales of “Land and People”. B. “Guarantee Clauses” are rare in sales of “Land and People”, while in sales of people they are frequent. C. In some sales of “Land the People” the price of the transaction is so low as to be unreasonable for people (if they were slaves) to be included, even if we assume that the price of the land was very cheap (this matter is considered at length in chapters II–III). On account of the above arguments it is preferable at this stage of the discussion to keep slave families recorded on sales of people separate from families recorded on sales of “Land and People”, because apparently one cannot determine if the latter were slaves or tenant farmers. Later in this work we shall examine this issue afresh, to see if it is possible to decide between these two alternatives. Anyhow it is clear that the families recorded on sales of “Land and People” belonged to the lower stratum in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. The texts of the “Harran Census” are considered at length in the literature. In addition to the pioneering work of Johns (ADB), and the excellent doctoral thesis of Fales (1973), dozens of studies discuss various aspects of these texts.19 In this case too scholars are divided as to the status of these people, but many agree that they were not slaves, and on the other hand not landowners either, because in several instances it is clearly stated that small parcels of land or other means of production were in “their possession”; hence most of the means of production were not in their possession. As a working hypothesis we shall assume that their status in principle was no different from that of other “farmers” and “gardeners” who tilled land that was not in their possession, and did so on a permanent basis and in return for a portion of the crop, namely they held the status of tenants. These people should not be seen as “semi-free” but as free people who continued to live on the land because this was a common interest to them and the landowners, and because in their current socio-economic situation

19 For the “Harran Census” see also Jacobsen, 1969a, pp. 281–283; van Driel, 1970, p. 175; Postgate, 1974; Postgate, 1974a, pp. 28–39; Fales, 1975; Parpola, 1975; Fales, 1984, pp. 212–214; Roth, 1987, pp. 733–736; Fales—Postgate, 1995, pp. xxx–xxxiv; Radner, 1997, pp. 57, 71, 125–126, 152–153, 209, 223, 286, 299, 304; Akerman, pp. 240–241; Garelli, 1998, p. 180; Fales, 2001, pp. 171–178.

introduction

11

they had no better alternative. They were a kind of permanent workers at their place, in contrast to the day laborers, for whom there was no commitment to employ except according to need, and chiey in the “busy” farming seasons. Not by chance are there only a few real leasing contracts from the Neo-Assyrian period (most of these contracts are nothing more than the depositing of land as security for debt),20 as tenants who shared the harvest with the landowners were better off than lessees, who settled for a xed payment (sÖtu in the Neo-Babylonian period).21 When necessary, at a time of crisis or drought, these lessees bore all the costs caused by the hard times that befell them. By contrast, the tenants, who worked the land in return for a part of the crop (by the system known in the Neo-Babylonian period as imittu—and compare Hammurabi’s laws 49, 178, 215–217, 221–223, 253), shared the risk with the landowners. Even in bad years, when the harvests were sparse, they managed to survive.22 Obviously, the tenant would prefer to be the landowner, to take the entire crop, but his economic situation did not allow him to purchase the land. So the two sides had a joint interest that kept them together. The working farmer, who perhaps had been the landowner in the past, lived in a place he knew well, could make a respectable living, and inwardly perhaps harbored the hope that the day would come when he could get back this land, or some other land; the landowner beneted from his having a skilled working team, motivated, and working with a will, for they received a share of the crop and not a wage. In contrast to slaves, there was no need to place a guard over tenants to stop them running away, and there was no need to lay out large sums of money to buy slaves. We may recall that obtaining the land through a senior ofcial was sometime accompanied by exemption from tax on the crop also, a bonus that independent farmers did not enjoy. In my research I distinguished families recorded in the texts of the “Harran Census” from families recorded in royal grants or personal decrees. Here too there is no agreement in research as to the status of

20

See Jas, 2000a. See Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 50–51; Dandamaev, 1990, p. 90; Snell, 1993, pp. 222–223; Jursa, 1995, pp. 85–116; Bongenaar, 1997, pp. 9–10, 25, 134, 262, 291, 302, 312, 428. 22 See Petschow, 1976, pp. 68–73; Reis, 1976, p. 82; Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 50–51; Snell, 1993, pp. 222–223; Jursa, 1995, pp. 38–39, 147–154; Cole, 1996, p. 51; Baker, 2004, pp. 63–67, 219–220. In the Neo-Babylonian period the owner of the land received 10%–80% of the produce. 21

12

introduction

the people listed in these texts.23 Note that very common in these texts is a formula signifying the family head “with his people” (adi UN.MEŠ-šú), without detailing numbers of the people; this differs from the sales of people, in which those sold are almost always indicated by their name or by their connection with the family head.24 The major difculty in research of this group of families arises from the sparse information we have on any of the dozens of these families. The discussion will be divided between families listed in the texts of grants and exemptions from tax to ofcials (group A) and families recorded in royal grants and personal decrees to temples (group B). As a working hypothesis we shall posit that the families belonging to group A were not slaves but tenants, while those belonging to group B had the status of temple slaves or temple employees. Later in the study we shall check whether it is possible to decide between these two alternatives.25 Most texts of the Rations have not yet been published, so a certain lack of clarity clouds these lists. As we know, in the Ancient Near East food rations were distributed to both slaves and “non-slaves”, so it is not clear if those families were temple slaves or temple employees. In any event, it is reasonable to suppose that they were under the supervision of members of the family of exorcists in whose house Archive N4 was found, in which these texts were contained, together with about 800 other tablets.26 Most of the families mentioned in this group (11 out of 13) include a woman with her son or daughter, or a woman with her children, that is, single-parent families, a very common feature among slave families.27 Now a few words on the group I have dened generally as Deportees and Displaced Persons (after SAA XI). Note that I have included 23 For the status of the people attested in royal grants and personal decrees see Jakobson, 1969, p. 294; Postgate, 1969; Zablocka, 1972, p. 212; Oded, 1979, p. 114; Fales, 1984, pp. 209–213; Kataja—Whiting, 1995, pp. xiii–xli. Jacobson and Zablocka are of the opinion they were slaves, but Oded claimed that “next to nothing can be said for certain” on their status. 24 For the pattern “PN adi UN.MEŠ-šú” see SAA XII, no. 36–37, 50, 53, 60–61; see also Fales, 1983a, pp. 236–237. 25 For the status of the people donated to temples see above, note 23, and see also van Driel, 1969; Menzel, AST; cf. also Klengel, 1975, pp. 181–200; Singer, 1998, pp. 109–110, for the status of the people donated to temples in the Hittite kingdom. In Singer’s opinion they were tenants. 26 For N4 see Pedersén, 1986, pp. 41–76; Pedersén, 1998, pp. 135–136. 27 For the rations system in the Ancient Near East see Gelb, 1965; Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 500–505; Renger, 1994, pp. 176–180; Bongenaar, 1997, pp. 297–298; van Koppen, 2001, p. 473; Uchitel, 2002.

introduction

13

in this group only deportees who were in transit from their original places to their new places; I do not include deportees who were settled in their new place. As a working hypothesis I took it that the deportees held during their transfer from place to place the provisional status of prisoners of war (hubut qašti, kišittu, šallatu). Only at the second stage were the deportees placed by the king of Assyria in various positions and on the various levels of Assyrian society (as B. Oded has shown).28 In the fullness of time they became an inseparable part of Assyrian society, or in the phrase of the Assyrian propaganda itti nišÏ KUR Aššur amnÖšunÖti. The deportees were slotted in primarily according to the king’s requirements and to their talents. Some were given low level and even senior positions in the Assyrian bureaucracy; others (only in rare cases) were sold as slaves by corrupt ofcials or were awarded, by the king, as slaves to his ofcials. But most of the deportees were apparently placed as tenants on lands owned by the king or his ofcials, or by the temples.29 In this study I examine the differences between the families listed in the various groups noted here, and I re-check the working hypotheses I have raised in the foregoing outline.

Structure of the Work This volume of my study is divided into two main parts. Part I includes three chapters: chapter I offers a general discussion of the sources, and chapter II briey surveys all 447 Lower Stratum families in the period under review (800–600 B.C.). These families are mentioned in 177 texts. In this chapter the families are arranged in seven groups: slaves, pledged people, “Land and People”, Royal Grants, “Harran Census”, deportees and displaced persons, and ration recipients (according to the working hypothesis set out above).30 Within each group the families are arrayed chronologically; the undated texts are tted in by their archives, and are followed by the unassigned documents.31 The post-canonical texts 28 See Oded, 1979, pp. 75–115 with earlier literature. For the status of deportees in the Hittite Empire see Bryce, 2002, p. 78. 29 Cf. Oded, 1979, p. 98: “In the second stage, the deportees received the elds in tenure”. 30 No information on families of hired laborers is attested in Neo-Assyrian records. 31 Sealing with ngernail or the use of copper as currency was not used in my study

14

introduction

have been dated according to Parpola’s method.32 The conclusions of the discussion in chapter II are presented in tables 1–17. Chapter III examines the terminology used to dene the families mentioned, the formulation of the texts, and the status of the families. Part II of this volume considers socio-economic and demographic issues. These include family types (chapter IV), family size (chapter V), marriage patterns (chapter VI), childless families (chapter VII), children’s age (chapter VIII), and single-parent families (chapter IX); the last two chapters examine the numerical proportions among family members (chapter X) and the number of generations in a family (chapter XI). Before proceeding to study the sources, I present briey below two of the most important researches dealing with the subject covered in this volume (studies on the texts considered in this book are reviewed in full in the next chapter). The most important study written on the subject of this volume was published by Fales in 1975.33 Fales compared 37 families and single people numbered in the “Harran Census” with 65 other families enumerated in legal transactions, of which 40 were slave families (one of them, SAA VI 85, is not a family but a slave and a maid of uncertain relationship), 13 were pledged families, and 12 were families listed in sales of “Land and People”. Fales did not distinguish among these three groups but examined all 65 attestations as a single whole, in comparison with the attestations from the “Harran Census”. He examined only 37 out of the 101 families covered by the census, and only 65 (in fact 64) of the 182 families attested in legal transactions. Fales did not avail of some of the texts known today, for example, new documents from DÖr-Katlimmu. In sum, Fales scrutinized only 101 out of the 447 families discussed in this volume of my study. Nevertheless, Fales’s work is of great importance, and I regard mine as a continuation of his. Although he studied less than a quarter of the attestations that we possess he reached extremely signicant conclusions, which cannot be refuted, including emphasis on the small size of the families considered, absence of grown-up girls, proportion of the sexes in these families, the few generations in a family, planning of workforce by the

as dating criteria, since both were common in the 8th century, but the practice continued in the 7th century. See also Radner, 1997, p. 38; Mattila, 2002, pp. xxi–xxii. 32 See PNA, 1/I, pp. xviii–xxi. 33 See Fales, 1975.

introduction

15

landowners, and more. Fales similarly examined the implications of his research for various social, economic, and political problems.34 In addition to Fales’s work, the researches of Karen Radner has to be highlighted, particularly noteworthy is her doctoral thesis,35 which centers on legal transactions in the Neo-Assyrian period. This work contains a special and detailed study devoted to “Der Mensch” in these documents (Chapter VII, pp. 125–248).36 This is a profound study of various philological and social aspects of the subject. The chapter discusses evidence regarding children, young people, adults, and the elderly, and it has a special and extensive place devoted to slaves. Chapter VII.3, entitled “Der Mensch als Teil der Gesellschaft” (pp. 195–230), in fact considers mainly slaves (pp. 202–230), while the following chapter (VII.4, pp. 230–248) indeed continues with the study of slaves. Only two pages are concerned with the issue of the family and the household (pp. 200–202).37 Radner’s research is of great importance in philological terms, and it also offers important discussions of the terminology applied in legal transactions through comparison with administrative texts and letters from the period under review. But the research does not consider methodically demographic and socioeconomic matters, including family size, types and structure, as these matters exceed the research plan and are omitted from the start. This lack does not reduce the value of Radner’s book, nor its contribution to a better understanding of society in the Neo-Assyrian Empire.

34 35 36 37

See also Fales, 2001, pp. 174–178. See Radner, 1997. See Radner, 1997, Ch. VII, pp. 125–248. For a review of Radner’s study see Müller, 1999, pp. 320–325.

PART ONE

CHAPTER ONE

THE SOURCES

A. Types of Documents The 447 families of the lower stratum are attested in 177 texts, which are divided into four main types: legal transactions, administrative records, court decisions, and letters. Most texts (69%) are legal transactions (122), and this type is further divided into three sub-groups: conveyances (115), contracts (6), and one receipt. The conveyances are mostly sales of people (78), sales of “Land and People” (30), or sales of “Land and People” with a pledge (2). Other conveyances are divisions of property/ inheritance (3), a private gift, and redemption from a pledge. The six contracts are mainly debt notes with a pledge (4); the other two are a loan of silver with a pledge, and payment of a debt by pledging of persons. The 47 administrative records (27%) are divided into four main groups: 1. Population management and military administration (15): most texts of this group refer to deportees and displaced people (14), and only one is a schedule of “Land and People”; 2. The well known group of texts called the “Harran Census” (15); 3. Royal grants and private votive donations (7); 4. Lists of barley rations (10). Two out of the six letters were sent to the king, two are petitions to ofcials, and two are too broken to be clearly dened (see the table on the next page and appendix A to chapter I).

B. Date of Documents Most texts (78%) are dated or can be dated by prosopographic considerations. The earliest document is dated to 800 B.C. and the latest are from the end of the 7th century B.C. In the following discussion the texts will be divided into three main groups: the earlier documents (59 texts dated to 800–681 B.C. = 33%); the later documents (79 texts dated to 680–614* B.C. = 45%); and the other 39 texts (22%) which are undated, and cannot be dated by prosopographic considerations (most of them are probably from the 7th century B.C.).

20

chapter one TYPES OF DOCUMENTS

A. Legal Transactions (122) I. Conveyances (115) 1. Sale of Persons (78) 2. Sale of Land and People (30) 3. Sale of Land and People with a Pledge (2) 4. Division of Property/Inheritance (3) 5. Redemption from a Pledge (1) 6. Private Gift (1) II. Contracts (6) 1. Loan of Silver with a Pledge (1) 2. Debt-note with Pledge (4) 3. Payment of a debt by pledging of persons (1) III. Receipts (1) B. Administrative Records (47) I. Population Management and Military Administration (15) 1. Deportees and Displaced People (14) 2. Schedules of Land and People (1) II. The “Harran Census” (15) III. Royal Grants and Private Votive Donations (7) 1. Royal Grants (6) 2. Private Votive Donations (1) IV. Lists of Rations (Private Archive—10) C. Court Decisions (2) D. Letters (6) I. Letters to the King (2) II. Petitions to Ofcials (2) III. Other Letters (2)

B.1. The earlier documents (800–681 B.C.). Most of these 59 texts are dated to Sennacherib’s reign (34) or to the reign of Sargon II (17), and only a few to the time of Tiglath-pileser III (5) or Adad-nÏrÊri III (2). Another text (an administrative text from Calah) is dated to the 8th century B.C. (text no. 152). The two texts from the reign of Adad-nÏrÊri III are a sale of people (text no. 1 = 800 B.C.) and a royal grant (text no. 128). The ve documents from the time of Tiglath-pileser III are a division of property from Aššur (text no. 2 = 744 B.C.), a sale of people from Aššur (text no. 2 = 727 B.C.), two royal grants from Nineveh (texts no.

the sources

21

129–130), and an administrative list from Calah (text no. 150). The 17 documents from the reign of Sargon II (721–705 B.C. are mainly the 15 texts of the “Harran Census” (texts nos. 135–149), a sale of people (text no. 4 = 713 B.C.), and a letter sent to the king (text no. 151). Most of the 34 texts which are dated to Sennacherib’s reign are sales of people or sales of “Land and People” from Nineveh (14 sales of people, dated to 700–681—texts nos. 7, 9–13, 15–22; and ten sales of “Land and People” most of them dated to 698–683—texts nos. 88, 97–104, 106). Three other sales of people or of “Land and People” (texts nos. 5–6, 105) involve Šumma-ilÊni, a chariot driver who was active in Nineveh for about 30 years, mainly in the time of Sennacherib (709–680 B.C.). The other seven texts from Sennacherib’s reign are two royal donations to temples (texts nos. 132–133); two debt-notes with a pledge from Nineveh (texts nos. 86–87—693–694 B.C.); two unpublished sales of people from MaxallÊnÊte (texts nos. 8, 14–700, 693 B.C.), and one letter (text no. 153). B.2. The later documents (680–614* B.C.). 38 texts are dated to Esarhaddon’s reign (680–669 B.C.) or to the rst half of Assurbanipal’s reign (668–649 B.C.). All but three are legal transactions (35), the exceptions being a letter, a royal grant, and an administrative list of Egyptian deportees (texts nos. 30, 131 and 154). The 35 legal transactions are mainly sales of people (22 texts: nos. 23–29, 31–45) or sales of “Land and People” (12 texts: nos. 89, 107–117); and one debt-note with a pledge (text no. 90). 41 texts are from the second half of Assurbanipal’s reign to the last years of Assyria (648*–614* B.C.). Most are sales of people (23 texts: nos. 46–58, 60, 62, 65–72), the others are six legal transactions (two divisions of property, a private gift, payment of a debt by a pledge of people and a receipt: texts nos. 59, 61, 63–64, 92). The remaining 12 texts are ten lists of rations (texts nos. 168–177) and two court decisions (texts nos. 91, 93). B.3. The undated documents. Most of these 39 undated texts (which cannot be dated by prosopographic considerations) are probably from the 7th century B.C. Twenty out of these 39 texts are sales of people (12: texts nos. 73–84) or of “Land and People” (8: texts nos. 119–126). Three other legal transactions are redemption from a pledge (text no. 96), a loan with a pledge (text no. 94), and a debt-note with a pledge (text

22

chapter one

no. 95). Thirteen are administrative texts, mainly lists of deportees (11); one is a private donation (134) and one is a schedule of “Land and People” (127). The last three texts are letters (texts nos. 85, 161–162).

C. Provenance of the Texts The texts originated in six places: Aššur, Calah, Nineveh, DÖrKatlimmu, MaxallÊnÊte and Gezer (see table below). Ninety percent of the texts originated in the three capital cities of the empire (160 out of 177 texts): 126 texts are from Nineveh (71%), 30 from Aššur (17%), and only four from Calah (2%). Sixteen texts originated in the periphery (9%): 12 in DÖr-Katlimmu, three in MaxallÊnÊte, and one in Gezer. The provenance of one text is unclear (no. 85). However, the texts do not reect only the situation on the mainland of Assyria; on the contrary, many texts from Nineveh refer to diverse areas of the Assyrian empire, from Til-Barsib and NÏrubu/NÏrab in the west to Arbail in the east; and from TalmÖsa, the province of the rab šÊqê and Izalla in the north to Babylonia in the south.1 It is well known that very important data concern the Harran area, although the texts of the “Harran Census” were unearthed in Nineveh. Appendix B to this chapter is a list of texts from Nineveh relating to diverse places in the Assyrian empire. For simplicity’s sake the 15 texts of the “Harran Census” are presented as related to the city of Harran, although in these texts 143 toponyms are attested, mostly unidentied (see discussion below).

D. The Division of the Texts into Groups for Discussion The 177 texts are divided in this study into seven groups for discussion in accordance with the research hypothesis set forth in the Introduction. The Administrative records are divided into four groups (nos. 4–7): group 4 contains all royal grant and private votive donations; group 5 is the 15 texts of the “Harran Census”; group 6 consists of all lists of deportees, as well as two letters sent to Sargon II and Sennacherib which refer to deportees; and group 7 contains the lists of rations for people who probably were under the supervision of members of the family of exorcists in whose house these texts were found. 1

See Kwasman, 1986, p. 239; Kwasman, 1988, pp. xxxix–l.

the sources

23

PROVENANCE OF TEXTS Aššur (30): Sale of Persons (11); Division of Property/Inheritance (3); Payment of a debt by pledging of persons; Receipt; Royal Grants (2); Lists of Rations (10); Court Decisions (2). Calah (4): Sale of Persons (2); Administrative List of Deportees (2). DÖr-Katlimmu (12): Sale of Persons (11); Sale of “Land and People” (1). Gezer (1): Sale of “Land and People”. MaxallÊnÊte (3): Sale of Persons (3) Nineveh (126): Sale of Persons (51); Sale of “Land and People” (28); Sale of “Land and People” with a Pledge (2); Redemption from a Pledge (1); Private Gift (1); Loan of Silver with a Pledge (1); Debt-note with a Pledge (4); Administrative List of Deportees (12); Schedules of “Land and People” (1); The “Harran Census” (15); Royal Grants (4); Private Votive Donations (1); Letter to the King (2); Petition to Ofcial (1); Other Letters (2). Unknown Provenance (1): Petition to Ofcials

The 122 legal transactions are divided into three groups: the people attested in sales of people (slaves) are separate from people mentioned in sales of “Land and People”. Additional texts are included in the rst group (“slaves”) as follows: three divisions of property/inheritance, a private gift, a receipt, and two petitions to ofcials. The people mentioned in a schedule of “Land and People” are related to the group of people attested in sales of “Land and People”. All texts that list pledged people are discussed in a separate group (see table, below).

E. The Publication of the Documents Three main stages may be observed in the history of the research of most of these documents: 1. the studies of Johns, published in 1898–1923 (= ADD; ADB); 2. the research of Kohler and Ungnad (1913 = ARU); 3. the SAA series, vols. VI, XI, XII, XIV, published in 1991–2002.2 Johns’s studies were preceded by a few pioneering works published in the last third of the 19th century B.C.: ten of the present 177 texts

2 See Kwasman—Parpola, 1991 (= SAA VI); Fales—Postgate, 1995 (= SAA XI); Kataja—Whiting, 1995 (= SAA XII); Mattila, 2002 (= SAA XIV).

24

chapter one THE GROUPS FOR DISCUSSION

1. Slaves (85 texts; 116 families): A. Legal Transactions (83): I. Conveyances (82): 1. Sale of Persons (78): Aššur (11); Calah (2); DÖr-Katlimmu (11); MaxallÊnÊte (3); Nineveh (51)

4. Division of Property/Inheritance (Aššur, 3); 6. Private Gift (Nineveh, 1); III. Receipts (1); D. Letters (2): II. Petitions to Ofcials (Unknown provenance, 1; Nineveh, 1) 2. Pledged Persons (11 texts; 19 famiies): A. Legal Transactions (9): I. Conveyances (3): 3. Sale of Land and People with a Pledge (Nineveh, 2); 5. Redemption from Pledge (Nineveh, 1); II. Contracts (6): 1. Loan of Silver with a Pledge (Nineveh, 1); 2. Debt-note with a Pledge (Nineveh, 4); 3. Payment of a debt by pledging of persons (Aššur, 1); C. Court Decisions (2): (Aššur). 3. “Land and People” (31 texts; 52 families): A. Legal Transactions (30): I. Conveyances (30): 2. Sale of “Land and People” (30): DÖr-Katlimmu (1); Gezer (1); Nineveh (28) B. Administrative Records (1): I. Population Management and Military Administration (1): 2. Schedule of “Land and People” (1) 4. Royal Grants (7 texts; 89 families): B. Administrative Records (7): III. Royal Grants and Private Votive Donations (6); 1. Royal Grants (6): Aššur, 2; Nineveh, 4; 2. Private Votive Donations (1): Nineveh. 5. The “Harran Census” (15 texts; 101 families): B. Administrative Records (11): II. The “Harran Census” (15): Nineveh (15). 6. Deportees and Displaced Persons (18 texts; 57 families): B. Administrative Records (14): I. Population Management and Military Administration (14): 1. Deportees and Displaced Persons (14): (Calah, 2; Nineveh, 12). D. Letters (4): I. Letter to the King (2): Nineveh, 2. III. Other Letters (2): Nineveh, 2.

7. Recipients of Rations (10 texts; 13 families): B. Administrative Records (6): IV. Lists of Rations (10): Aššur (10).

the sources

25

were among the rst edited in Assyriology. Three documents were published as early as 1866 by Norris in Rawlinson’s second volume (texts nos. 23, 42, 51).3 These sales of people also include Aramaic captions. Three additional texts (nos. 25, 58, 98) were published by Smith in Rawlinson’s second volume (in 1870).4 Most of these documents were also published by Oppert and Ménant in Paris in 1877 (nos. 23, 25, 42, 58, 98),5 and four texts (no. 17, 40, 104, 112) were published in Berlin in 1896 by Peiser.6 Of these 177 texts, 112 (63%) were rst edited by Johns in his pioneering studies: ADD (97 texts); and ADB (15 texts). Eighty-one out of these 112 documents were presented by Kohler and Ungnad in 1913 in ARU (most of them from Nineveh, and a few from Aššur). In that study the texts were arranged by legal categories, and they were transliterated and translated into German.7 In 1973, Fales reexamined the texts of the “Harran Census” in his dissertation,8 and in 1979, many texts were collated by Parpola and new restorations of texts rst edited by Johns were presented.9 In 1988 Kwasman studied 426 texts including 62 out of 112 documents rst published by Johns and presented in my study.10 Kwasman rearranged the texts dividing them into archives; he collated the texts and presented a fresh transliteration and translation of the texts. Eight texts with Aramaic captions (nos. 23, 26, 29, 42, 51, 58, 61, 114) were the rst edited in Assyriology, as mentioned above. In 1901 most of these texts were studied by Stevenson,11 and additional editions were published in 1912, and in 1970–1971.12 An important study

3 H. C. Rawlinson, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, II, London 1866 (= 2R). 4 H. C. Rawlinson, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, III, London 1870 (= 3R). 5 J. Oppert and J. Ménant, Document juridiques de l’Assyrie et de la Chaldée, Paris 1877 (= Op). 6 F. E. Peiser, Texte juristischen und geschäftlichen Inhalts, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, IV, Berlin 1896 (= KB 4). 7 ARU, pp. 447–467. 8 Fales, 1973. 9 Parpola, 1979. 10 Kwasman, 1988. 11 J. Stevenson, Assyrian and Babylonian Contracts with Aramaic Reference Notes, Chicago 1901 (= ABC). 12 L. L. Delaporte, Epigraphes araméens, Paris 1912 (= EA); F. Vattioni, Epigraa aramaica, Augustinianum 10 (1970), pp. 493–452; 11 (1971), pp. 18–190; Orientalia 48 (1979), pp. 140–145 (= Ep. Ar).

26

chapter one

of these texts was presented by Lieberman in 1968,13 but, the most important study of these texts was published by Fales in 1986.14 Fales reexamined all 61 texts of this category, including ten unpublished documents. He arranged the texts by their provenance, suggested new restorations, and followed this with a philological discussion. All 112 texts rst edited by Johns were republished in the SAA series, vols. VI, XI, XII, XIV, in 1991–2002; and the personal names attested in these texts were reexamined in the volumes of the most important prosopographic project (= PNA). The other 65 texts included in my study (which were not edited by Johns), are divided into two main groups: 48 have been published and 17 are as yet unpublished (three from MaxallÊnÊte and 14 from Aššur, one [KAJ 243 = text no. 169] was published by Ebeling in 1927 only in cuneiform). The 48 published texts are mainly from Aššur (17), Nineveh (14), and DÖr-Katlimmu (12). The other ve texts are from Calah (4) and Gezer. The Gezer tablet was rst published at the beginning of the 20th century.15 In 1935 it was reexamined by Galling, and a new edition was presented by Becking in the 1980s.16 Four texts from Calah were published by different scholars: text no. 44 by Weisman in 1953 (reexamined by Postgate in 1976);17 text no. 150 by Parker in 1961; and text no. 152 by Postgate in 1973;18 the fourth text from Calah (no. 1) was published by Deller and Fadhil in 1993.19 Fourteen texts from Nineveh that were not edited by Johns were published in the SAA series in 1995–2003: six for the rst time in this series (no. 80 = SAA XIV 414; no. 130 = SAA XII 17; no. 153 = SAA XVII 114; no. 163 = SAA XI 199; no. 166 = SAA XI 195; no. 167 = SAA XI 196); eight texts were published by various scholars: no. 151 was rst published by Harper (ABL 212) in his monumental study that appeared between 1892 and 1914. This letter was translated into Italian by Fales in 1983,20 and was republished in 2001 (= SAA XV 13 See S. J. Lieberman, The Aramaic Argillary Script in the seventh century, BASOR 192 (1968), pp. 25–31 (= Lieb.). 14 See F. M. Fales, Aramaic Epigraphs on Clay Tablets of the Neo-Assyrian Period, Rome 1986 (= AECT). 15 Pinches, 1904; Sayce, 1904; Johns, 1904a; Johns, 1904b; Conder, 1904; Conder, 1905; Macalister, 1912, pp. 22–27+g. 1. 16 Galling, 1935; Becking, 1981–1982, pp. 81–82. 17 Weisman, 1953, pp. 141, 151 (Pl. XII); Postgate, 1976, no. 9. 18 Parker, 1961, pp. 27–28; Postgate, 1973, no. 113. 19 Deller—Fadhil, 1993, p. 247. 20 Fales, 1983, pp. 110–113.

the sources

27

181). Three other letters (nos. 31, 161–162)21 were published only in cuneiform in CT 53 by Parpola, and a new edition was presented in 2001–2002 (SAA XV 303, 309; SAA XVI 53). Four other texts from Nineveh were published in the 1970s and 1980s mainly by Postgate: in 1970 (no. 122 = SAA XIV 399); in 1979 (no. 52 = SAA XIV 424); and in 1987 (no. 134 = SAA XII 98).22 The fourth text was published by Parpola in 1979 (no. 160 = SAA XI 200).23 Five of 16 texts from Aššur were published in the rst half of the 20th century: two by Ungnad in 1907 (60, 91); these documents were republished by Kohler and Ungnad in 1913, and by Radner in 1997.24 Another document (no. 61) was rst published in 1939; in the 1970s and 1980s it was reedited by Vattioni, Postgate and Fales.25 Two royal grants from Aššur were reexamined by many scholars: text no. 132 was rst published only in cuneiform by Schröder in 1920; it was reexamined in 1954 by Ebeling, by Postgate in 1969, and by Kataja and Whiting in 1995.26 The other royal grant was rst published by Ebeling, and reedited in 1969 and 1995.27 The other 11 texts from Aššur were rst published in the last generation: no. 48 by Donbaz and Deller in 1987,28 with a new edition presented in StAT 2 140; no. 63 in 1991, by Fales and Jakob-Rost (= SAAB 5 17); and no. 71 by Deller, Fales, and others in 1995 (= SAAB 9 78). Two other texts (nos. 92, 93) were published by Radner in 1997 and 1999;29 and six other texts (nos. 2, 48, 67, 83, 84, 168) were rst presented in StAT 2 in 2001 by Donbaz and Parpola.30 Another text, whose provenance is unclear (no. 85), was published by Donbaz in 2002,31 and the 12 texts from DÖr-Katlimmu (nos. 43, 21

Parpola, 1979a, no. 9, 325, 604. Postgate, 1970, pp. 145–146; Postgate—Ismail, no. 2; Postgate, 1987, pp. 57–63. 23 Parpola, 1979a, no. 321. 24 Ungnad, 1907, no. 95–96; ARU, no. 70, 655; Radner, 1997a, pp. 118–121, 129–133. 25 CTNMC, no. 68; Ep. Ar., no. 274; Postgate, 1976, no. 18; Fales, 1986, no. 61. 26 See KAV, no. 39; SVAT III, pp. 9–12; Postgate, 1969, App. 4; Kataja—Whiting, 1995 (= SAA XII), no. 87. 27 PKTA, no. 27–30; SVAT I, pp. 3–9; Postgate, 1969, App. 4a; Kataja—Whiting, 1995 (= SAA XII), no. 86. 28 See Deller—Donbaz, 1987, pp. 221–226. 29 Radner, 1997, p. 369; Radner, 1999, no. 36. 30 Donbaz—Parpola, 2001, nos. 11, 101, 118, 119, 137, 140. 31 Donbaz, 2002. 22

28

chapter one

47, 49–50, 53–54, 65–66, 72, 81–82, 126) were published in 2002 by Radner.32

F. The “Harran Census” F.1. Scribe A and Scribe B The texts of the “Harran Census” are considered at length in the literature, as mentioned in the Introduction.33 These texts should evidently be divided into two main groups (following Parpola),34 each composed by a different scribe: A or B. This important observation is based on the following main considerations: 1. Scribe A uses the sign A (with only one exception—DUMU), while scribe B uses the sign DUMU (again with one exception—A); 2. Scribe A presents a detailed description of the family members, clearly distinguishing wives from daughters; while scribe B omits patronymics, sons’ names, children’s ages, and totals, and counts all females (wives and daughters) in one category, “Women”. A few families attested in texts related to these different scribes nicely illustrate these characteristics (see the discussion on families 308–309 in Chapter II). The following is a list of texts related to these two scribes (see p. 29). F.2. Toponyms and Personal Names in the Texts of the “Harran Census” The texts of the “Harran Census” were found in Nineveh, but it is well known that they describe the HarrÊn area: 143 toponyms are attested in these texts, most of them unidentied as mentioned above. However, a few are clearly located in the Balikh basin (HarrÊn, HuzÒrÒna, and BalÒhu), and in adjacent areas to the west (SarÖgu and Hadattu) or the north (KipÊnu).35 Recently, Jacobson argued once again that KipÊnu is not the name of a place.36 His arguments are unconvincing, as clearly

32

Radner, 2002 (= BATSH 6). For the “Harran Census” see Introduction, note 19. 34 Parpola, 1975, pp. 99–107; Roth, 1987, pp. 731–735. For a different division of the texts see Fales—Postgate, 1995, pp. xxxiii–xxxiv. 35 For a list of the toponyms mentioned in the “Harran Census” see Fales, 1973, pp. 148–150. For the identication of these toponyms see Fales, 1973, pp. 93–98; Parpola—Porter, 2001, pp. 5–18, and map no. 3. 36 Jakobson, 1999. 33

29

the sources Scribe A (By Number in this book) Families 135. ADB 136. ADB 137. ADB 138. ADB 139. ADB 145. ADB

01 02 03 13 08 20

= = = = = =

CCNA CCNA CCNA CCNA CCNA CCNA

01 02 03 10 09 19

= = = = = =

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

XI XI XI XI XI XI

201 202 203 205 206 218

= = = = = =

K K K K K K

2017 8125+ 8134 8957 8179 6951

“Fathers and Sons” 146. ADB 05 = CCNA 21 = SAA XI 219 = K 4729 147. ADB 07 = CCNA 22 = SAA XI 220 = Rm 2,130+79–7–8, 102 Scribe B (By Number in this book) Families 140. ADB 06 = CCNA 05 = 141. ADB 14 = CCNA 06 = 142. ADB 09+11+12+16 = 9728+ 143. ADB 04 = CCNA 04 = 144. ADB 21 = CCNA 08 =

SAA XI 207 = K 4754+ SAA XI 208 = K 13394 CCNA 11+13+14+16 = SAA XI 209 = K SAA XI 213 = K 4767+ SAA XI 214 = Rm 478

“Fathers and Sons” 148. ADB 10 = CCNA 12 = SAA XI 210 = K 13132+91–5–9, 103 149. ADB 19 = CCNA 07 = SAA XI 211 = 79–7–8, 337

attested in other Neo-Assyrian documents too.37 It is possible that Magrisu (text no. 136) is located in the Khabur basin, although the restoration of the toponym NaÉibina in this text is unclear.38 Most personal names attested in the texts of the “Harran Census” are West Semitic or Aramaic (see the discussion in Chapter II). This accords well with the location of most toponyms in the Harran area, since the theophoric elements SÏx, SÒn-, Našuh-, the names of the moon god whose center was in Harran, are attested in many names.

37 Fales—Postgate, 1995, p. xxxi; Postgate, 1974a, p. 33. Cf. also the toponym Tll zy Qpn Hrn (= Tilul of the Qipan of Harran) mentioned in an unpublished text from MaxallÊnÊte (O 3648). See Lipinski, 1985, p. 346; Garelli, 1986, p. 242. 38 Fales, 1973, p. 97; SAA XI 202 ii 14’.

30

chapter one

F.3. The Main Characteristics of the “Harran Census” The information on the families presented in my study is not uniform. In a few texts only the name of the family head is attested, with just the total of his family members (e.g., in the royal grants); other texts yield more details; the texts of the “Harran Census” related to scribe A undoubtedly give the fullest description; each is arranged as follows: it opens with the family head’s personal name and profession (at times patronymics are also presented); the other family members are listed next, with a note of their relation to the head: his sons and brothers are listed sometimes by name, and usually with an indication of their “size” or age; the wife, daughter(s), head’s mother or sister are mentioned last, usually unnamed. The description of the people is followed by a detailed list of the land, recorded by type and quantity, as well as animals (oxen, sheep, etc.). Important information on the position of the farm in respect of the local and the regional district is also given (e.g., ina GN; ina qanni . . .; ina madbar . . . etc.). The ownership of land is a central issue in these texts, and the landowners of these rural holdings were clearly Assyrian ofcials in the main. Small parcels were owned by the cultivators (“ša ramannišunu”: see Families nos. 277–278, 299), but these are rare exceptions.39 In other rare cases land was donated to the “farmers” (see text no. 146, col. III). But most of the landowners were high-, middle-, and even low-rank ofcials, including a governor (text no. 136), a chief cook (of the governor) of Harran (text no. 143), and even a cook whom this same chief cook promoted (text no. 137). Text no. 146 (= SAA XI 219) enumerates lands owned by Assyrian ofcials, and cultivated by Gambulaean deportees. The landowners listed in this text are mainly high ofcials, including the chief cupbearer, the palace herald, the sartinnu, the governors of Nineveh and TamnÖna, the treasurers of the crown prince and of the AššÖr temple, and more.40

39 For the term: ša ramannišunu see Zablocka, 1971, pp. 209–211; Fales, 1973, p. 15; Oded, 1979, pp. 95–98. See also ND 2449:22 = Saggs, 1956, p. 40; Postgate, 1974a, pp. 375–376; Saggs, 2001, pp. 196–197. 40 On the problem of land ownership in the Neo-Assyrian Period see Postgate, 1974a, pp. 31–35.

the sources

31

F.4. The Date and the Purpose of the “Harran Census” The texts of the “Harran Census” are undated, and their purpose is unspecied in the texts. They may reasonably be dated to the late reign of Sargon II or to the beginning of Sennacherib’s reign, as suggested by Parpola,41 and one may surmise that the “lands enumerated are those properties in the area in question, which were exempt from taxation”.42

41

Parpola, 1975, p. 108. Postgate, 1974, pp. 229–230; Postgate, 1974a, p. 39; see also Fales—Postgate, 1995, p. xxxiii. 42

CHAPTER I

APPENDIX A

THE SOURCES by Types of Documents

A. Legal Transactions (122)

I. Conveyances (115) 1. Sale of Persons (78) Aššur (11) 727 3. unpublished = VAT 19872 see PNA, p. 841. 649 45. unpublished = VAT 9582 see PNA, pp. 58, 181, 214, 470, 501, 529. 641* 48. StAT 2 140 = A 2692 = Ass 11770a = ALA N29 (1) = BaM 18 (1987), pp. 221–226. 631* 55. unpublished = VAT 8232 = PNA, p. 1159. 625* 60. ARU 70 = AoF 24 (1997), pp. 118–121 = VAT 5602 = VS 1 95. Ass or later 67. StAT 2 137 = A 2919 [= N 28]. 69. unpublished = SAAS VI, p. 226, n. 1253 = VAT 9755 see PNA, pp. 230–231, 924, 1110. 70. unpublished = SAAS VI, p. 136, n. 689 = VAT 15538 see PNA, pp. 632, 676. After Ass 71. SAAB 9 78 = VAT 8592 = Ass 8520d = ALA N15 (3) = KAN II 77.

the sources

33

? 83. StAT 2 118 = A 341 = Ass 11393dz = ALA N25 (17). 84. StAT 2 119 = A 795+2565 = Ass 11393du+11393d = ALA N25 (12). Calah (2) 800 1. BaM 24 (1993), pp. 247 ff. = ND 673. 649 44. Iraq 15 (1953), pp. 141, 151 (Pl. XII) = ND 3426 = FNALD 9. DÖr-Katlimmu (11) 650 43. BATSH 6 46 = SH 98/6949 I 896 = DeZ 21027. 644/629* 47. BATSH 6 141= SH 98/6949 I 439 = DeZ 21050/32. 641* 49. BATSH 6 53 = SH 98/6949 I 876. 639* 50. BATSH 6 56 = SH 98/6949 I 884 = DeZ 21030. 634* 53. BATSH 6 142 = SH 98/6949 I 922 = DeZ 21051/3. 631* 54. BATSH 6 66 = SH 98/6949 I 875 = DeZ 21036. Ass or later 65. BATSH 6 91 = SH 98/6949 I 895 = DeZ 21046. 66. BATSH 6 97 = SH 98/6949 I 932 = DeZ 21051/13. After Ass 72. BATSH 6 34 = SH 00/6747 II 78 = DeZ 20960. ? 81. BATSH 6 185 = SH 98/6949 I 929 = DeZ 21051/10. 82. BATSH 6 200 = SH 98/6747 II 205 = DeZ 21059. MaxallÊnÊte (3) 700 8. unpublished = O 3660 see PNA, p. 452. 693 14. unpublished = O 3706 see PNA, p. 452. 670 27. unpublished = O 3709 see PNA, p. 452.

34

chapter one

Nineveh (51) 713 4. ADD 248 = ARU 455 = NALK 185 = SAA VI 6 = Rm 189. Šumma-ilÊni (709–680 = end of S II or Senn) 5. ADD 246 = ARU 82 = NALK 376 = SAA VI 52 = 83–1–18, 339. 6. ADD 236 = ARU 80 = NALK 369 = SAA VI 53 = K 444. 700 7. ADD 294 = ARU 49 = NALK 109 = SAA VI 116 = Rm 160. 696 9. ADD 241 = ARU 73 = NALK 84 = SAA VI 130 = K 1513. 10. ADD 614 = ARU 72 = SAA VI 128 = 83–1–18, 372. 695? 11. ADD 244 = ARU 159 = NALK 72 = SAA VI 96 = 80–7–19, 49. 693 (Šumma-ilÊni) 12. ADD 238 = ARU 201 = NALK 361 = SAA VI 40 = 82–3–23, 134+. 13. ADD 240 = ARU 59 = NALK 360 = SAA VI 41 = 81–7–27, 27. 686 15. ADD 232 = ARU 458 = NALK 13 = SAA VI 89 = 81–2–4, 149. 685 16. ADD 274 = ARU 69 = SAA VI 172 = 80–7–19, 53. 684 17. ADD 230 = ARU 60 = NALK 394 = SAA VI 177 = Rm 167. 681 (SÏx-maxÊdÒ) 18. ADD 231 = ARU 202 = NALK 301 = SAA VI 110 = 81–2–4, 150. 19. ADD 269 = ARU 63 = SAA VI 195 = Sm 218. 20. ADD 277 = ARU 532 = SAA VI 193 = K 354. Senn (Nabû-šumu-iškun) 21. ADD 253 = ARU 85 = NALK 210 = SAA VI 57 = 83–1–18, 359. Senn (AddatÒ) 22. ADD 261 = ARU 87 = NALK 414 = SAA VI 86 = K 8754. 680 (SÏx-maxÊdÒ) 23. ADD 229 = ARU 64 = NALK 302 = SAA VI 111 = K 76.  ¤ KB 4 (1896), pp. 124 ff; ABC 4; CIS II 17; AECT 5.

the sources

35

675 (Silim-AššÖr) 24. ADD 1158 = NALK 307 = SAA VI 229 = Ki 1904–10–9, 46. 671 (RÏmanni-Adad) 25. ADD 266 = ARU 538 = NALK 235 = SAA VI 297 = K 416. ¤ KB 4 (1896), pp. 130–131. 671 26. ADD 257 = ARU 66 = NALK 194 = SAA VI 284 = 83–1–18, 338. ¤ ABC 5; Ep. Ar. 15; AECT 14. 669 28. ADD 310 = ARU 158 = NALK 149 = SAA XIV 64 = K 1492 + K 1605.  ¤ AST, T202; UF 4, pp. 144. Esa (Abi-rahî) 29. ADD 245 = ARU 81 = NALK 2 = SAA VI 250 = 81–2–4, 152.  ¤ ABC 20; CIS II 33; AECT 20. Esa 30. ADD 288 = ARU 77 = SAA VI 266 = K 1498. End of Esa 32. ADD 268 = ARU 88 = SAA VI 294 = Rm 2,193. End of Esa or Ass (Milki-nÖrÒ) 33. ADD 287 = ARU 95 = NALK 177 = SAA XIV 4 = Rm 181. 34. ADD 316 = ARU 74 = NALK 179 = SAA XIV 5 = Rm 583. RÏmanni-Adad (671–660?) 35. ADD 247 = ARU 83 = NALK 269 = SAA VI 342 = K 1563. RÏmanni-Adad (668–660?) 36. ADD 270 = ARU 67 = NALK 273 = SAA VI 343 = 83–1–18, 689. 36D. ADD 271 = ARU 68 = NALK 272 = SAA VI 344 = 80–7–19, 140. 37. ADD 322 = ARU 200 = NALK 266 = SAA VI 345 = K 1505. 668 38. ADD 284+ = ARU 462 = NALK 295 = SAA XIV 65 = K 20900 + 83–1–18,358. 668? (IddÖxa) 39. ADD 306 = ARU 544 = SAA VI 256 = Rm 166. 666 (RÏmanni-Adad) 40. ADD 258 = ARU 65b = NALK 247 = SAA VI 313 = K 347. ¤ KB 4 (1896), pp. 134–135.

36 D. ADD 801

chapter one

= ARU 65a+537 = NALK 246 = SAA VI 312 = K 399 (ADD 192) + K 7357 + K 10448 (ADD 529) + K 13056. 665 (RÏmanni-Adad) 41. ADD 237 = ARU 71 = NALK 251 = SAA VI 319 = 82–5–22, 29. 659 (LÖqu) 42. ADD 233 = ARU 208 = NALK 146 = SAA XIV 24 = K 281. ¤ KB 4 (1896), pp. 138–141; EA 12; ABC 7; CIS II 19; AECT 17. 647* 46. ADD 275 + 593 = ARU 174 + 522 = SAA XIV 146 = 83–1–18, 349 + 82–5–22, 44. 639* (NÒnuÊiu) 51. ADD 250 = ARU 72 = NALK 215 = SAA XIV 16 = K 331. ¤ EA 9; ABC 15; CIS II 18; AECT 24. 638* 52. TIM XI 2 = SAA XIV 424 = MM 1082/A. 630* (KakkullÊnu) 56. ADD 308 = ARU 57 = NALK 120 = SAA XIV 34 = K 301 (Marriage). 57. ADD 309 = ARU 56 = NALK 133 = SAA XIV 37 = K 1568 (Marriage). 629* (KakkullÊnu) 58. ADD 711 = ARU 55 = NALK 124 = SAA XIV 38 = K 320 (Marriage). ¤ EA 4; ABC 11; CIS II 15; AECT 30. 622* 62. ADD 221 = ARU 503 = SAA XIV 165 = 82–5–22, 1011. Ass or later (KakkullÊnu) 68. ADD 235 = ARU 231 = NALK 130 = SAA XIV 49 = K 425. 7th Cen. 73. ADD 296 = ARU 79 = NALK 48 = SAA XIV 186 = K 460. 74. ADD 305 = ARU 94 = SAA XIV 247 = K 5381. ? 75. ADD 282+ = ARU 76 = NALK 299 = SAA XIV 213 = K 10412+. 76. ADD 718 = ARU 540 = SAA XIV 326 = K 2828. 77. ADD 789 = ARU 91 = SAA XIV 337 = K 14279. 78. ADD 259 = ARU 86 = NALK 399 = SAA XIV 475 = K 1608b.

the sources

37

79. ADD 265 = ARU 75 = NALK 113 = SAA XIV 196 = K 454. 80. SAA XIV 414 = K 20541. 2. Sale of “Land and People” (30) DÖr-Katlimmu (1) ? 126. BATSH 6 180 = SH 98/6949 I 908. Gezer (1) 651 117. PEF QS (1904), pp. 229–236; Macalister, 1912, pp. 22–27 + g. 1; JEOL 27 (1981–82), pp. 81–82 = GEZER 1. Nineveh (28) 698 97. ADD 473 = ARU 96 = NALK 27 = SAA VI 100 = 83–1–18, 331. D. ADD 474+ = ARU 96a = NALK 28 = SAA VI 101 = K 439 + 17997 = TCAE 67. 694 (Šumma-ilÊni) 98. ADD 427 = ARU 186 = NALK 358 = SAA VI 37 = K 346. ¤ KB 4 (1896), pp. 114 ff. 689 99. ADD 432 = ARU 432 = SAA VI 149 = Bu 89–4–26, 33. 687 100. ADD 456 = ARU 451 = SAA VI 155 = 82–5–22, 32. 686 101. ADD 443 = ARU 97 = NALK 386 = SAA VI 169 = Bu 91–5–9, 95. 102. ADD 453 = ARU 187 = SAA VI 163 = 81–7–27, 25. 685 103. ADD 430 = ARU 32 = SAA VI 173 = K 1430. 683 (Ahi-¢allÒ) 104. ADD 447 = ARU 61 = NALK 14 = SAA VI 90 = 82–5–22, 34. ¤ KB 4 (1896), p. 11.

38

chapter one

Šumma-ilÊni (709–680 = end of S II or Senn) 105. ADD 422 = ARU 103 = NALK 370 = SAA VI 50 = K 447. 105D ADD 423 = ARU 104 = NALK 371 = SAA VI 51 = K 10474. SÏx-maxÊdÒ (Senn) 106. ADD 455 = ARU 381 = SAA VI 112 = Bu 89–4–26, 128. 679 107. ADD 462 = ARU 375 = SAA VI 269 = Bu 91–5–9, 173. IssÊr-dÖrÒ (Esa) 108. ADD 428 = ARU 106 = NALK 114 = SAA VI 253 = K 453. ŠaddÒtu (Esa) 109. ADD 804 + ADD 441 + ADD 740 = ARU 102 = NALK 405 = SAA VI 251 = K 3146 + K 7379 + K 7400 + K 13192. End of Esa or Ass (Milki-nÖrÒ) 110. ADD 452 = ARU 556 = NALK 176 = SAA XIV 6 = Sm 1076. 111. ADD 727 = ARU 92 = NALK 175 = SAA XIV 3 = Sm 653. 666 (RÏmanni-Adad) 112. ADD 420 = ARU 100 = NALK 248 = SAA VI 315 = K 306. ¤ KB 4 (1896) pp. 134–137. D112. ADD 421 = ARU 100a = NALK 249 = SAA VI 316 = 81–7–27, 28. 113. ADD 448 = ARU 443 = NALK 265 = SAA VI 314 = K 1499. RÏmanni-Adad (668–660?) 114. ADD 429 = ARU 105 = NALK 274 + 275 + 276 = SAA VI 334 = 80–7–19, 348 + 83–1–18, 350 + 83–1–18, 387 ¤ ABC 18; CIS II 1; AECT 16. 115. ADD 424 = ARU 90 = NALK 279 = SAA VI 341 = 83–1–18, 348. 116. ADD 471 = ARU 167 = NALK 260 = SAA VI 326 = K 446 = TCAE 178. 620* 118. ADD 435 = ARU 447 = SAA XIV 168 = 81–2–4, 161.

the sources

39

7th Cen. 119. ADD 457 = ARU 78 = SAA XIV 229 = Rm 463. ? 120. ADD 1168 + ADD 1222 = SAA XIV 345 = Ki 1904–10–9, 135 + Ki 1904–10–9, 373. 121. ADD 1205 = SAA XIV 355 = Ki 1904–10–9, 231+272+376 = AJSL 42 (1926), p. 251. 122. Iraq 32 (1970), pp. 145–146 + Pl. XXIV = SAA XIV 399 = BM 134551. 123. ADD 426 = ARU 89 = NALK 145 = SAA XIV 198 = K 13845. 124. ADD 458 = ARU 352 = SAA XIV 265 = 83–1–18, 711 + 83–1–18, 862. 125. ADD 369 = ARU 388 = SAA XIV 254 = K 1490. 3. Sale of Land and People with a Pledge (2) Nineveh (2) 681 (Ahi-¢allÒ) 88. ADD 59 = ARU 123 = NALK 15 = SAA VI 91 = K 333. 672 (DannÊia) 89. ADD 64 = ARU 152 = NALK 90 = SAA VI 245 = K 349. 4. Division of Property/Inheritance (Aššur—3) 744 2. StAT 2 101 = A 962 = Ass 11393bu = ALA N25 (1). 625* 61. CTNMC 68 = FNALD 18 = Museum no. 8612 = AECT 61 616* 64. SAAB 5, pp. 136–137 = VAT 20363 see PNA, pp. 19a, 760. 5. Redemption from a Pledge (Nineveh—1) 7th Cen. 96. ADD 85 = ARU 656 = SAA XIV 216 = Bu 91–5–9, 79 = Radner, 1999a, p. 105.

40

chapter one

6. Private Gifts (Nineveh—1) 627* 59. ADD 619 = ARU 47 = NALK 69 = SAA XIV 155 = K 386.

II. Contracts (6) 1. Loan of Silver with a Pledge (Nineveh—1) 7th Cen. 94. ADD 78 = ARU 155 = NALK 336 = SAA XIV 181 = 83–1–18, 396. 2. Debt Note for Silver with a Pledge (Nineveh—4) 694 (AddatÒ) 86. ADD 58 = ARU 150 = NALK 7 = SAA VI 81 = 80–7–19, 48. 693 (Indibî) 87. ADD 66 = ARU 124 = NALK 112 = SAA VI 97 = K 414 = FNALD 24. 666 (RÏmanni-Adad) 90. ADD 65 = ARU 141 = NALK 242 = SAA VI 307 = K 387. 7th Cen. 95. ADD 79 = ARU 130 = SAA XIV 209 = 80–7–19, 368. 3. Payment of a Debt by pledging of Persons (Aššur—1) 614* 92. StAT 1 36 = VAT 20786 = Ass 13865 = ALA N33 (60).

III. Receipts (1) Aššur (1) 622* 63. SAAB 5 17 = VAT 14450 = Ass 9570t = ALA N9 (20) = KAM I 17.

the sources

41

B. Administrative Records (47)

I. Population Management and Military Administration (15) 1. Deportees and Displaced People (14) Calah (2) TP III 150. Iraq 23 (1961), pp. 27–28 = ND 2443+. 8th Cen. 152. CTN II 113 + Pl. 49 = ND 451 = Fales, 1974, p. 187 ff., n. 6. Nineveh (12) Esa-Ass 154. ADD 763 = SAA XI 169 = K 4718. 7th Cen. 155. ADD 882 = SAA XI 174 = K 947. 156. ADD 891 = SAA XI 154 = K 93. ? 157. ADD 783 = SAA XI 173 = K 7399. 158. ADD 826 = SAA XI 172 = K 897. 159. ADD 911 = SAA XI 146 = Rm 2,247. 160. CT 53 321 = SAA XI 200 = K 7294. 163. SAA XI 199 = K 14233. 164. ADD 719 = SAA XI 181 = K 7444. 165. ADD 811 = SAA XI 194 = K 3502. 166. SAA XI 195 = K 20348. 167. SAA XI 196 = K 18317. 2. Schedules of Land and People (1) Nineveh ? 127. ADD 825 = SAA XI 232 = K 859.

42

chapter one II. The “Harran Census” (15)

Nineveh (Sargon II) 135. ADB 1 = CCNA 1 = SAA XI 201 = K 2017. 136. ADB 2 = CCNA 2 = SAA XI 202 = K 8125+. 137. ADB 3 = CCNA 3 = SAA XI 203 = K 8134. 138. ADB 13 = CCNA 10 = SAA XI 205 = K 8957. 139. ADB 8 = CCNA 9 = SAA XI 206 = K 8179. 140. ADB 6 = CCNA 5 = SAA XI 207 = K 4754+. 141. ADB 14 = CCNA 6 = SAA XI 208 = K 13394. 142. ADB 9+11+12+16 = CCNA 11+13+14+16 = SAA XI 209 = K 9728+. 143. ADB 4 = CCNA 4 = SAA XI 213 = K 4767+. 144. ADB 21 = CCNA 8 = SAA XI 214 = Rm 478. 145. ADB 20 = CCNA 19 = SAA XI 218 = K 6951. 146. ADB 5 = CCNA 21 = SAA XI 219 = K 4729. 147. ADB 7 = CCNA 22 = SAA XI 220 = Rm 2,130+79–7–8, 102. 148. ADB 10 = CCNA 12 = SAA XI 210 = K 13132+91–5–9, 103. 149. ADB 19 = CCNA 7 = SAA XI 211 = 79–7–8, 337.

III. Royal Grants and Private Votive Donations (7) 1. Royal Grants (6) Nineveh (4) Adad-nÏrÊri III 128. ADD 399 + 803 = ARU 2 = NARGD 5 = SAA XII 7 = K 11441 + 11463. TP III? 129. ADD 861 = SAA XII 16 = K 11898 (Copied twice by Johns as ADD 861 and 772) 130. SAA XII 17 = K 14619. Ass 131. ADD 741 + 741bis + 465 + 749 = CCNA 23 + 23bis = SAA XII 27 + 28 = K 753 + 1765 + 4291 + 6236 + 9797 + 11937 + 13448 + 14249 + 14271 + 14312 + 20353 + 1749.

the sources

43

Aššur (2) Senn 132. KAV 39 = SAA XII 87 = VAT 8883 = Ass 1418   ¤ SVAT III, p. 9–12; NARGD, App. 4b; ALA N5 (26). 683 133. PKTA 27–30 = SAA XII 86 = VAT 9656 = Ass 1170 ¤ SVAT I, pp. 3–9; NARGD, App. 4a = ALA N2 (9). 2. Private Votive Donations (1) Nineveh ? 134. SAAB 1 (1987), pp. 57–63 = SAA XII 98 = BM 118796.

IV. Lists of Rations (Private Archive—10) Aššur 615* 168. StAT 2 11 = A 1182 = Ass 14232c (= VAT 8680: 18 ff). 169. KAJ 243 = VAT 8833 (published by Ebeling in 1927 only in cuneiform). Unpublished Texts: 170. VAT 8669 (615*). 171. VAT 8586 (615*). 172. VAT 8664 (615*). 173. VAT 8681 (614*). 174. VAT 8674 (614*). 175. VAT 8605. 176. VAT 8665. 177. VAT 8678.

44

chapter one C. Court Decisions (2)

Aššur 638* 91. ARU 655 = SAAS V, 28 = AoF 24 (1997), pp. 129–133 = VAT 5606 = VAS 1 96. PC (SÏn-kÏnu-Òdi) 93. SAAS VI, p. 369 = VAT 19500 = Ass 11682d = ALA N28 (4).

D. Letters (6) I. Letters to the King (2) Nineveh S II 151. ABL 212 = SAA XV 181 = K 679. Senn 153. SAA XVII 114 = CT 54 401 = Sm 549 + Sm 1213. II. Petitions to Ofcials (2) Nineveh (Esa) 31. CT 53 9 = SAA XVI 53 = K 880b. Unknown provenance 85. NABU 2002/90 = A 3660. III. Other Letters (2) Nineveh—? 161. CT 53 325 = SAA XV 309 = K 7337. 162. CT 53 604 = SAA XV 303 = K 15009.

CHAPTER I

APPENDIX B

The Texts from Nineveh According to Their Geographical Setting Adia—(town in central Assyria)—see note below* Adian (or Adi-il, town in central Assyria)—101 (Sale of Land and People); The following two place names are also mentioned in this text: Kannu’; Maliyati. Anditâ—see note below Arbail (ArbÏla)—124 (Sale of Land and People); 132—(Royal Grant) Arumu (Aram)—120 (Sale of Land and People) Babylonia—151; 153; 155–156; (Deportees) BÏt-šašširi—128 (Royal Grant) Calah—4, 26, 28 (Slaves); and see note below; 134 (Private Donation) Dadi-ualla—(town in the province of TalmÖsa)—88 (Sale of Land and People + pledge) HarrÊn—46, 75 (Slaves); 135–149 (The “Harran Census”)—143 toponyms** Ispallurê—(town in Izalla)—113 (Sale of Land and People) Kalhu—see Calah Kannu’—see Adian Kapar MallÊÉi—134 (Private Donation) Kapar Nabû-nÊÉir—see note below KÊšijÏri—see note below Kurru- . . .—see note below LahÒru—(city in Babylonia)—39? (Slaves); 111 (Sale of Land and People) Maliyati—see Adian MÊt rab-šÊqê (Aramaic caption: mt rbšqn)—114 (Sale of Land and People) Nabur—(city near NaÉibina)—104 (Sale of Land and People) NÏrubu/NÏrab—(town near Aleppo)—115 (Sale of Land and People) Niku’a—122 (Sale of Land and People) Nineveh (NÒnua)—6, 15, 18, 22, 24, 29, 35, 41, 59, 68 (Slaves) 109 (Sale of Land and people) PaddÊnu—125 (Sale of Land and People)

46

chapter one

Pattu- . . .—see note below QudÊru—9 (Slaves) RaÉappa—89 (Sale of Land and People + pledge); 133—(Royal Grant) SingÊra (Jebel SinjÊr)—see note below ŠibanÒba—(town in central Assyria)—102 (Sale of Land and People) Šiddi-hiriti—(town near DÖr-ŠarrukÒn)—98 (Sale of Land and People) Šulmu-birÊti—see note below TalmÖsa—see Dadiualla Ti’i—105 (Sale of Land and People) Til-Barsib—(city near Carchemish)—40 (Slaves) Til-Bu . . .—127 (Schedule of Land and People) Til-Nahiri—112 (Sale of Land and People) Til-ra . . .—see note below Urakka—(near NaÉÒbina)—11 (Slaves) Zabarra—see note below * The following place names are mentioned in Text 131 (Royal Grant): Adia; Anditâ; Calah; Kapar Nabû-nÊÉir; KÊšiÏjri; Kurru- . . .; Pattu- . . .; Til-ra . . .; SingÊra; Šulmu-birÊti; Zabarra ** For the location of the toponyms enumerated in the “Harran Census” see discussion, above.

CHAPTER TWO

A SURVEY OF THE LOWER STRATUM FAMILIES

This chapter briey surveys all 447 Lower Stratum families in the Neo-Assyrian period. The study of each family opens with citation of the text in which it is attested, followed by a short commentary. Occasionally the operative section of the text is newly restored. Each entry for every family also includes a study of the formulation of the text and terminology; family type and size, personal names, and professions; marriage pattern and children’s age. Other aspects of the texts examined are the prices and the identity of the parties engaged in legal transactions. The chapter is divided into seven main parts as follows: A. Slaves; B. Pledged Persons; C. Persons enumerated in sales and lists of “Land and People”; D. Royal Grants; E. The “Harran Census”; F. Deportees and Displaced Persons; G. Recipients of Rations. In each part the families are presented chronologically: the undated texts are arranged by their archives, and are followed by the unassigned texts. The conclusions of this chapter are presented in Appendix A: tables 1–17.

A. Slaves Family no. 1: “EmÖqÒ-AššÖr, his wife, his 3 sons (and) his daughter, a total of 6 persons of Nabû-ahu-iddina son of Nabû-šumu-ibni, the scribe” (ND 673 = BaM 24 (1993), p. 247 = Text no. 1).1 This large nuclear family of six persons, a couple and four children, was sold in Calah in 800 B.C. The age of the children is not mentioned, and only the name of the father is attested.2 The family is sold to Nabû-tuklatÖxa by the scribe, Nabû-

1 For a previous study of this text see Deller—Fadhil, 1993, pp. 247, 265. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 135, 233; PNA, pp. 96a(1), 799, 898a(1). 2 For the name EmÖqÒ-AššÖr see PNA, p. 396a.

48

chapter two

ahu-iddina,3 for 185 minas of bronze (an average price per soul of 30.8 minas of bronze).4 Nabû-tuklatÖxa was a “palace scribe” in Calah in the reigns of Adad-nÏrÊri III and Shalmaneser IV.5 He bought at least 32 slaves in the course of 12 years (800–788 B.C.), including groups of seven, six, ve and two slaves (two texts), but only one family.6 Since no sons or grandsons are mentioned in the clauses of penalties for litigation in any of his legal transactions, it is reasonable to suppose that he was a eunuch, and his large group of slaves (including the family of EmÖqÒ-AššÖr) were a kind of substitute for a family of his own.7 Family no. 2: “[PN], (and) his mother . . . a total of 13 persons of BÏl-nÊÉir” (A 962 = StAT 2 101 = Text no. 2).8 This small nuclear family consists only of a man and his anonymous mother. The son, whose name is lost, is presented as the “head” of the family. They are attested in a settlement sealed between two persons from Aššur, dated to the beginning of the reign of Tiglath-pileser III (744 B.C.). It is not clear whether BÏl-nÊÉir and Abu-¢Êba are former partners who are dividing their property or relatives who are dividing a paternal inheritance.9 The property includes

3 Perhaps the same Nabû-ahu-iddina is mentioned in a wine list (NWL 2 iv 5 = CTN I, p. 130). See also PNA, p. 799a(1). 4 For the prices of slaves in the Neo-Assyrian Period see Fales, 1996, pp. 30, 12*–13*; Radner, 1997, pp. 230–248. The average price of a slave sold with a group of slaves or with his family in the Neo-Assyrian period is 32.18 shekels of silver, see Galil, forthcoming (a). For the suggestion that one mina of copper corresponded roughly in value to one shekel of silver see Fales, 1996, p. 20. 5 The archive of Nabû-tuklatÖxa was discovered in Room 57 of the North-West Palace at Calah in 1989. See Deller—Fadhil, 1993, p. 243; Pedersen, 1998, p. 150 (= “Calah 9”). For the families of Nabû-tuklatÖxa’s father and grandfather see vol. II of my study. 6 The 32 slaves (22 men and 10 women) were bought in ten legal transactions for at least 572 minas of bronze (or copper) and two minas of silver. See PNA, p. 898a(1). 7 For eunuchs in the Neo-Assyrian Period see Grayson, 1995; Deller, 1999; Watanabe, 1999a; Tadmor, 2002. Watanabe points out that “The omission of the person’s sons or grandsons [from the clause of penalties for litigation] may, therefore, enable one to identify the person as a eunuch, even if the title ša rÏši is not added” (1999a, p. 319). See also Hawkins, 2002. 8 For previous studies and notes on this text see Radner, 1997, p. 104; Pedersen, 1986, p. 118, archive N 25(1); PNA, pp. 19a(2), 158b(3), 174b(9), 324a(3–4), 477a(1), 746a(1). 9 BÏl-nÊÉir is the name of two different persons (a priest and a scribe) mentioned as witnesses in a text from the reign of Tiglath-pileser III, dated to 742 B.C. (VAT 9749 = SAAB 9 136 r 11, e 1). One of them may be identied with BÏl-nÊÉir attested in StAT 2 101, but it is not clear which one. Åkerman and Radner identify him with the priest (PNA, p. 324a [3–4]), but it is not certain. Out of the six witnesses enumer-

a survey of the lower stratum families

49

18 slaves (probably, 12 men and six women), and a chariot. BÏl-nÊÉir gets the chariot and 13 slaves, including the mentioned slave and his mother, and Abu-¢Êba gets ve slaves (one of them is a baker). Family no. 3: “Thuri-[. . .]bi, his wife (and) his son, slaves of Nabû-kibsÒ-uÉur” (VAT 19872 = Text no. 3—Unpublished).10 This small nuclear family of three persons, a couple and their son, was sold in Aššur in 727 B.C. The son’s age is not mentioned, and only the name of the father is attested (but it is broken). The family was sold by Nabû-kibsÒ-uÉur, a village manager of Agurima (probably near Aššur), to Urdu-Šamaš and Dadu, for 3.5 minas of silver (an average of 70 shekels per person).11 Family no. 4: “Šamaš-immi, his wife, his son (and) his 4 daughters, a total of 7 persons, slaves of Gabrî” (ADD 248 = SAA VI 6 = Text no. 4).12 This large nuclear family of seven persons, a couple and ve children, was sold for 180 minas of copper, probably in Calah in 713 B.C. (an average of 25.7 minas of copper per person).13 The family was sold by Gabrî to Mušallim-IssÊr, a village manager of the chief eunuch in Calah in the reigns of Tiglath-pileser III, Shalmaneser V and Sargon II. At least 20 slaves were bought by Mušallim-IssÊr (attested in nine legal transactions), for at least 450 minas of bronze, over about 30 years (742–713 B.C.). No other slave families are attested in these texts. Since

ated in StAT 2 101, two are priests and two are scribes (the other two are an architect and a baker’s son). Abu-¢Êba is also the name of one of the slaves that BÏl-nÊÉir got, the only one entitled “LÚ*.ARAD” in this text (line 2). Clearly therefore we should distinguish Abu-¢Êba the slave from Abu-¢Êba BÏl-nÊÉir’s partner/relative. The entries “Abu-¢Êba”, “AššÖr-bÊni” and “AššÖr-bÏlu-uÉur” in PNA, pp. 19a(2), 158b(3), 174b(9) are mistaken, since Abu-¢Êba is not Aššur-bÊni’s slave. On the contrary, all of them, Abu-¢Êba, AššÖr-bÊni, and AššÖr-bÏlu-uÉur, are among the group of 13 slaves that BÏl-nÊÉir acquired. 10 I would like to thank Karen Radner for sending me the translation of this passage by e-mail (on 9 Oct. 2002). For previous studies and notes on this unpublished text see Radner, 1997, pp. 103, 233; PNA, pp. 365a(1), 714b(1), 841a(1). 11 The price is high. The average price per person in this text (70 shekels of silver) is more then double the average price in other texts (32.18 shekels of silver). See Galil, forthcoming (a). 12 For previous studies of this text see ARU 455; Postgate, 1973, p. 91; Parpola, 1979, p. 145; Menzel, AST, T214, no. 292; Kwasman, 1988, no. 185; Radner, 1997, pp. 135, 232–233; Mattila, 2000, pp. 68, 100; PNA, pp. 416b(4), 775a(6). 13 For the idea that this text originated in Calah and was brought to Nineveh at some time, see Parpola, 1986, p. 229, note 31; Kwasman, 1988, pp. xliv, 220; PNA, p. 416b(4).

50

chapter two

no sons or grandsons of Mušallim-IssÊr are mentioned in the clauses of penalties for litigation in any of his legal transactions, he too was presumably a eunuch, like Nabû-tuklatÖxa.14 Families nos. 5–8: These families are attested in ADD 246 (= SAA VI 52 = Text no. 5): (Family no. 5): “Ahi-nÖrÒ, his wife (and) daughter, a total of 3; (Family no. 6): Mannu-kÒ-NÒnua, his wife (and) his 3 sons, a total of 5;(Family no. 7): Nabû-Ï¢ir (and) his wife; (Family no. 8): Nabû-iddina (and) his wife; NÖrÊia (= single); a grand total of 13 persons”.15 The structure and size of all these nuclear families are evident, and in all of them only the name of the father is attested. The detailed description ts well with the grand total. NÖrÊia was probably a bachelor, and was not a relative of Nabû-iddina. Šumma-ilÊni bought these 13 persons, in Nineveh, from three sons of BÏl-HarrÊn-taklÊk, for 6.5 minas of silver (an average price per soul of 30 shekels of silver). The date of this text is lost, but it should be dated to the end of the reign of Sargon II or to the reign of Sennacherib because of archival context (see below). Šumma-ilÊni was a chariot driver in Nineveh in the reign of Sargon II and Sennacherib. He bought at least 50 slaves, including seven families,16 attested in 12 legal transactions,17 in the course of about 30 years (709–680 B.C.).18 Family no. 9: “[. . .]-šarru-uÉur (and) his mother [a total of 2] slaves of KiqillÊnu” (ADD 236 = SAA VI 53 = Text no. 6).19 This small nuclear family consists only of a man and his anonymous mother. The son, whose name is broken, is presented as the “head” of the family. They are 14

See above, family no. 1, and note no. 7. For previous studies of this text see ARU 82; Parpola, 1979, p. 145; Menzel, AST, T205, no. 210; Kwasman, 1988, no. 376; Radner, 1997, pp. 126, 242–243; PNA, pp. 86b(10), 234b, 304a(2), 695b(7), 829b(3), 834b(2), 968a(4), 1171a(3). 16 See below, families nos. 9, 18–20. 17 SAA VI 34, 38–41, 45, 48, 52–56. 18 Šumma-ilÊnixs documents may indicate slave-trading: in SAA VI 40, 15 slaves are listed (see families nos. 18–20, below), and SAA VI 39 (694 B.C.) indicates a payment of 18 minas of silver, probably for slaves. At least 22 slaves were bought from BÏlHarrÊn-issÏ’a (SAA VI 40–41, and perhaps also SAA VI 39—see PNA, p. 302b[4]). For the business of Šumma-ilÊni see Galil, 1998, pp. 38–39. For slave-trading in Nipur in the eighth century B.C. see Cole, 1996, pp. 61–62. In his opinion, “Slave-trading was an important part of the business that was concluded among the markets of the alluvial plain during the middle of the eighth century” (p. 61). 19 For previous studies and notes on this text see ARU 80; Parpola, 1979, p. 142; Kwasman, 1988, no. 369; PNA, p. 618b(6). 15

a survey of the lower stratum families

51

bought from KiqillÊnu by Šumma-ilÊni, a chariot driver, in Nineveh, for 1 mina of silver (30 shekels per person). The date of this text is lost, but it can be dated to the end of the reign of Sargon II or to the reign of Sennacherib, because of archival context.20 Family no. 10: “¾du-qidira (= single); the woman [. . .]; (and) BÊbÊia, [her] daugh[ter], a total of 3 persons, [his] slave[s]” (ADD 294 = SAA VI 116 = Text no. 7).21 This small single-parent family includes only a woman (whose name is lost), and BÊbÊia her daughter. They were sold together with a third woman (¾du-qidira), probably a single person who is not a relative of the woman and her daughter. They were bought by RÒsÊ[ia], the bodyguard of [. . .], in Nineveh, in 700 B.C. The seller’s name is lost. Family no. 11: A small single-parent family of three persons: a woman and her two small daughters. It is attested in an unpublished text from the vicinity of MaxallÊnÊte (O 3660 = Text no. 8 = PNA, pp. 233a, 452a–b). The family was bought by Handî, from a person named Ateqanni in 700 B.C. Handî is a central gure in the archive from the vicinity of MaxallÊnÊte. He was a palace prefect (“šaknu ša ekalli”), in the reigns of Sennacherib, Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal; in the course of 30 years (700–670 B.C.), he bought at least 16 slaves, including eight single people and three families (see below, families nos. 22 and 41).22 Families nos. 12–15: These families are attested in ADD 241 (= SAA VI 130 = Text no. 9):23 (Family no. 12): “[PN], his [. . .], his 2 sons, (and) [his] daughter, [a total of 4 or 5];

20

For the date and for the business of Šumma-ilÊni see families nos. 5–8. For previous studies and notes on this text see ARU 49; Parpola, 1979, p. 153; Kwasman, 1988, no. 109; PNA, pp. 243b(2), 394b, 1053a(2–3). 22 For the business of Handî/hdy and his son HarrÊnÊiu/hrny see Lipinski, 1975, pp. 144–150; idem, 1994, pp. 213–215; idem, 1998, pp. 293–295; idem, 1998a, pp. 41–42; idem, 2004, pp. 131–139. For the archive from MaxallÊnÊte see Lipinski, 1985, pp. 340–348; Garelli, 1986, pp. 244–245; idem, 1998, p. 175. 23 For previous studies of this text see ARU 73; Parpola, 1979, pp. 143–144; Kwasman, 1988, no. 84; Radner, 1997, pp. 232–233; PNA, pp. 175a(14), 260b(3), 917a(8), 1172a(9). 21

52

chapter two

(Family no. 13): Nabû-[. . ., his? . . .], his [. . .] sons, daughter (and) 2 m[aids], a total of 7; (Family no. 14): Âil-b[Ïl], [his . . ., ] his [. . .], a total of 3; (Family no. 15): AššÖr-bÏlu-uÉur (and) his wife, a total [of 2]”; or: AššÖr-bÏlu-uÉur, his wife and [his] brother, [a total of 3]; a grand total of 17 persons, slaves of [Naxdi-ilu]”. The size of Family no. 12 is not clear. It probably numbers 4 or 5 persons: the father, whose name is lost, and three anonymous children (two sons and a daughter). If indeed the sign before “2 DUMU.MEŠ” in line 3 is šú, then it is possible to restore: “[ARAD]-šú” = “his [slave]” (of Naxdi-ilu, the seller); or “[MÍ-šú” = “his [wife]”. See above, family no. 15. No. 13 is a large family of seven persons: the father, Nabû-. . ., a daughter, two maids and at least two sons. The identity of the seventh person is not clear: it might be his wife (as suggested by Kwasman and Parpola in SAA VI), but it is also possible, to read “his brother” instead of “his wife”, or to suppose that the family included three sons and no wife. It is important to note that this slave “has” two maids, probably acquired before he was enslaved. It is clear that Family no. 14 includes three persons, but only the total and the father’s name are preserved. The sufx -šú in line 5, indicates that the persons enumerated in this line are Âil-b[Ïl]’s relatives. The restoration of line 6 is not clear, and a few different readings were proposed by the scholars.24 In my opinion, there are two possibilities: (1) “PN, MÍ-šú PAB [2]”; or (2) “PN, MÍ-šú PAB-[šú PAB 3]” (see above, family no. 15). If we accept the rst one, we would have to read “his wife” in line 3 (and not “his slave”), and to suppose that family no. 12 included ve persons (and not four), since the grand total is 17. These 17 slaves were bought by Bal¢i-Aia from Naxdi-ilu, the deputy (governor), in Nineveh in 696 B.C. The price is 8.5 minas of silver

24 Johns transliterated: “PN, MÍ-šú PAB-šú” (ADD, I, no. 241, p. 169). In 1913, Kohler and Ungnad read: (6) “AššÖr-bêlu-uÉur, sein Weib, [seinen] Bruder (7) zusammen 3” (ARU, p. 61). Parpola proposed another reading for the end of line 6: “PAB-[šú PAB 3]!” (1979, p. 143). A very different reading was offered by Kwasman in 1988: “Aššur-bÏlu-uÉur, a total [of 1]”; but in 1991 Kwasman and Parpola reiterated Parpola’s proposal (SAA VI, pp. 117–118).

a survey of the lower stratum families

53

(30 shekels of silver per soul). It is possible that the slaves originate in QudÊru, since the mayor of this city is mentioned in the list of witnesses (line r. 10).25 Family no. 16: This family is attested in ADD 614 (= SAA VI 128 = Text no. 10). The restoration of the beginning of the operative section of this broken text is problematic, since very few signs were preserved in lines 2’–5’, as follows: 2’ 3’ 4’ 5’

[x x x x x x x x]-ni! MÍ-šú m [x x x x x x x x] DUMU.MÍ-su MÍ [x x x x x x x x x x] x m [x x x x x x x x x x]-a

2’ 3’ 4’ 5’

[x x x x x x x x]-ni, his wife [x x x x x x x x], his daughter the woman [x x x x x x x x x x] x the man [x x x x x x x x x x]-a

The rest is broken off. There are two main possibilities to understand this section, and neither is preferable: 1. only one family is presented in lines 2’–3’ of this text. It consisted of four persons, all enumerated by their personal names; 2. If we assume that only the personal names of the fathers in this text were listed, we should separate the family in line 2’ (a couple without children) from the family in line 3’, with a father and his anonymous daughter. The relation between these families (or family) and the persons mentioned in lines 4’–5’ is not clear. These people were sold in Nineveh in 696 B.C., but the names of the parties in this legal transaction are lost and only the names of the scribe, Nabûxa, and the eponym ofcial, Šulmu-bÏli, governor of TalmÖsa, are attested.26 Family no. 17: “TarÒbi-IssÊr, his brother, his wife (and) her daughter, a total of 4 per[sons], slaves of BÊbilÊiu” (ADD 244 = SAA VI 96 = Text no. 11).27 This extended family has four persons: a couple, the brother of the head of the family, and a daughter, that is dened as “her” daughter, probably meaning from previous marriage. The ages of the brother

25

See PNA, p. 175a(14). For previous studies of this text see ARU 93; Radner, 1997, pp. 97, 232–233; PNA, p. 789a(15). 27 For previous studies of this text see ARU 159; Parpola, 1979, p. 144; Menzel, AST, T197, no. 145; Kwasman, 1988, no. 72; Radner, 1997, pp. 220, 232–233; PNA, pp. 244b(8–10), 273a(2). For the date of this text see PNA, pp. 174b–175a(13, a–2’), and for the personal name TarÒbi-IssÊr see Tallqvist, 1918, p. 231a. 26

54

chapter two

and the daughter are not stated, and only the family head’s name is mentioned. They were sold by BÊbilÊiu to the woman Barsipitu for three minas of silver (an average of 45 shekels per person), in Nineveh, probably in 695 B.C.28 Families nos. 18–20: These three families are attested in ADD 238 (= SAA VI 40 = Text no. 12): 3 (Family no. 18): “[. . .-uÉa]lla – 5 4 (Family no. 19): [. . .]mu –6 5 (Family no. 20): [. . .] –4 6 a grand total of 15

persons, persons, persons, [persons, s]laves of BÏl-Ha[rrÊn-issÏx]a”.29

These families/groups are enumerated by the pattern: “PN—x ZI.MEŠ”. In an Aramaic caption attested in SAA VI 111 (see below, family no. 37; text no. 23), a similar pattern clearly denes a family (see also chapter 3). But since it is not clear whether the text enumerates families or working groups, these families are dened in this study as “unclear” (see Table 2). The grand total indicates that the head of the family/group is included in the total number of each. These slaves were sold to Šumma-ilÊni, a chariot driver, in Nineveh in 693 B.C., by BÏl-HarrÊn-issÏ’a, probably an Assyrian ofcial involved in slave-trading.30 Family no. 21: It is unclear whether one or two families are attested in ADD 240 (= SAA VI 41 = Text no. 13). Two personal names and “3 sons” are mentioned in lines 4–7 of this broken text, as follows: 4 5 6 7

m

DINGIR–na-tan [x x x x x] a-du-ni–¢u-[bu x x x x x] 3 DUMU.MEŠ-šú [x x x x x] PAB 7 ZI.MEŠ [ARAD.MEŠ ša m EN–KASKAL–KI-ia] m

4 5 6 7

Il-natan [. . . . .] AdÖnÒ-¢Ö[bu. . . . .] his 3 sons [. . . . .] a total of 7 persons, [slaves of BÏl-HarrÊn-issÏxa]

28 The slaves were probably from Urakka (near NaÉÒbina) since this toponym is attested in the clauses of penalties for litigation in this text (line 19). For the location of Urakka see Parpola-Porter, 2001, p. 18, and map 3. 29 For previous studies of this text see ARU 201; Parpola, 1979, p. 143; Kwasman, 1988, no. 361; Radner, 1997, pp. 220, 232–233; PNA, p. 302b(4). For a different reading of this text see Kwasman, 1988, pp. 415–416. 30 For BÏl-HarrÊn-issÏ’a see PNA, p. 302b(3–4), and see also families nos. 5–8, above, and note 18, for the businesses of Šumma-ilÊni and BÏl-HarrÊn-issÏ’a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

55

A family is clearly mentioned in these lines, and it consists of at least four persons, three sons and their father, but it is not clear who their father is: Il-natan or AdÖnÒ-¢Öbu. Two main restorations of this text are proposed below, as neither of them is to be preferred: 1. The text enumerates only one family of seven persons: Il-natan; his three sons, all mentioned by their personal names, including AdÖnÒ-¢Ö[bu], and three anonymous women, listed in line 6, after the sons (they might be his wife and two daughters: “[MÍ-šú 2 DUMU.MÍ-šú]”); 2. If we assume that only the personal names of the fathers in this text are attested (and perhaps their professions), we should distinguish the family in line 4 (“Il-natan, [the . . ., and his wife]”) from the family in lines 5–6, which consists of AdÖnÒ-¢Ö[bu], the father, and his anonymous wife and three sons, as follows: “(5) AdÖnÒ-¢Ö[bu, the . . ., his wife]; (6) his 3 sons [a total of 5 persons]”. Like Families nos. 18–20 these seven slaves were also sold by BÏl-HarrÊn-issÏxa to Šumma-ilÊni in Nineveh, in the same year and in the same month: Nisan, 693.31 Family no. 22: A nuclear family that includes a couple without children: SÏx-lawÊ and his wife Balaiâ. It is attested in an unpublished text from the vicinity of MaxallÊnÊte (O 3706 = Text no. 14).32 This couple was bought by Handî, a palace prefect, for 35 shekels of silver, from SilimAdad of MaxallÊnÊte in 693 B.C.33 Family no. 23: This small family is attested in ADD 232 (= SAA VI 89 = Text no. 15): 3 “Amurrî, [his] slave; [. . .]-šar-AššÖr; 4 (and the woman) Urkittu-ilÊxÒ, [his . . .]; 5 a family (É) of 3 persons [. . .]”.34

This text is broken and the restoration of the ends of lines 4 and 5 is not clear. One possibility is to read “his . . .” after the personal name of the woman in line 4.35 The persons are dened by the term É

31 For previous studies of this text see ARU 59; Parpola, 1979, p. 143; Kwasman, 1988, no. 360; Radner, 1997, pp. 232–233; PNA, pp. 54b, 302b(4), 523a(2). 32 See PNA, pp. 452a–b, 1102a, 1108b(5). 33 For the business of Handî/hdy see family no. 11, above, and note 15. 34 For previous studies of this text see ARU 458; Parpola, 1979, p. 141; Kwasman, 1988, no. 13; Radner, 1997, pp. 232–233; PNA, pp. 67b(1)–68a, 108b(1). 35 In Kwasman’s opinion (1988, p. 18): “the most likely restoration is [MÍ-šú]”.

56

chapter two

(= “bÏtu”), which usually means in the Neo-Assyrian period a house or a household.36 People dened as a household might be just persons living in the same house that were not relatives or members of a same family (in ADD 232 they might be a single person, Amurrî, and a couple, [. . .]-šar-AššÖr and Urkittu-ilÊxÒ, [his wife], who lived in a same house, before they were sold). Yet in a few Neo-Assyrian texts, the term É-PN (= “bÏt PN”) clearly relates to an extended family. For example, in SAA XI 153–154 a few nuclear families (qinnu) are presented as a branch of an extended family (bÏt PN): see SAA XI 153 r. 8: “qin-ni ša É me-gi-bi”. A few scholars translate bÏtu in ADD 232 = “a household”,37 while others prefer to dene them as a family.38 In my opinion, two restorations are possible: 1. “Amurrî (a single); [. . .]-šar-AššÖr (and) Urkitu-ilÊxi, [his wife]”, a “household” who lived in a same house, before they were sold; 2. They were members of a same family, but it is not clear if [. . .]-šar-AššÖr was Amurrî’s son or brother, and if Urkittu-ilÊxÒ was Amurrî’s wife, daughter, mother, sister, daughter-in-law etc. These three slaves were sold by Šarranu to Ahi-¢allÒ, governess (šakintu) of the central city,39 for a high price, four minas of silver (80 shekels per person), in Nineveh in 686 B.C. Family no. 24: This family is attested in ADD 274 (= SAA VI 172 = Text no. 16): 3 “[x x x x x]; [x x]–NanÊia, his wife; 4 [x x x x x x x, a total of] 6 persons”.40

The rest is broken off. Two restorations of these broken lines are possible: 1. Only one family is mentioned, a couple and four other members of the family, for example, his son and his three daughters, his three sons and his

36 See Radner, 1997, p. 200, with earlier literature. For the term É (= “bÏtu”) see also StAT 2 142, and Radner, 1997, p. 187. 37 For this proposal see Kwasman, 1988, p. 17; see also SAA VI, p. 77. 38 Radner, 1997, pp. 232–233. 39 For the title “šakintu” and for her activities see Kinnier Wilson, 1972, pp. 44, 84; Dalley—Postgate, 1984, pp. 12–14; Heltzer, 1987, pp. 33–40; Teppo, 2005, pp. 53–63. For Ahi-¢allÒ see also Garelli, 1998, p. 177; PNA, pp. 67b(1)–68a; Teppo, 2005, pp. 56–57, 63, 78, 82. 40 For previous studies of this text see ARU 69; Parpola, 1979, pp. 150–151; Radner, 1997, pp. 96, 234–235; Tallqvist, 1918, p. 232b.

a survey of the lower stratum families

57

daughter; etc.; 2. Two families are mentioned, the rst in line 3 and the second in line 4. This second possibility is less reasonable since only seven signs are missing in line 4. These six slaves were sold by Tirî, prefect (šakinu) of the Harranians, in Nineveh in 685 B.C. Family no. 25: “KandalÊnu, his 3 sons, his wife, his 2 daughters, his brother, (and) his (brother’s) 2 sons” (ADD 230 = SAA VI 177 = Text no. 17).41 This large family of ten persons consists of two nuclear families: the main one has seven persons: a couple and their ve children (three sons and two daughters), and the secondary one is a single parent family that includes the brother of KandalÊnu and his two sons. The brother’s wife is missing, but the reason is not clear (see chapter IX, below). This family is one of the three largest slave families attested in a NeoAssyrian text. It was sold by Nabû-erÒba to UlÖlÊiu in Nineveh in 684 B.C. for six minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (an average of 36 shekels per person). Three years later, in 681 B.C., Nabû-erÒba sells another nine or ten slaves (SAA VI 193), and it is possible that he is engaged in slave-trading (see families nos. 28–31, below). Family no. 26: “HamnÖnu, his wife, his mother, Addâ (and) Il-sÖri, his brothers, (and) his 2 sisters, a total of 7 persons, slaves of Urda-IssÊr” (ADD 231 = SAA VI 110 = Text no. 18).42 This large family of seven persons includes two nuclear families: the rst consists only of HamnÖnu and his wife, and the second has ve persons: HamnÖnu’s mother, and his two brothers and two sisters. It is possible that HamnÖnu became the head of this family after his father’s death. This family was sold in Nineveh in 681 B.C. by Urda-IssÊr to SÏx-maxÊdÒ for a relatively low price: two minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (about 17 shekels per person). SÏx-maxÊdÒ was a village manager of the crown prince, Esarhaddon. During the last three years of Sennacherib’s reign (683–680) he bought at least 17 slaves in three different legal transactions. In all three texts the seller is the same Urdu-IssÊr, and the total sum was ve minas and 41 For previous studies of this text see ARU 60; Fales, 1975, p. 332; Parpola, 1979, p. 141; Kwasman, 1988, no. 394; Radner, 1997, pp. 61, 95, 98, 318, 354; PNA, pp. 600b (4); 827a (10); Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 239–240. See also KB 4, pp. 120–121; Gelb, 1979, p. 78. 42 For previous studies of this text see ARU 202; Parpola, 1979, p. 141; AST, T 204, No. 197; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 354–355, no. 301; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 44a(3), 448b, 524a, 1102a–b(1+2).

58

chapter two

50 shekels of silver (see also SAA VI 109, SAA VI 111, and family no. 37, below). Family no. 27: “Nabû-šÏzib, his wife, [hi]s 4 son[s, a total] of 6 persons, slave[s of ] LÖ-bala¢” (ADD 269 = SAA VI 195 = Text no. 19).43 This large nuclear family of six persons, a couple and four sons, was sold by LÖbala¢ to Šamaš-ilÊxi, “chief . . .” in Nineveh in 681 B.C. The sons’ ages are not clear and only the father’s name is mentioned. It is possible that the slaves originated in Šazabinâ (see line r. 9’). Families nos. 28–31: These families are attested in ADD 277 (= SAA VI 193 = Text no. 20): (Family no. 28): “[P]N (and) his wife, a total of 2; (Family no. 29): [PN] (and) his wife, a total of 2; (Family no. 30): [PN], his 2 sons, [. . ., a total of 3 or 4]; (Family no. 31): [fPN] (and) her son, a total of [2]”.44 The structure and size of families 28–29 and 31 are evident: two couples without children, and a woman with her unnamed son. The size of family no. 30 is uncertain. It includes at least three person, a father and two sons, but it is not clear if a fourth person is also mentioned (perhaps a wife). These nine or ten slaves were sold in Nineveh in 681 B.C. by Nabû-erÒba, an “ofcial (ARAD) of the governor”.45 The buyer’s name and the price are lost. Families nos. 32–33: These two very large families are attested in ADD 253 (= SAA VI 57 = Text no. 21):

43 For previous studies of this text see ARU 63; Parpola, 1979, p. 150; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 665b(3), 879b(6)–880a. 44 For previous studies of this text see ARU 62; Parpola, 1979, p. 151; Radner, 1997, pp. 221, 234–235; PNA, p. 827b(10). 45 For the possibility that Nabû-erÒba was involved in slave-trading see family 25, above.

a survey of the lower stratum families

59

(Family no. 32): “[PN], a prisoner (Éabtu)46 in his custody, 1 suckling son, [his 5 . . .], his wi[fe], his 2 slaves a total of 10 person[s]; (Family no. 33): [PN], his 2 wives, his 3 sons, [his . . .], his [3] slaves a total of 10 persons; [a grand total of 20 peo]ple of Ubru-Nabû [. . .]”.47 These families are two out of three largest slave families attested in Neo-Assyrian texts (see also family no. 25, above). The families are of ten persons each, and both include slaves, probably acquired before they were enslaved.48 At the beginning of line 2’ only three or four signs are missing. Since family no. 32 includes ten persons, and since a suckling son and a wife are clearly mentioned in the text, the most reasonable restoration of the beginning of line 2’ is “5 brothers” or “5 daughters”. Family no. 33 is also of ten persons: the head of the family (whose personal name is lost), his two wives (a very rare attestation to polygamy in this period), and three sons. Since only three or four signs are missing at the beginning of line 4’, and since one of them must be the number of slaves, it is reasonable to suppose that this family includes three slaves and that the tenth member of the family was its head’s mother or sister or daughter. These 20 slaves were bought by Nabû-šumu-iškun, Sennacherib’s chariot driver, from Ubru-Nabû, for ten minas of silver (30 shekels per person), in Nineveh in Sennacherib’s reign (the date is lost).49 Families nos. 34–36: These families are attested in ADD 261 (= SAA VI 86 = Text no. 22): 1’ 1’ 2’ 2’

MÍ su-u-[x x x] x x [x x x x x x x] the woman Su[ . . .] (Family no. 34:) [PN, his wife?] 2 DUMU.MEŠ-šú DUMU.MÍ-su x [x x x x x x x x x] his 2 sons (and) his daughter [a total of 4 or 5]; (Family no. 35:) [PN, his wife]

46 The term Éabtu may indicate that his family was sent to prison by a court order (cf. SAAS V, pp. 28–30). 47 For previous studies of this text see ARU 85; Parpola, 1979, pp. 146–147; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 248–249, no. 210; Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, p. 888b(6). 48 For slaves owned by slaves see family no. 13, above, and Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 372–378. 49 Nabû-šumu-iškun’s sons or grandsons are not mentioned in the clauses of penalties for litigation in this text, but they are attested in another text (SAA VI 58).

60 3’ 3’ 4’ 4’ 5’ 5’ 6’ 6’

chapter two 2 DUMU.MEŠ-šú PAB 4 mmad !-a-a [x x x x x x x x x x (x x)] (and) his 2 sons, a total of 4 (persons); MÊdÊiu, [x x x x x x x x] m ú-ra-a-a MÍ-šú msi-t[i!-ir-x x x x x x x x x] (Family no. 36:) ÇrÊiu (and) his wife; Sit[ir-. . . . .] md U.GUR–SUM-na PAB 20 LÚ*!.Z[I.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ]-ni ! Nergal-iddina, a grand total of 20 per[sons, slav]es ša mURU.arba-ìl-a-a of ArbailÊiu.50

Family no. 34 consists of four or ve persons: a father (whose personal name is lost), his two sons, and his daughter. It is reasonable to suppose that the wife was mentioned after the name of the father; and that the woman Su . . . was not related to this family, since in this text only the names of the heads of the families and of the single persons are enumerated (see line 4’). Family no. 35 consists of four persons: a father (whose personal name is lost), his two sons and probably a wife who was listed after the father’s name. Family no. 36 is a minimal nuclear family of two persons: ÇrÊiu and his wife. These 20 slaves were sold by ArbailÊiu to the governess (šakintu) of the central city in Nineveh in Sennacherib’s reign (the date is lost, see family no. 23). About 14 or 15 out of these 20 slaves are attested in the text: families nos. 34–36 are of 10–11 people, and the other four persons are the woman Su . . ., and three men (MÊdÊiu, Sitir. . . and Nergal-iddina). Su . . . and Nergal-iddina were probably single persons, while MÊdÊiu and Sitir-. . . might be heads of families.51 Family no. 37: “ÇsÏax; his 2 wives: Mexsâ (and) BÊdia; SÏx-gabâ, BÏl-HarrÊntaklÊk, two weaned daughters, a total of 7 persons, slaves of Urda-IssÊr”. Aramaic caption: “Dead of Hosea and 6 others, 7 persons of Urda-Is[sÊr]” (ADD 229 = SAA VI 111 = Text no. 23).52 This large Israelite family consists of seven persons: ÇsÏax, his two wives, Mexsâ and BÊdia, his two unnamed weaned daughters, and 50 For previous studies of this text see ARU 87; Parpola, 1979, p. 149; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 472–473, no. 414; Postgate, 1974a, pp. 140–141; Radner, 1997, pp. 240–241; PNA, pp. 125b(14), 674a(6), 947a(2), 1152b. 51 For a different interpretation of this text see Kwasman, 1988, p. 472. 52 For previous studies of this text see 2R 70/2; 3R 46/6; Op. pp. 182–183; CIS II/1, no. 17; KB 4, pp. 124–125; ABC, no. 4; EA, no. 14; ARU 64; Lieb. no. 5; Ep. Ar. no. 14; Parpola, 1979, pp. 140–141; Zadok, 1978–1979, p. 224; Fales, 1986, pp. 142–145, no. 5; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 355–356; Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 250b(1), 304b(3), 749b, 1100a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

61

two other men, SÏx-gabâ and BÏl-HarrÊn-taklÊk, probably his sons but possibly his brothers; therefore, in this study this family is dened as unclear. These people were sold by Urda-IssÊr to SÏx-maxÊdÒ for 3 minas of silver (an average of 25.7 shekels per person), in Nineveh in 680 B.C. (For SÏx-maxÊdÒ, a village manager of the crown prince, Esarhaddon, see family no. 26, above). This Israelite family had probably been exiled to Assyria in the 8th century B.C., but it is not clear when and why it was enslaved. The name ÇsÏax is Israelite,53 and the names of his two wives (Mexsâ and BÊdia), are West Semitic.54 His sons (or brothers) bear names that are clearly related to the HarrÊn area: SÏx-gabâ is a West Semitic name that includes the component SÏx-, an Aramaic form of SÒn, the god of HarrÊn. This component is very popular in names from the HarrÊn area.55 The name of the other son/brother, BÏl-HarrÊn-taklÊk (= “In the Lord of HarrÊn I trust”), is Akkadian and its relation to HarrÊn is evident.56 Family no. 38: “DandÖsi; his daughter (and) LÊ-qÏpu, his son, a total of 3 persons, slaves of Šumma-ibašši-kettu” (ADD 1158 = SAA VI 229 = Text no. 24).57 This is a single-parent family of three persons: a father and his two children, an unnamed daughter and a son. The age of the children is not mentioned. The order of the people is unusual since the daughter is listed before the son. This small family was sold by Šumma-ibašši-kettu to Silim-AššÖr, in Nineveh in 675 B.C. for the low price of 30 shekels of silver (10 shekels per soul). Silim-AššÖr was the grand vizier for of at least ten years (666–656 B.C.) and was the eponym ofcial of the year 659.58 He owned at least ve slaves (see SAA VI 227–228). Family no. 39: This unclear family is attested in ADD 266 (= SAA VI 297 = Text no. 25): “Ilu-kÏnu-uÉur, Âil-AššÖr, [. . .], 2 girls (MÍ.TUR.MEŠ),

53

See Ephxal, 1973, pp. 202–203, xxv. For the names Mexsâ and BÊdia see Zadok, 1977, pp. 171, 258; PNA, pp. 250b(1), 749b. 55 For the component SÏx in personal names see Johns, ADB, p. 30; Parpola, 1985, p. 273, note 2, with earlier literature; Stol, 1995a, pp. 1480–1481. 56 See PNA, p. 304a. 57 For previous studies of this text see Kwasman, 1988, pp. 359–360, no. 307; AST, T 200, No. 168; Radner, 1997, pp. 135, 234–235; PNA, pp. 375b, 653a(12). 58 For Silim-AššÖr see Mattila, 2000, pp. 94–95, 103, 134; PNA, p. 1109a(4). 54

62

chapter two

a total of 5 per[sons], slaves of [these peo]ple”.59 The two girls indicate that this group of slaves probably included a family. At the end of line 6, Kwasman and Parpola propose the restoration of a male personal name, but Fales suggested that probably a woman was mentioned after the name of Âil-AššÖr.60 Another possible restoration is “[DUMU-šú 1 MÍ]” or “[DUMU-šú MÍ-šú]”, namely that Âil-AššÖr, was Ilu-kÏnuuÉur’s son, and the family consists of ve persons: a couple, a son and two daughters. It is important to point out that the term MÍ.TUR at times, denes young girls and even babies.61 These slaves were bought by RÏmanni-Adad, here entitled: “chariot driver”, from IddÊti-BÏl-allak, Adad-šarru-uÉur and Šarru-šumu-kaxxin, the three sons of AššÖr-šallimahhe, in Nineveh in 671 B.C. (the price is lost). For RÏmanni-Adad’s slaves and businesses see families nos. 53–55, below. Family no. 40: “Marqihitâ, his ma[id, (and) her son], a total of 2 persons, slaves of [Nabû-bÏl-uÉur]” (ADD 257 = SAA VI 284 = Text no. 26).62 This is a small single-parent family of two persons, a maid and her unnamed son, as attested in the Aramaic caption: “[Marqihitâ and] her son [. . .], [. . .] of Nabû-[bÏl-uÉur]” (e 16–17).63 It was sold by Nabû-bÏl-uÉur to Nabûxa for two minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (an average of one mina per person), in 671 B.C. The text was sealed in Nineveh but the slaves probably originated in Calah. Family no. 41: UruÉa and her daughter are attested in an unpublished text from the vicinity of MaxallÊnÊte (O 3709 = Text no. 27 = PNA, pp. 452a–b, 598b, 656a).64 This small single-parent family was bought by 59 For previous studies of this text see 3R 49/4; Op. pp. 191–193; KB 4, pp. 130–131; ARU 538; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 278–279, no. 235; Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 36b(2), 217a(6), 501a–b, 531a(3), 1038b, 1171a(4). 60 See Parpola and Kwasman, SAA VI, p. 240; Fales, PNA, p. 1038b. 61 For the term MÍ.TUR see Radner, 1997, pp. 147–148, 152–155. 62 For previous studies of this text see ABC, no. 5; EA, no. 15; ARU 66; Lieb. No. 14; Ep. Ar. no. 15; Parpola, 1979, pp. 147–148; AST, T 212, No. 270; Fales, 1986, pp. 161–165, no. 14, Pl. V, Fig. 14; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 229–230, no. 194; Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 741a, 790a (35). 63 Fales suggested the restoration brt[h] instead of brh, see Fales, 1986, pp. 162–163, no. 14, Pl. V, Fig. 14. But he admits that: “brt has many attestations in Egyptian Aramaic, but hardly at all in pre-Achaemenid (and esp. Mesopotamian) Aramaic”. A comparison of the two captions attested in this text (see Fales, 1986, Pl. V, Fig. 14) indicate that the restoration brh proposed by Kwasman and Parpola in SAA VI, is more reasonable. 64 For this text see Garelli, 1986, p. 244; PNA, pp. 452a–b, 598b, 656a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

63

Handî together with another maid (LÊ-tenni-amassa) from Kalbi-Ukû in 670 B.C. For Handî, a “šaknu ša ekalli” in the reigns of Sennacherib, Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, see families nos. 11 and 22, above. Family no. 42: “[Ne]rgal-d[Ê]n, IssÊr-[. . ., his wife], MÊrtî , her daughter, (of ) 3 spans’ (height), a total of 3 person[s, slaves o]f [Adad-ahu-iddina]” (ADD 310 = SAA XIV 64 = Text no. 28).65 This is a nuclear family of three persons: a couple, and a daughter, who is dened as “her” daughter, probably meaning from a previous marriage (see family no. 17, above, and family no. 67, below). The daughter was a very young child of “three spans” (for this system of recording children see chapter III). The personal names of all three people are mentioned. This family was sold by Adad-ahu-iddina to Mannu-kÒ-AllÊia, a recruit (?) (raksu) of the chief eunuch, for two minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (40 shekels per person), in Nineveh in 669 B.C. The slaves probably originate in Calah. Family no. 43: “Iaqar-ahÒ (and) her daughter (and) the woman Abi-iahia, a total of 3 persons of Minahimi”. Aramaic caption: “mnhm” (ADD 245 = SAA VI 250 = Text no. 29).66 This is a single-parent family of two persons: a maid (Iaqar-ahÒ) and her unnamed dughter. The age of the daughter is not mentioned. This family was sold together with an other maid (Abi-iahia) by Minahimi to Abi-rahî, sister of the governess, for two minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (40 shekels per person), in Nineveh in Esarhaddon’s reign (the date is lost). Families nos. 44–45: These families are attested in ADD 288 (= SAA VI 266 = Text no. 30):

65 For previous studies of this text see ARU 158; Postgate, apud Weinfeld, 1972, p. 144, n. 88; Parpola, 1979, pp. 155–156; AST, T 202, No. 180; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 182–183, no. 149; Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 21b(5), 685a, 742a, 943b(1). 66 For previous studies of this text see CIS II/1, no. 33; ABC, no. 20; EA, no. 5; ARU 81; Lieb, no. 19; Ep. Ar. no. 5; Parpola, 1979, pp. 144–145; AST, T 204, no. 200; Fales, 1986, pp. 183–184, no. 20; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 3–4, no. 2; Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, pp. 10b, 12b(1), 493a, 748a(4), 1110b(6); Teppo, 2005, p. 64.

64

chapter two

2’ (Family no. 44:) “Iannuqu; his son (and) [his] wife, [a total of 3 persons]; 3’ (Family no. 45:) DalÖwa; his son (and) h[is] wife, [a total of 3]”.67

In the copy published by Johns the restoration is “MÍ-šú” at the end of lines 2’ and 3’. Kohler and Ungnad read “MÍ [. . .]” at the end of line 2’, and “MÍ-š[ú]” at the end of line 3’. In 1979 Parpola published his collation of this text, and his restoration of these two lines was similar to Kohler’s and Ungnad’s. Since Parpola pointed out that about ve signs are missing in line 2’ and only two in line 3’, the following restoration of the end of these lines may be suggested: 2’ DUNU-šú MÍ-[šú PAB 3 ZI.MEŠ]; 3’ DUNU-šú MÍ-š[ú PAB 3]. According to this restoration both families include a couple and a son. But since there are other possibilities (see below), both families are dened in this study as unclear. Another possibility is that Šamaš-aiÊlÒ, (line 1’) is the father of the family, Iannuqu is his son, and the name of his wife is mentioned at the end of line 2’. The restoration of lines 1’–2’ will be as follows: “Šamaš-aiÊlÒ, the . . . (LÚ.šá–[x x]), Iannuqu, his son (and) MÍ.[ . . .], [his wife]”.68 But the formulation of line 3’ indicates that this possibility is less likely, and Šamaš-aiÊlÒ was probably a single person. These slaves were sold in Nineveh in Esarhaddon’s reign.69 The date and the names of the parties are lost. This broken text indicates that at least ten persons were sold, and a few were probably singles, including the women Bauiâ, Dimbâ, San . . . and Didî (see lines 4’–7’). Families nos. 46–47: These families are attested in CT 53 9 (= SAA XVI 53 = Text no. 31): 4 (Family no. 46:) “IlÖssa (and) her 2 sons; 5–6 (Family no. 47:) Muhhi-ili-šapkÊku (and) her daughter; 7 a grand total of 5 persons”.70

These two single-parent families are cited in a letter of complaint, probably dated to Esarhhadon’s reign. The writer claims that the following property of his father’s house was taken over: ve persons, a

67 For previous studies of this text see ARU 77; Parpola, 1979, pp. 152; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, pp. 278b, 361a(9), 373b(3), 384b, 492a(2). 68 For the possibility that Iannuqu was Šamaš-aiÊlÒ’s son see Baker, PNA, p. 492a(2). 69 The name of Esarhaddon is mentioned in line s. 1. For the date of this text see SAA VI, p. 213 (note). 70 For the personal names mentioned in this text see PNA, pp. 535b, 763a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

65

bed, three blankets, chairs, a table, etc. Since the ve persons are listed in the same context as the other objects, clearly they were slaves. Families nos. 48–49: These families are attested in ADD 268 (= SAA VI 294 = Text no. 32): 1’ (Family no. 48:) “SagÒbÒ, weaver, (and) his wife; 2’ (Family no. 49:) SÏx-nÖrÒ, his wife (and) [his] 2 daughters; 3’ a grand total of 6 per[sons, slaves of PN]”.71

The size and type of these two nuclear families are evident: the rst is a couple without children, and the second a couple with two daughters. The age of the children is not listed, and only the names of the heads of the families are mentioned. These two families are recorded in a sale of persons from Nineveh probably from the end of Esarhaddon’s reign.72 Most details of this text are lost, including the names of the parties, the price and the date. Family no. 50: “[. . .-ah]he-balli¢ (and) his wife” are a couple without children attested in ADD 287 (= SAA XIV 4 = Text no. 33).73 This small nuclear family was sold together with other three slaves by Nabûtî to Milki-nÖrÒ, in Nineveh in Esarhaddon’s late reign or in Assurbanipal’s early reign. The three slave mentioned in lines 3–4 were probably single persons and not relatives of this couple. Milki-nÖrÒ was a eunuch of the queen (see SAA XIV 1–7, the rst two texts are dated to 668 and 666 B.C.). He bought the villages Nabû-šezib and BahÊia, in their entirety, as well as 11 slaves and “Land and People” with at least 12 persons (see also families nos. 51–52, 157–158, below). Families nos. 51–52: These families are attested in ADD 316 (= SAA XIV 5 = Text no. 34): 1’ (Family no. 51:) “[PN (and)] Šamaš-ilÊxÒ, his son (of ) 4 spa[ns’ (height)]; 2’ (Family no. 52:) [PN (and)] ÇsÏax, (his) son (of ) 3 spans’ (height);

71 For previous studies of this text see ARU 88; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, pp. 1103b(5), 1061a(5). 72 For the date of this text see SAA VI, p. 237. 73 For previous studies of this text see ARU 95; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 213–214, no. 177; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, pp. 328 b(3), 752a(1). See also note no. 175, below.

66

chapter two

3’ [ . . .]-IssÊr, a weaned son, (and) Baxassi [his] daughte[r]; 4’ [a grand total of 6] persons, slaves [of] Marduk-rÏmanni”.74

The text enumerates two single-parent families: (1) a father with a young child; and (2) a father with two very young sons, and a daughter whose age is unclear. The names of all slaves are mentioned, but a few are lost. In both families the mother is absent; she might have remained in the hands of the seller. These families were bought by Milki-nÖrÒ, a eunuch of the queen, from Marduk-rÏmanni, in Nineveh in Esarhaddon’s later reign or in Assurbanipal’s early reign, for two minas and ten shekels of silver (21.66 shekels per soul).75 Families nos. 53–55: These families are attested in ADD 247 (= SAA VI 342 = Text no. 35), as follows: (1’) (Family no. 53:) “SÒn-Êlik-pÊni, [the . . .; his son/brother]; (2’) his wife (and) his weaned daughter. (Family no. 54:) [PN; his son/brother]; (3’) his wife (and) is daughter; (Family no. 55:) UÉa[. . .], hatter (and) his wife, a grand total of 10 [persons]”.76 The two rst families are of four persons each, and both include a couple and a daughter. The identity of the fourth member in each family is unclear. He might be a son or a brother of the head of the family. The third family is a couple without children: UÉa[. . .] the hatter and his unnamed wife. These ten slaves were bought in Nineveh by RÏmanni-Adad, here entitled probably “[chariot driver]” but usually he is entitled: “chief chariot driver of Assurbanipal king of Assyria”. His transactions have been discussed extensively in the literature.77 He bought at least 38 slaves, in 13 different transactions, in the course of at least six years (671–665 B.C.). Most of his slaves lived in families: he owned nine slave-families of 2–5 persons per family, a total of 30 persons (see family no. 39, above; and families nos. 56–58, 61–62, below). A few of his slaves were professional (see SAA VI 300–301, 305, 313, and chapter III). Hardly anything is known about his family, but the clauses of penalties for litigation in his texts indicate that he had sons.

74 For previous studies of this text see ARU 74; Parpola, 1979, p. 156; Kwasman, 1988, p. 215, no. 179; Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, pp. 721a(9), 752a(1). 75 For Milki-nÖrÒ see family no. 50, above. 76 For previous studies of this text see ARU 83; Parpola, 1979, p. 156; AST, T 205, No. 215; Kwasman, 1988, p. 319, no. 269; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, pp. 1128b(1), 1038a(4). 77 For the transactions of RÏmanni-Adad see Fales, 1987; Galil, 1998, pp. 28–37; Fales, PNA, pp. 1038–1041.

a survey of the lower stratum families

67

Families nos. 56–57: These families are attested in ADD 270/271 (= SAA VI 343/344 = Text no. 36): (Family no. 56:) “[ . . .] (and) his wife, a total of 2; (Family no. 57:) [Mar]Éiš-adllal; Ba-[ . . .], a total of 2 youths; Mannu[ . . .], their mother; a total of 5 persons, [slaves of ] these me[n]”.78 These ve slaves are divided into two families: a couple without children and a mother with her two sons. This single-parent family is presented in an unusual way: the two brothers are named rst, without either of them being signied as the head of this family. These slaves were bought in Nineveh by RÏmanni-Adad for ve minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (one mina per person) from four sons of Gabbu-ilÊni-Ïreš: Daxxinanni-Nergal, Zilî, Kur-ilÊxÒ (and) AššÖr-šallim-ahhÏ (Assurbanipal’s reign; the date is lost). For RÏmanni-Adad and his slaves see families nos. 53–55, above. Family no. 58: “[. . .]-a-¢a[b], his slave; [. . .]-ilÊxi, his wife; [. . .]-atu, his daughter; [a total of 3 per]sons” (ADD 322 = SAA VI 345 = Text no. 37).79 This is a nuclear family of three persons: a couple with a daughter all mentioned by their personal names. They were bought in Nineveh by RÏmanniAdad from Nabû-aplu-iddina (Assurbanipal’s reign; the date is lost). For RÏmanni-Adad and his slaves see families nos. 53–55, above. Family no. 59: “[. . .] (and) Sadaia, his mother, a total of 2 person(s)” (ADD 284+ = SAA XIV 65 = Text no. 38).80 This is a nuclear family of two persons: a slave and his mother both mentioned by their personal names (the son’s name is lost). They were bought in Nineveh in 668 B.C. by Urda-IssÊr, the chamberlain, from SalmÊnu-immÏ for one and a half mina of silver, by the mina of the king (45 shekels per person).

78 For previous studies of this text see ARU 67–68; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 322–324, no. 272–273; Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, pp. 217a(8), 370a, 415b(4), 641a(6), 721b. 79 For previous studies of this text see ARU 200; Parpola, 1979, p. 157; Kwasman, 1988, p. 317, no. 266; Radner, 1997, pp. 240–241; PNA, pp. 805b(6), 1039a. 80 For previous studies of this text see ARU 462; Parpola, 1979, p. 152; Kwasman, 1988, p. 348, no. 295; Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 1059a, 1079a.

68

chapter two

Family no. 60: “[. . .]-BÏl (and) [his] 2 wi[ves] (= 2 M[Í.MEŠ-šú] . .) . . .” (ADD 306 = SAA VI 256 = Text no. 39).81 This is an unclear family of at least three persons: a male slave, [. . .]-BÏl, and his two wives. The women are probably his wives since they are not named. If they were single they should have been listed by their personal names. These slaves were bought in Nineveh probably in 668 B.C.82 by IddÖxa (the price is lost). The slaves probably originated in LahÒru, since IddÖxa served as a town manager of the queen mother in this area (see SAA VI 255).83 Family no. 61: “[. . .]ê, tailor, his wife, his [. . .], (and) his 2 sons, a total of 5 persons, [slav]es of BÏl-aplu-iddina” (ADD 258 = SAA VI 313 || ADD 801 = SAA VI 312 = Text no. 40).84 This is a family of ve persons: a tailor, his wife, two sons, and a fth member, who might be his mother (see SAA VI 313) or his brother. These slaves were bought by RÏmanni-Adad from BÏl-aplu-iddina, chief singer of Til-Barsib, in 666 B.C., for three minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (36 shekels per person). The text was sealed in Nineveh, but the slaves probably originated in Til-Barsib.85 For RÏmanni-Adad and his slaves see families nos. 53–55, above. Family no. 62: “DÒnÊna (and) Gabia, his wife, a total of 2 persons, slaves of SÏx-nÊtan” (ADD 237 = SAA VI 319 = Text no. 41).86 This couple was

81 For previous studies of this text see ARU 544; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, p. 505a(1). 82 The date of this text is unclear. Kwasman and Parpola suppose that it should be dated to the reign of Esarhaddon (see SAA VI, p. 204). But since it is clear that the eponym was a turtÊnu (see line 2’), and since no commander-in-chief served as an eponym ofcial in the reign of Esarhaddon, it is reasonable to date the text to 668 B.C. (= MÊr-larÒm). Other possible identications of this turtÊnu are BÏl-Ïmuranni (686 B.C.) or BÏl-naxdi (663 B.C.). Cf. Mattila, 2000, p. 107. 83 For the identication of LahÒru see Parpola—Porter, 2001, p. 12, and map no. 10, with earlier literature. 84 For previous studies of this text see KB 4, pp. 134–135; ARU 65a–65b, 537; Parpola, 1979, pp. 148, 196–197; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 290–292, no. 246–247; Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 287a(14), 1038b(2’). 85 For Til Barsib in the Neo-Assyrian period see Bunnens, 1997. For the texts from this site see Dalley, 1996–1997; Radner, 2004. 86 For previous studies of this text see ARU 71; Parpola, 1979, pp. 142; AST, T216, no. 314; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 296–297, no. 251; Radner, 1997, pp. 236–237; PNA, pp. 385a (1), 416b, 1039a 2’, 1103a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

69

sold by SÏx-nÊtan to RÏmanni-Adad in Nineveh in 665 B.C., for one mina of silver (30 shekels per person). For RÏmanni-Adad and his slaves see families nos. 53–55, above. Family no. 63: “Hambussu, [thei]r ma[id] (and) her daughter, upon the house [. . .] (ina UGU É [x x])”; Aramaic caption: “Deed of the maid Hambussu (hbš)—and her daughter—belonging to LÖqu (lqh)” (ADD 233 = SAA XIV 24 = Text no. 42).87 This small family, Hambussu and her unnamed daughter were sold to LÖqu, cohort commander of the crown prince, in Nineveh in 659 B.C., for one mina and eight shekels of silver (34 shekels per person). The names of the sellers are lost: one of them was the son of Hazi . . . In the Aramaic caption they are dened as “the brothers and sons” of Hambussu. Family no. 64: “[. . .] (and her) daughter, [the maids of TabÊlÊ]iu, ironsmith” (SH 98/6949 I 896 = DeZ 21027 = BATSH 6 46 = Text no. 43).88 This maid (whose name is lost) and her unnamed daughter, were sold by TabÊlÊiu, an ironsmith, to Šulmu-šarri, in DÖr-Katlimmu in 650 B.C. (the price is lost). Šulmu-šarri, a royal bodyguard (ša-qurbÖti), and his relatives are attested in 73 texts from DÖr-Katlimmu. He bought at least 55 slaves (most of them females) in 42 legal transactions, in the course of about 35 years (665–631*). Most of his slaves were singles (at least 43), but a few lived in six single-parent families (a maid with her daughter or her son; see families nos. 74–75, 80, 93–94, below). Family no. 65: “AhÊtÒ-lÏxi (and) SÏx-hÊri, her son (of ) 3 spans’ (height), a total of 2 persons of these men” (ND 3426 = Iraq 15 (1953), pp. 141, 151, Pl. XII = FNALT 9 = Text no. 44).89 This maid and her very young son, of three spans, were sold by two men, NÖr-Šamaš son of PušhÒ and

87 For previous studies of this text see 2R 70/6; 3 R 46/5; Op. pp. 195–198; CIS II/1 19; KB 4, pp. 138–141; ABC no. 7; EA, no. 12; ARU 208; Lieb, no. 16; Ep. Ar. no. 12; Parpola, 1979, pp. 142; AST, T202, no. 181; Fales, 1986, pp. 175–180, no. 17; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 179–180, no. 146; Radner, 1997, pp. 234–235; PNA, pp. 447b(3), 670b(4). 88 For Šulmu-šarri see Radner, 2002, pp. 70–72. 89 For previous studies of this text see Wiseman, 1953, pp. 141, 151, pl. xii; Postgate, 1979, pp. 93–95 (no. 9); Radner, 1997, pp. 236–237; PNA, pp. 59b, 886b(29), 1000b(3), 1100b(3), 1154b(27).

70

chapter two

Nabû-šumu-iddina son of Sukki-Aia, to Šamaš-šarru-uÉur, a eunuch, in Calah in 649 B.C. for a high price of two minas and one shekel of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (one mina and 0.5 shekel per person). Families nos. 66–67: These families are attested in VAT 9582 (= Text no. 45—Unpublished): (Family no. 66): “AhÊt-abÒša (and) her son, Ilu-ibni”; (Family no. 67): “Hehe-ilÊxÒ, his wife (and) her son Ubru-ilÊni, a total of 5 persons, slaves of AššÖr-erÒba”.90 The rst is a singe-parent family of two persons, a maid and her son, and the second one is a nuclear family of three persons: a couple with a son dened as “her” son; probably from a previous marriage (see families nos. 17 and 42, above, but only in VAT 9582 is the woman distinctly dened as “his wife”). These two families were sold by two persons, AššÖr-erÒba son of AššÖr-mu-BI-KAT and the scribe, AššÖr-rÏšÒ-išši son of Nabû-šumu-iddina, to IdÊia/IdÒAia, an ofcial (= “ARAD”) of the crown prince from Kapar-Adunu. The slaves were sold in Aššur in 649 B.C., for three minas and four shekels of silver (36.8 shekels per person). Families nos. 68–71 are attested in ADD 275+ (= SAA XIV 146 = Text no. 46), as follows: 2 (Family no. 68): (Family no. 69): 3 (Family no. 70): 4 (Family no. 71): 5 [a grand total of

“SalÊmÊnnu (and) his wife; MusukÊiu (and) his wife; Urdu-InÖrta (and his) 2 daughters; a grand total of 7 persons; [. . .]aia (and) his son. Gaddijâ (= single) 3 persons]; a grand total of 10 persons [. . .]”.91

This fragmentary document attests to a sale of ten slaves: four nuclear families and one singe person (Gaddijâ). At the beginning of line 5 about four signs are missing, and another grand total might have been mentioned: [PAB 3 ZI.MEŠ]. The structure and size of the families is evident. The rst two families are couples without children, and the last two are single-parent of two or three persons: a slave and his two daughters or a slave and his son. The names of the parties and the

90 I would like to thank Karen Radner for sending me the translation of this passage by e-mail (on 9 Oct. 2002). For previous studies and notes on this unpublished text see Radner, 1997, pp. 103, 175–176, 185, 220–221, 236–237; PNA, pp. 59a(5), 181b(8), 196b, 214a(9), 470b–471a, 501a, 529a(6), 887a(36). 91 For previous studies of this text see ARU 174, 522; AST, T215, no. 298; Radner, 1997, pp. 238–239; PNA, pp. 417b(4), 771b, 1069b(13).

a survey of the lower stratum families

71

price are lost. The slaves changed hands in Nineveh in 642*, but they may originate in Harran (see line r. 2). Family no. 72: This family is attested in SH 98/6949 I 140 (= DeZ 21058/7 = BATSH 6 141 = Text no. 47), as follows: 1’ 2’ 3’ 4’

MÍ.a-b[u–x x mx x x] DUMU pi-ir-[su MÍ. x x x] MÍ.[i]š-šal-[x (x) PAB 4 ZI.MEŠ] ú-piš-[ma mx x x x]

1’ 2’ 3’ 4’

“The woman Ab[u-. . .; (and) PN] (her) wean[ed] son; [The woman . . .] Iššal[-. . .], a total of 4 persons] [. . .] has contracted and [bought]

This is a single-parent family of at least two persons: a maid (Abu-. . .) and at least her weaned son, whose name lost. The other two slaves may be two single maids (as suggested by Radner),92 but at least the rst one might have been a daughter of Abu-. . . These slaves were sold in DÖr-Katlimmu in 644* or 629* B.C. (the other details are lost). Family no. 73: This family is attested in A 2692 (= StAT 2 140 = Text no. 48): “Il-bakî (and her son) Haia-ahi (of ) 3 spans’ (height)”.93 This is a single parent-family of two persons: a maid and her son. They were sold in Aššur in 641* B.C. by DalÖwa to SÊmidu, the . . . of Aššur, for one mina of silver, by the mina of the king (30 shekels per person). SÊmidu bought at least two other maids (see StAT 2 145–146). Family no. 74: This family is attested in SH 98/6949 I 876 (= BATSH 6 53 = Text no. 49), as follows: “Amat-SalmÊnu, a maid (and) his suckling (‘ina UGU zi-zi’) daughter, a [to]tal of 2 maids of Nergal-šarru-uÉur”. This is a small nuclear family of two persons: a maid, Amat-SalmÊnu (Aramaic caption: ‘mtšlmn) and her unnamed suckling daughter. The baby is dened as “his” daughter, probably indicating that the maid was his mistress (see also family no. 80, below). They were sold by Nergalšarru-uÉur (= xAthar-šarru-uÉur) son of Šamaš-ahu-uÉur (= Aramaic caption: {thrsrÉr br sshÉr)94 to Šulmu-šarri, a royal bodyguard (ša-qurbÖti),

92

Radner, 2002, pp. 180–181. For previous studies of this text see Deller—Donbaz, 1987, pp. 221–226; see also Pedersen, 1986, pp. 123, N29 (1); Radner, 1997, pp. 236–237; PNA, pp. 373b(4), 1083b(3). 94 For Nergal-šarru-uÉur see PNA, pp. 955b–956a(36). 93

72

chapter two

in DÖr-Katlimmu in 641* B.C., for half a mina of silver (15 shekels per person). For the slaves of Šulmu-šarri see family no. 64, above. Family no. 75: This family is attested in SH 98/6949 I 884 (= DeZ 21030 = BATSH 6 56 = Text no. 50), as follows: “The woman, [M]a-[. . . (and) the woman . . .], a you[ng gi]rl (M[Í.T]UR), [her] daughter, [his maids]”. This is a small single-parent family of two persons: a maid (Ma . . .) and her daughter (whose name is lost). The daughter is dened as a young girl. They were sold by Atûti son of KummÊiu95 from HindÊnu to Šulmušarri, a royal bodyguard (ša-qurbÖti ), in DÖr-Katlimmu in 639* B.C. for one mina of silver (30 shekels per person). For the slaves of Šulmu-šarri see family no. 64, above. Family no. 76: “[Il-h]azi (and) AhÊtÒ-¢Êbat, his mother [a total of 2 person]s, slaves of HuddÊia” (ADD 250 = SAA XIV 16 = Text no. 51).96 This is a small nuclear family of two persons: a man and his mother. The son, whose name is broken, is presented as the “head” of the family. They were bought from HuddÊia son of MuÉurÊiu by NÒnuÊiu, a royal eunuch, in Nineveh in 639* (the price is lost). NÒnuÊiu bought at least ten slaves in the course of nine years (641*–633*: see SAA XIV 15 = SAAS V, no. 29; SAA XIV 18–22). Families nos. 77–78: These families are attested in MM 1082/A (= TIM XI 2 = SAA XIV 424 = Text no. 52): (Family no. 77): “Isî, Attar- . . ., his wife, B[a . . .]î, his son (of ) 5 spans’ (height), DaiÊnu-idrÒ, his son (of ) x spans’ (height), Ramâ, his daughter, a total of 5 (persons); (Family no. 78): BuxšÊia, Nagaha, his wife, PÖdî, his brother, AttÊr-idrÒ, his weaned son, a total of 4 (persons); KiqillÊnu (and) Quta[r]î, his brother, Il-idrÒ, tanner; a total of 12 persons, slaves of Sukki-Aia son of Parnu-uarri”. The rst family is a nuclear one of ve persons: a couple and three children: two sons (one of ve spans) and one daughter. The second family is an extended one of four persons: a couple and their weaned son, and the brother of the head of the family. The last three slaves (two brothers and a single tanner) were not 95

For Atûti son of KummÊiu see PNA, p. 637a(10). For previous studies on this text see 2R 70/3; 3R 46/7; CIS II/1 18; ABC no. 15; EA, no. 9; ARU 72; Lieb, no. 23; Ep. Ar. no. 9; Fales, 1986, pp. 188–189, no. 24; Kwasman, 1988, p. 255, no. 215; Radner, 1997, pp. 238–239; PNA, pp. 59b (2), 476a(4), 772a(2), 964b(11). 96

a survey of the lower stratum families

73

relatives of the rst nine. All the slaves in this document are named in person. They were sold in Nineveh in 638* by Sukki-Aia son of Parnuuarri, a Kummuhean merchant (tamkÊru), to Asalluhi-šumu-iddina, cohort commander of the palace (= “ša šÏpi”) guard, son of the chief judge, Asalluhi-ahhÏ-iddina, for a high price of 10 minas of silver (50 shekels per person). Since a merchant is the seller (in this case probably a private merchant and not a royal trade agent), and since many slaves changed hands, and a large sum is attested, the parties could be involved in slave-trading (note that ve other tamkÊru’s are mentioned in the list of witnesses).97 Family no. 79: This family is attested in DeZ 21051/3 (= SH 98/6949 I 922 = BATSH 6 142 = Text no. 53): 3 [mx x x]-x-a-a LÚ*.[AR]AD-šú 3 [. . .]aia, his [sla]ve, 4 [MÍ. x x x]-’ MÍ-šú 4 [. . .]-’, his wife 5 [m/MÍ.x x x x]-šú MÍ.Éa-ru-ru–E 5 [PN/fPN] his . . .], the woman ÂarÖruiqbi 6 [x x x x x] GÉME.MEŠ 6 [. . . . . . x] maids 7 [PAB x ZI.ME]Š ú-[piš-]ma 7 [a total of x person]s, has con[tracted and bo]ught

The restoration of lines 3–7 of this text is not clear. In Radner’s opinion ve slaves were enumerated in this text, all of them by their personal names, as follows:98 a family of three persons ([. . .]aia; [. . .]-’, his wife (and) [. . .], his [son]), and two single maids: ÂarÖru-iqbi99 and another one whose name is lost. But the text is very fragmentary and other restorations are possible. A couple is clearly attested in lines 3–4, both mentioned by their personal names. At the beginning of line 5 a relative of this couple is attested (their son or daughter or someone else). The restoration of line 6 is even more complicated, since ÂarÖru-iqbi might be a single maid or a daughter of [. . .]aia, and the term GÉME.MEŠ may refer to [. .]aia’s maids (for maids or slaves of a slave see families nos. 13, 32–33, above). Therefore, the following restoration of line 6

97 For previous studies of this text see Postgate—Ismail, no. 2; Radner, 1997, pp. 236–237; PNA, pp. 136a–b, 235b(3), 369b, 517b(5), 565b, 619a(14), 921b(6), 989b, 998a, 1026b, 1031a, 1155b(36). For the tamkÊru’s in the Neo-Assyrian Period see Postgate, 1979, p. 206; Deller, 1987; Elat, 1987; 1998, pp. 51–57; Radner 1999a, pp. 101–109; Faist 2001, p. 117; Galil forthcoming (c). 98 See Radner, 2002, p. 181. 99 For the name ÂarÖru-iqbi see PNA, p. 1168b.

74

chapter two

is also possible:”[DUNU.MÍ-šú x] GÉME.MEŠ”. If this restoration is accepted, this family might be large, of at least six persons: a couple with a daughter, a son (or another relative) and at least two maids. But as mentioned this is just one possibility, and so this family is dened in this study as an unclear one of at least three persons. These slaves were sold by [. . .]-šumu-iddina, in DÖr-Katlimmu in 634* B.C. (the other details are lost). Family no. 80: This family is attested in DeZ 21036 (= SH 98/6949 I 875 = BATSH 6 66 = Text no. 54): “Betuzati, his maid (and) his suckling (‘ša–GA’) daughter”. This is a single-parent family of two persons: a maid (Betuzati) and her unnamed suckling daughter. The baby is dened as “his” daughter, probably indicating that the maid was his mistress (see family no. 74, above). They were sold in DÖr-Katlimmu in 631* B.C. by BÖru-rapax son of BÖru-ahu-iddina to Šulmu-šarri, a royal bodyguard, for half a mina and ve shekels of silver (17.5 shekels per person). For the slaves of Šulmu-šarri see family no. 64, above. Family no. 81: This family is attested in VAT 8232 (= Text no. 55 = Unpublished).100 This is a single-parent family of four persons: a maid, Supala, and her three children (a daughter and two sons). They are among the 25 slaves that were sold in Aššur in 631* B.C. by the four sons of the priest BÊtÊnu to four men: QibÒt-AššÖr, Iqbi-AššÖr, Ahu[. . .] and another person whose name is lost. Family no. 82: KakkullÊnu, cohort commander of the crown prince, has bought the maid Âalimtu as a wife for Tarhu-nazi his slave (ADD 308 = SAA XIV 34 = Text no. 56).101 In this study these two slaves are considered a couple just married. The maid was bought from AhÖxa-erÒba son of Aia-ahhÏ and another person whose name is lost, in Nineveh in 630*, for half a mina of silver (see families nos. 83–84, below). 100

For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 277a, 560a–b(8), 1012b(19), 1159a. 101 For previous studies of this text see ARU 57; Tallqvist, 1918, p. 230b; Parpola, 1979, pp. 154–155; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 145–146, no. 120; Radner, 1997, p. 157; PNA, pp. 71a(17), 89b(4), 596a(7a.), 1166b(1). For the economic activities of KakkullÊnu (630*–617* B.C.) see Fales, 1989, pp. 169–200; Postgate, 1989, pp. 150–152; Galil, 1998, pp. 37–38; SAA XIV, pp. xvi–xviii; PNA, pp. 596a(7)–597.

a survey of the lower stratum families

75

Family no. 83: KakkullÊnu, cohort commander of the crown prince, has bought the maid Abi-dal[â] as a wife for UlÖlÊiu his slave (ADD 309 = SAA XIV 37 = Text no. 57).102 These two slaves are also considered a couple just married. This maid was bought from Sukki-Aia and his two sons, in Nineveh in 630*, for half a mina of silver (see also families nos. 82 and 84). Family no. 84: KakkullÊnu has bought Gula-rišat as a wife for UrduNabû his slave (ADD 711 = SAA XIV 38 = Text no. 58).103 These two slaves are also considered a couple just married (see families nos. 82–83). In the Aramaic caption the maid is presented as the wife of Urdu-Nabû (“xšt š{rdnbw”). This maid was bought for half a mina of silver from her four relatives: her two brothers, Mutakkil-Marduk and AššÖr-Mušallim (sons of TarÒba-IssÊr, the ironsmith); and from her two sons: AššÖr-nÊdin-ahi and Ubru-AššÖr. Therefore, it is evident that it was Gula-rišat’s second marriage. One possibility is that she went back to her two older brothers at her father’s house, after the death of her rst husband. Another is that her brothers redeemed her and her two sons from a creditor, and therefore she is dened as their maid. The text was sealed in Nineveh in 629*. Families nos. 85–87: These families are attested in ADD 619 (= SAA XIV 155 = Text no. 59). BÏl-naxdi gives his daughter BaxaltÒ-iÊbatu a house and people, as follows: 5 6–7 8 9–10a 10b–11 12–14a 14b

“[. . .]a-tequme, baker; (Family no. 85): [LÊ-d]Êgil-ili, fuller, (and) [. . .]ma, his wife; IssÊr-d[Ör-q]alli, cap-man; (Family no. 86): Aia-ehu[. . .] (and) Urkittu-lÏxât, his wife; (Family no. 87): Šulmu-b[Ïli-l]Êmur, baker (and) Urkittu-riš[at, his wife] (the women:) Mannu-kÒ-ummi, HatezÊia, Murabbataš, Pahî” In all a house (É) and 11 persons”.104

102 For previous studies of this text see ARU 56; Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 239b–240a; Parpola, 1979, p. 155; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 166–167, no. 133; Radner, 1997, pp. 157, 170; PNA, pp. 9a, 596a(7a.), 1154b(23). For KakkullÊnu’s transactions see family no. 82, above. 103 For previous studies of this text see Op., pp. 147–150; CIS II 11; ABC, no. 11; EA, no. 4; ARU 55; Lieb, no. 29; Ep. Ar. no. 4; Fales, 1986, pp. 202–205, no. 30; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 151–152, no. 124; Radner, 1997, pp. 157, 170; PNA, pp. 199a(2), 201b(9), 784b(5). For KakkullÊnu see family no. 82, above. 104 For previous studies of this text see ARU 47; Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 224a, 243b;

76

chapter two

BÏl-naxdi gives his daughter BaxaltÒ-iÊbatu a present of a house located at the Šamaš gate in Nineveh along with 12 slaves: six single persons and three couples (the total “11” is a mistake). The third couple is unclear, and is based on a restoration of the text. The text was sealed in Nineveh in 627* B.C. BaxaltÒ-iÊbatu’s father may be identied with BÏl-naxdi the commander-in-chief, who was the eponym ofcial of 663 B.C.105 Family no. 88: “Texitu, his maid (and) Hanabušâ, his weaned daughter” (VAT 5602 = ARU 70 = AoF 24 [1997], pp. 118–121 = Text no. 61).106 These two maids, Texitu and Hanabušâ, her weaned daughter, were sold to Urdu-NanÊia by LÖ-šakin son of Mannu-kÒ-AššÖr in AššÖr in 625* B.C., for one mina and 33 shekels of silver (46.5 shekels per person). The weaned child is dened as “his” daughter, indicating probably that the maid was his mistress (see also families nos. 74 and 80, above). Family no. 89: This unclear family is attested in CTNMC 68 (= National Museum, Copenhagen, no. 8612 = FNALD 18 = Text no. 61): “BÏletissÏxa, a maid; Amman-tanahti, a slave; Apî, a daughter, a maid, a total of 3 persons (=) the share of Pu¢i-MÖnu”.107 These three slaves are part of the property which Pu¢i-MÖnu inherited from his father, LÊ-turammanniAššÖr, commander-of-fty, in addition to a house that he shared with Hu¢-nahti, his brother. The text was sealed in Aššur in 625* B.C. Clearly, the inheritance was divided before the father’s death.108 The enumeration of a daughter indicates that it is a family, and since she is mentioned after Amman-tanahti, it is reasonable to suppose that he was her father. The relation between these two slaves and BÏlet-issÏxa is uncertain: she might be Amman-tanahti’s wife, but in that case the man would presumably be mentioned before the woman.

Parpola, 1979, p. 155; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 79–80, no. 69; Radner, 1997, p. 164; PNA, pp. 242a, 323b(8), 465b, 698a(1), 770b, 979b. 105 See Deller, 1991a, p. 351; Cf. Mattila, 2000, p. 111. 106 For previous studies of this text see ARU 70; Tallqvist, 1918, p. 232; Radner, 1997a, pp. 115–121; PNA, pp. 449a, 671b(18). 107 For previous studies of this text see Ep. Ar. no. 274; Fales, 1986, pp. 264–267, no. 61; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 157, 170; PNA, pp. 102b(2), 112b(1), 297a(2), 483b, 658b(3), 1001b(2). 108 See Postgate, 1976, p. 116; Akerman, p. 232, and note 126.

a survey of the lower stratum families

77

Family no. 90: “Sams[i-. . .], his maid, (and her) suckling son” (ADD 221 = SAA XIV 165 = Text no. 62).109 This maid and her baby were sold to [ . . .]aiu in Nineveh in 622* B.C. The price and the name of the seller are lost. At the end of line 2’, after the words DUMU GA, the following restoration is possible “[PAB 2 ZI.]MEŠ” = “[a total of 2 person]s”. Other restorations including “[x DUMU.MÍ] MEŠ” = “[and (her) x daughter]s”, are impossible since line 6’ mentions only a woman and a child: “MÍ DUMU [šu]-a-te” = “that woman (and) child”. Family no. 91: This single-parent family is attested in VAT 14450 (= SAAB 5 17 = Text no. 63): (lines 5–9) “Mudammiq-AššÖr gave back (to SagÒb/ SÊkip-AššÖr) TuqÖnnat/TuqÖn-mÊti, maid (MÍ-šú) of SagÒb/SÊkip-AššÖr, (and) Milki-natan, her son, (and) half a mina of silver, the share of SagÒb/SÊkip-AššÖr”. The context of this text is evident: SagÒb/SÊkip-AššÖr together with his two collegues, Mudammiq-AššÖr and his son Šar-ili, planned a trading enterprise. Moreover, SagÒb/SÊkip-AššÖr along with Šar-ili even provided Mudammiq-AššÖr with merchandise for it. But for some unknown reason SagÒb/SÊkip-AššÖr decided to quit, so Mudammiq-AššÖr, who wanted to maintain his good business relations with SagÒb/SÊkip-AššÖr, returned him his share: half a mina of silver and two slaves, a maid and her son. The woman was denitely SagÒb/SÊkip-AššÖr’s maid and not his wife, since these people are listed as merchandise along with the repaid silver (Aššur, 622* B.C.).110 Family no. 92: This single-parent family is attested in VAT 20363 (= SAAB 5, pp. 136–137 = Text no. 64): “[A]bu-riša (and) [her] daught[er] (= DUMU.M[Í-sa])” (side B, line 4’). Abu-riša and her unnamed daughter are part of the share which Šamaš-erÒba inherited from his father Mudammiq-AššÖr. Two inheritance documents indicate that at least 22 slaves were divided among six sons of Mudammiq-AššÖr (all these slaves are singles except for this small family).111 This text was sealed in Aššur in 616* B.C.

109 For previous studies of this text see ARU 503; Parpola, 1979, p. 140; Radner, 1997, p. 137; PNA, pp. 361b(21), 1167a(10). 110 For a similar opinion see Radner, PNA, p. 1066b(4), contra SAAB 5, p. 49. For Mudammiq-AššÖr’s family see Akerman, pp. 222–229; PNA, p. 760a(7). 111 For the inheritance documents of the sons of Mudammiq-AššÖr see Akerman, pp. 222–229, 232, 236; PNA, p. 760a(7). See also PNA, p. 19a.

78

chapter two

Family no. 93: This family is attested in DeZ 21046 (= SH 98/6949 I 895 = BATSH 6 91 = Text no. 65): “Ahatâ, his maid (and) [his?] suckling son (ina UGU-hi zi-zi)”.112 This is a single-parent family of two persons: a maid (Ahatâ) and her unnamed suckling son. It is possible that the baby is dened as “his” son, indicating that the maid was his mistress (see families nos. 74, 80 and 88, above). They were sold by Akbaru son of BÏl-rÒba to Šulmu-šarri, a royal bodyguard, in DÖr-Katlimmu for a very low price of 20 shekels of silver (10 shekels per person). The date is lost. For the slaves of Šulmu-šarri see family no. 64, above. Family no. 94: This family is attested in DeZ 21051/13 (= SH 98/6949 I 932 = BATSH 6 97 = Text no. 66): “Pa-la-x-[. . .], (and her) da[ught]er”.113 The text is broken and fragmentary, but the restoration presented by Radner is convincing. This maid (Pala . . .) and her unnamed daughter were sold by Dihatari to Šulmu-šarri, a royal bodyguard, in DÖrKatlimmu, for half a mina of silver (15 shekels per person). The date is lost. For the slaves of Šulmu-šarri see family no. 64, above. Family no. 95: This unclear family is attested in A 2919 (= StAT 2 137 = Text no. 67): “[. . .]-Marduk, his son, [. . .? . . .?], his daughter, [a total of x persons]”. The size and structure of this family are uncertain since this text is broken. One possible restoration is presented in StAT 2 137: a nuclear family of four persons: a couple (whose names are lost), a son (Marduk) and an unnamed daughter. But other restorations may be presented. This family clearly includes a father, a son and a daughter. But it is possible that only the name of the father is mentioned (“[. . .]-Marduk”). At the beginning of line 2’ there is room for two or three unnamed members of this family, and therefore it may include ve or six persons. These slaves were bought by Nabû-zÏru-iddina in Aššur probably in Assurbanipal’s later reign.114 Family no. 96: “Mardî, gardener, his wife (and his) daughter, a total of 3 persons, slaves of Nabû-šumu-lÏšir” (ADD 235 = SAA XIV 49 = Text no. 68).115

112 For the pattern “ina UGU-hi zi-zi” see Radner, 2002, p. 89. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 877b(40), 1061b(5). 113 For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 993 a–b, 1022a. 114 For Nabû-zÏru-iddina see PNA, p. 910a(23). 115 For previous studies of this text see ARU 231; Parpola, 1979, p. 142; Oded, 1979, p. 96; AST, T204, no. 198; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 162–163, no. 130. This text

a survey of the lower stratum families

79

This is a nuclear family of three persons: a couple and an unnamed daughter. It is the only slave family whose head is dened as a gardener. It was sold by Nabû-šumu-lÏšir to KakkullÊnu in Nineveh for one mina of silver (20 shekels per person), probably in Assurbanipal’s reign or later. For KakkullÊnu see family no. 82, above. Family no. 97: “NanÊia-il[ÊxÒ] (and her) daughter, a total of 2 persons, Elamite captives whom the king has given to the city of Aššur (= ‘Libbi-Êli’)” (VAT 9755 = Unpublished; for a transliteration of lines 12–15, see Radner, 1997, p. 226, note 1253 = Text no. 69).116 This is a single-parent family of two persons: a maid (NanÊia-il[ÊxÒ]) and (her) unnamed daughter. They were Elamite captives that the king (Assurbanipal?) donated to the city of Aššur. But they changed hands, and in this legal transaction they were sold in Aššur for one mina of silver (30 shekels per person) to Mannu-kÒ-AššÖr by ten persons: SÊkip-AššÖr, Silim-AššÖr, Šep-AššÖr, a baker, Urdu-IssÊr and six others. The date is lost, but it should be dated to Assurbanipal’s reign or later. Family no. 98: The size and structure of this family are unclear. It is attested in VAT 15538 (= Unpublished; for a transliteration of lines 1’–3’, see Radner, 1997, p. 136, note 689 = Text no. 70), as follows: “KudurrÊ[nu], [. . .], MammÒtu-dÖri [. . .] (and) her weaned daughter (= MÍ.TURsa pirsu), MÍ.x[. . .]”.117 This is a family of at least two persons: a maid and her daughter. KudurrÊ[nu] may be the father of this family, but this is not certain. A few signs are missing after the names of the man and the woman, and the following restoration may be suggested: “[his slave]” after the man’s name; and “[his wife]” after the woman’s. The scribe used a very rare term, MÍ.TUR-sa, for the baby, and Radner may be right in determining MÍ.TUR as a scribal error for DUMU. MÍ.118 These slaves were sold in Aššur for 50 shekels of silver (16.66 shekels per person) to AššÖr-mÊtu-[taqqin?] by Anu-ahu-u[Éur] and AhhÖtu-kÒ-[. . .]. The date is lost, but it might be dated to Assurbanipal’s reign or later.

is not a usual purchase, see SAA XIV, p. 56, note. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 91–92, note 504d, 240–241; PNA, pp. 596a(7), 704a(14), 891b(11). 116 For this text see also Radner, 1997, pp. 246–247; PNA, pp. 176b, 230b–231a, 689a(22), 924b, 1066a, 1110a(9); Tallqvst, 1918, p. 220a. 117 For this text see also Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, pp. 62a, 195, 632b, 676b. 118 Radner, 1997, p. 136, note 689.

80

chapter two

Family no. 99: “Šiti-dannat (and) AššÖr-mÒtu-balli¢, her son, a total of 2 pers[on]s, slaves of Adad-milki-Ïreš” (VAT 8592 = SAAB 9 78 = Text no. 71).119 A maid and her son were bought from the fuller Adad-milki-Ïreš son of AššÖr-naxid by ErÒba-AššÖr in Aššur probably after Assurbanipal’s reign, for a high price of [o]ne and a half minas and four shekels of silver (47 shekels per person). Family no. 100: This nuclear family is attested in DeZ 20960 (= SH 00/6747 II 78 = BATSH 6 34 = Text no. 72), as follows: “LÊ-nasÒhi, his wife (and) his daughter, a total of 3 persons”. This is a small nuclear family of three persons: a couple and a daughter. It was sold by Sanî son of Il-šumki from Calah to Bapî in DÖr-Katlimmu, probably after Assurbanipal’s reign, for two minas of silver (40 shekels per person).120 Family no. 101: “Halmusu, tailor (and) his wife” (ADD 296 = SAA XIV 186 = Text no. 73).121 This couple without children was sold together with other four slaves by MÊr-[. . .] to BÊbilÊiu in Nineveh probably in the 7th century B.C. (the price is lost). Family no. 102: The size and structure of this family are unclear. It is attested in (ADD 305 = SAA XIV 247 = Text no. 74) as follows: “[. . .], his wife, his 2 sons, [his] daughter, [. . .], [a total of x per]sons, sla[ves of BÏl-Ïreš]”.122 This is a family of at least ve persons: a couple with two sons and a daughter. At the beginning of line 3 about three signs are missing,123 and a sixth member of this family was probably mentioned at this place, but his or her identity is not clear (it might be the family head’s brother, sister, mother, etc.). The text was sealed in Nineveh probably in the 7th century B.C., but it is badly broken and therefore the other details are lost, including the name of the buyer and the date.

119 For previous studies on this text see Pedersen, 1986, p. 103, N15(3); Radner, 1997, pp. 246–247; PNA, pp. 28b(8), 200a–b(12), 402a(21), 1021b(17), 1043–1044(7–8); Jakob-Rost et al., 2000, p. 10, and no. 77. 120 For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 1071a, 1090a(2). 121 For previous studies of this text see ARU 79; Parpola, 1979, pp. 153–154; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 65–66, no. 48; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, pp. 35a(10), 225b(12), 245b(32), 363b(7), 445a, 740b(2). 122 For previous studies of this text see ARU 94; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, p. 296a(6). 123 See Johns, ADD 305. In ARU 94 and in SAA XIV 247 the missing signs are wrongly presented at the end of line 2.

a survey of the lower stratum families

81

Family no. 103: The size and structure of this family are unclear. It is attested in ADD 282+283+ADD 802 (= SAA XIV 213 = Text no. 75), as follows:124 4 [x x x x x] x x x [x x] 4 [PN (Father) ] 5 [x x x x] x DUMU-[šú x x x] 5 [PN , his] son [. . .] break 6’ [x x x x x] x x [x x x x x] 6’ [. . . . . . . . .] 7’ [x x x x] DUMU-[šú x x x x] 7’ [PN , his] son [. . .] 8’ [x x x x] DUMU-šú 3 x[x x x] 8’ [PN], his son, (of ) 3 [spans’ (height)] 9’ [x x x x]-sa!-a DUMU-šú [0] 9’ [. . .]sâ, his son 10’ [x x x PAB x ZI.MEŠ] 10’ [. . . in all x persons] šá LÚ-MEŠ-e an-nu-te belonging to these men

This broken and fragmentary text species at least six slaves. Since there is no physical join between ADD 282 and ADD 283, more persons may be attested in the missing line/lines between these two fragments; it is unclear whether one or more families are mentioned in this text. Three main restorations of this text are feasible: 1) Only one large family is listed, and all its members are recorded by their personal names. It is a family of at least six persons: a father (line 4) and his ve sons (lines 5–9’, each mentioned in a separate line). Two sons are clearly dened as “his son” (lines 8’–9’); one is probably of three spans (line 8’), and the end of the name of the other is attested in line 9’ ([. . .]sâ). At the beginning of line 10’ a few signs are missing, and the age of the last son may have been attested here (he was probably a weaned or a suckling baby). Since sons are mentioned in lines 5 and 7’, it is reasonable that a son is also mentioned in line 6’. His wife is possibly mentioned in line 4. 2) Two families are mentioned; the rst, in lines 4–5, is at least of two persons: a father and his son; the second, mentioned in lines 6’–10’ is of four persons: a father and three sons (one of three spans and one weaned or suckling). A wife may be included in each family (in lines 4 and 6’). 3) Many families are attested, each including a father and his single son; this suggestion is less reasonable than the preceding two since it almost doubles the number of the slaves, and the price is low even if we assume that only six slaves are mentioned (see below).

124 For previous studies of this text see ARU 76; AST, T215, no. 300; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 351–352, no. 298–299; Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, p. 1101b(2).

82

chapter two

SÏx-iÊtê bought these slaves from SÏx-immê and DÒšî, probably in the 7th century B.C., for a relatively low price: two minas of silver (20 shekels per person, if six slaves were sold). The text was sealed in Nineveh but the slaves probably originated in Harran, since the penalty clauses refer to the temple of SÒn in Harran. Family no. 104: The size and structure of this family are unclear. It is attested in ADD 718 (= SAA XIV 326 = Text no. 76), as follows:125 1’ 2’ 3’ 4’ 5’ 6’ 7’

“AdÖnu, [. . .] NabÖtu, [. . .] Ammi-iababa, [. . .] Abdâ, [. . .] LaiÊ, [. . .] one ditto wean[ed] son [. . .], a total of 4 sons; a grand total of [x persons], slaves of [PN]”.

This broken and fragmentary text enumerates at least ve slaves. The weaned son, mentioned in line 6’, and the total “4 sons” indicate that a family of at least ve persons is attested in this text: a father and his four sons. Since ve names are listed in lines 1’–5’, each in a separate line, it is possible that AdÖnu was the father of this family, and NabÖtu, Ammi-iababa, Abdâ and LaiÊ, are the names of his four sons. The signs missing at the end of lines 2’–4’ may state the relation of the sons to their father, and may be restored as follows: “his son x” = “[DUMUšú x]” (see family no. 103, above). A wife may be mentioned at the end of line 1’, and the grand total might be six. But since the text is broken other restorations may be proposed. For example, it is not at all clear if only one name is mentioned in each line, or if the operative section of this text really does begin in line 1’. These slaves were bought in Nineveh by a scribe whose name is lost, as are other details of this text including the name of the seller and the date Families nos. 105–108: The size and structure of these families are unclear. They are attested in ADD 789 (= SAA XIV 337 = Text no. 77):126

125 For previous studies of this text see ARU 540; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245; PNA, pp. 4a(15), 55a(3), 104a, 650b, 897b(8). 126 For previous studies of this text see ARU 91; Radner, 1997, pp. 244–245.

a survey of the lower stratum families 1’ 2’ 3’ 4’ 5’ 6’–7’

83

(Family no. 105:) “[. . .] (and) his [wi]fe; (Family no. 106:) [. . .] (and) his [wi]fe; (Family no. 107:) [. . .] (and) his daughter; [. . . . . . . . .] (Family no. 108:) [. . .]-ili (and) his [wi]fe; [a total of of x persons, slav]es [of PN]”.

These slaves were bought in Nineveh. The text is broken and most details are lost, including the names of the parties and the date. The only distinct family is the last: a couple without children. It is reasonable to suppose that in line 1’ a couple is listed by a similar pattern “PN (and) his wi[fe]”. But it is unclear whether another member of this family is mentioned in this line before the wife, for example, his son (= “[PN, his son] (and) his wi[fe]”). The problem in lines 2’–3’ is even thornier, since it is not clear whether one or two families are attested in these lines. Even if we assume that two families are mentioned, it is impossible to state which members are included in each. Additional slaves were mentioned in lines 4’–5’a, but the details are lost. As a working hypothesis it is suggested that two families are attested in lines 2’ and 3’ (a family in each line), but both families were dened as unclear. Family no. 109: “[ . . .]-Marduk, his wife, his [x x x], his 2 daughters, [a total of x per]sons, slaves [of] these [me]n” (ADD 259 = SAA XIV 475 = Text no. 78).127 The size and structure of this family are unclear. It is a family of at least ve persons: a couple with two daughters and at least one but probably two or more uncertain members who are mentioned at the beginning of line 6, probably sons or brothers of the family head. The slaves were sold in Nineveh by three persons, BÏl-iqbi, ZÏru-ibni and BÏl-abu-uÉur, to Urdu for [1]80 (minas) of copper (= about 30 shekels of silver per person).128

127 For previous studies of this text see ARU 86; Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 243a, 248a; Parpola, 1979, p. 148; AST, T217, no. 328; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 453–454, no. 399; Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, pp. 22b(4), 280a(4), 314b(4), 656a(1), 712a(3), 867b(1). 128 The price was “[1]80 (minas)” of copper, not shekels of copper. The translation in SAA XIV 475 is mistaken. For the supposition that one mina of copper “corresponded roughly in value to” one shekel of silver see Fales, 1996, p. 20.

84

chapter two

Family no. 110: “Šamaš-erÒba (and) his wife, Busuku” (ADD 265 = SAA XIV 196 = Text no. 79).129 This couple without children were sold in Nineveh together with two single persons, [. . .]nulamš and BÏl-nÖr[i] (line 1’), to IsinnÊiu for 50 minas of copper, by the mina of [. . .] (about 12.5 shekels of silver per person).130 The date and the sellers’ names are lost. Family no. 111: This unclear family is attested in K 20541 (= SAA XIV 414 = Text no. 80): 3 “¾¢ir–x[x x x x (x)] 4 a total of 5 peo[ple of PN]”.

Two main restorations of line 3 may be suggested: 1. “his 4 sons” [= “4 DUMU.MEŠ-šú”] (or his four daughters, or brothers, etc.); 2. “4 persons” (= “[4 ZI.MEŠ”]).131 Both possibilities indicate that a family is recorded in this text.132 The slaves were sold in Nineveh. All the other details are lost. Family no. 112: This unclear family, sold in DÖr-Katlimmu, is probably of at least three persons: a couple and at least one daughter. It is attested in DeZ 21051/10 (= SH 98/6949 I 929 = BATSH 6 185 = Text no. 81). Radner suggests the following restoration of this very small fragment: 1’ “[PN], BÊia, [his wife], 2’ (and) [Na]nÊia-RÊ[mat, his daughter], 3’ [a total of 3 person]s [of . . .]”.133

This proposal is possible but other restorations of these three lines may be suggested. One possibility is that this family is a nuclear one of four persons, a couple with two daughters:

129 For previous studies of this text see ARU 75; Tallqvist, 1918, p. 210; Parpola, 1979, p. 150; AST, T217, no. 329; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 134–135, no. 113; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 242–243; PNA, pp. 356b, 443b–444a, 499a (8), 565b, 566a. 130 The price was 50 (minas) of copper, not shekels of copper. The translation in the following studies is mistaken: Kwasman, 1988, pp. 134–135; Radner, 1997, p. 242; and Mattila, SAA XIV, p. 158: all of them read 50 (shekels) of copper. But it is clear that the right translation is minas, and even this price is low. For the opinion that the price was 50 minas of copper see also Fales, 1996, p. 2*. 131 For the pattern: “PN—x persons, a total of x persons” see chapter III, below. 132 For the opinion that a family is enumerated in this text see also PNA, p. 408b. 133 For the name BÊia see PNA, p. 253a.

a survey of the lower stratum families 1’ 1’ 2’ 2’ 3’ 3’

85

[ mx x x x x] MÍ.ba-ia[-a MÍ-šú] [PN], BÊia, [his wife], [MÍ.x x MÍ.dna]-na-a–ra-[mat DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ-šú] [PN, Na]nÊia-RÊ[mat, his daughters] [PAB 4 ZI.MEŠ ARAD].MEŠ [ša mx x x x x] [a total of 4 persons, slave]s [of PN]

Family no. 113: This is a family of probably two persons: a maid (IssÊr. . .) and her daughter (A . . .). It is attested in DeZ 21059 (= SH 98/6747 II 205 = BATSH 6 200 = Text no. 82): “SimkÒ-il; the woman [. . .]; the woman, Hanana; the woman, IssÊr-[. . .] (and her) daughter, A-[. . .]; a grand total of 5 persons, slave[s of ] Epi’”.134 The text is broken and fragmentary but Radner’s restoration is convincing. These ve persons (a man, three women and a daughter, probably of IssÊr-. . .) were sold by Epix to AhulÏšir in DÖr-Katlimmu for two minas of silver (24 shekels per person). The rst three slaves probably were not relatives of IssÊr- . . . and (her) daughter. The date is lost. Family no. 114: “[. . .]ba-ilu, his wife (and) his sons” (A 341 = StAT 2 118 = Text no. 83).135 This is a nuclear family of at least four persons: a couple and at least two sons. The scribe does not state the number of the sons. They were sold together with at least two other slaves, who were probably not relatives of this family: . . . -Šamaš and the woman IssÊr-kulitti (line 4). These people were sold by Mannu-kÒ-Arbail in Aššur. The other details are lost. Family no. 115: This family is attested in A 795+ (= StAT 2 119 = Text no. 84): (Beginning destroyed) “2 sons [a total of ] 4 persons, [slaves] of Nabû’a”.136 It is a family of four persons: two sons, and probably a couple. These four slaves were sold in Aššur by Nabûxa to BibÊia for two minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish (half a mina per person). The date is lost.

134

For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 83a, 1112b. For this text see Pedersen, 1986, p. 118, N25(17). For the name Mannu-kÒ-Arbail see PNA, pp. 678–688. 136 For this text see Pedersen, 1986, p. 118, N25(12). For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 342a, 792b(92). 135

86

chapter two

Family no. 116: This unclear family is attested in an appeal to a governor published by Donbaz in 2003 in NABU, 2002/90, pp. 88–89 (A.3660 = Text no. 85): 1–2 “Qallussu, the fowlherd, is dead. 3–4 Ratuxâ, the commander-of-fty, 5–6 has sold (his) 4 persons for silver”.137

This appeal indicates that corrupt Assyrian ofcials occasionally sell free persons for money (see also lines 7–12 and especially lines 17–18: “Why are the . . . -ofcials selling us for silver”?). In the rst case (line 1–6) a corrupt commander-of-fty (Ratuxâ) sold four persons who were clearly related to Qallussu and were probably his family (his widow and orphans). The provenance of the text is unknown, and it is undated. Enslavement of widows by corrupt ofcials is attested in two other Neo-Assyrian texts: KAV 197 and SAA I 21.138

B. Pledged Persons Families nos. 117–118: These families are attested in ADD 58 (= SAA VI 81 = Text no. 86): (Family no. 117:) “Qurdi-Adad, his wife (and) his 3 sons; (Family no. 118:) KandalÊnu (and) his wife, a grand total of 7 persons (and) 12 hectares are placed as a pledge at the disposal of AddatÒ”.139 BibÒa, deputy of a village manager, owes two minas of silver to AddatÒ, the governess. In lieu of the silver, he pledges an estate of 12 hectares of land outside the city of Aššur and two families: one of ve people, a couple with three sons, and the other, a couple without children. Both families are nuclear, and only the fathers’ names are attested. Nineveh, 694 B.C. Families nos. 119–120: These families are attested in ADD 66 (= SAA VI 97 = Text no. 87): (Family no. 119:) “DÊri-BÏl, his wife, his 3 sons (and) his 2 daughters, together with his property (everything, down to the) chaff and twig;

137

For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 1036a, 1005. For KAV 197 see Fales, 1997, pp. 33–40. 139 For previous studies of this text see ARU 150; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 17–18, no. 7; Radner, 1997, pp. 376–377; PNA, pp. 51a, 342b(3), 600b(3), 1020a(6); Teppo, 2005, pp. 56–57. 138

a survey of the lower stratum families

87

(Family no. 120:) Hulli (and) his daughter—are placed as a pledge”.140 ArbÊiu (“The Arab”) owes 17 minas of silver (by the mina of the merchant?) to the lady Indibî (an Elamite name?). It was a short term loan with a period of grace. ArbÊiu promised to pay back the silver within less than three months. “If he does not pay (it shall increase) two shekels per mina per month” (40% per year). In addition to the mentioned terms and as a security for this large sum he also pledges a vineyard in Kapar-BÏl-ahhÏ and two families: the rst (= no. 119) of seven persons, a couple with ve children: three sons and two daughters; and the second (= no. 120), a single-parent family of two persons: a father and his daughter. Both families are nuclear, and only the names of the fathers are attested. The children’s age is not mentioned. The scribe distinguished the families by a note that refers only to the rst, pointing out that it is a pledge together with all its property: “(everything, down to the) chaff and twig” (a-di qi-ni-ti-šú ha-am-šú hu-Éa-bu). This remark may indicate that only the rst family possessed property, and that the status of these two families was not the same. Nineveh, 693 B.C. Families nos. 121–126: These families are attested in ADD 59 (= SAA VI 91 = Text no. 88): (Family no. 121:) “Ehijâ, his wife, his 3 sons (and) his 2 daughters; (Family no. 122:) Pilaqqâ, his wife (and) his 2 sons; (Family no. 123:) ”Êb-rÖhiti, his wife (and) his son; (Family no. 124:) Nabtê, his wife, his mother (and) his brother; (Family no. 125:) Dullaiaqanun, his wife, his mother, his son (and) his brother; (Family no. 126:) ÇrÒ-iâ, his wife, his mother (and) his brother, in all 27 persons, together with their elds, their houses, their gardens, their cattle, their sheep (and) their families (qin-ni-šú-nu) in the town of Dadi-ualla in the province of TalmÖsa . . . they are placed as a pledge”.141 Milkia, governor of TalmÖsa,142 owes 20 minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish, to a palace concubine (sekret ekalli). In lieu of this large sum he pledges six families, a total of 27 persons (4.5 persons per family) together with “their” property. In this text it is clear that the property includes means

140 For previous studies of this text see ARU 124; Postgate, 1976, pp. 128–129, no. 224; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 133–134, no. 112; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 221, 254; PNA, pp. 127b(2), 380a(6), 543b. 141 For previous studies of this text see ARU 124; Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 236b, 243a; Postgate, 1976, pp. 128–129, no. 224; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 133–134, no. 112; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 221, 254; PNA, pp. 127b(2), 380a(6), 543b, 750b(2). 142 For the identication of TalmÖsa see Parpola—Porter, 2001, p. 17, map 4.

88

chapter two

of production, but it is not clear if these people own the elds or are just the cultivators. Since the governor of TalmÖsa is presented as the owner of the land and of the people, the second possibility seems more likely. But it is not clear if these people cultivate state lands that were controlled by the governor, ex ofcio, or whether the lands were Milkia’s private property. In the litigation clauses the scribe mentions Milkia’s deputy, the village manager and mayor of his city, but on the other hand his sons and grandsons. The description of the people is very detailed, but the size of the elds and gardens as well as the amounts of the other properties (houses, cattle and sheep) are not stated: they were probably well known to both parties, and were sufcient to use as a security for this loan. The size and structure of all six families are evident: the rst three are nuclear, and consist of a couple with one son (no. 123), two sons (no. 122), and three sons and two daughters (no. 121). Families 124 and 126 are extended ones of four persons: a couple with a mother and a brother of the head of the family; and family 125 is also an extended one of ve persons: a couple with a son and a mother and a brother of the head of the family. The structure of these last families may indicate that these three couples were relatively young, and that one brother became the family head after his father’s death. Only the names of the heads of the families are attested, and the children’s age is unclear. Nineveh, 681 B.C. Families nos. 127–128: These families are attested in ADD 64 (= SAA VI 245 = Text no. 89): (Family no. 127:) “”Êba-rigimÊtu-Adad, his wife (and) his 2 girls (MÍ.TUR.MEŠ-šú); (Family no. 128:) Nabû-šar-ilÊni (and) his wife; (along with) 2 oxen (and) 10 hectares of sown eld are placed as a pledge at the disposal of DannÊia”.143 [. . .]-¢Êba, deputy (governor) of RaÉappa, owes 15 minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish, to DannÊia, a rich Assyrian ofcial.144 In lieu of the silver he pledges an estate of 200 hectares of land in the town of Qubate along with ten hectares of sown eld and two families of six persons: a family of four people, a couple and two daughters, dened as MÍ.TUR.MEŠ-šú (see family

143 For previous studies of this text see ARU 152; Parpola, 1979, p. 118; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 103–104, no. 90; Radner, 1997, pp. 376–377, 386; Radner, 2001, p. 271, note 40; PNA, p. 873b(1). 144 For the transactions of DannÊia especially with high ofcials in RaÉappa in Esarhaddon’s reign see PNA, pp. 376b(5). He bought at least ve slaves (SAA VI 239, 244, 246) and owned at least 580 sheep and two camels (SAA VI 241–243).

a survey of the lower stratum families

89

no. 98); and a couple without children. Both families are nuclear, and only the fathers’ names are attested. Nineveh, 672 B.C. Family no. 129: “DÒ[d]î, the [. . .(and) his wife?] are pla[ced] as a pledge” (ADD 65 = SAA VI 307 = Text no. 90).145 ”usî and [. . .]î, deputy (probably BÊnî, deputy of the chief physician) owe three minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish, to RÏmanni-Adad, chief chariot driver of Assurbanipal. In lieu of the silver they pledge DÒ[d]î, the [. . .], and probably one of his relatives. At the beginning of line 6 only DÒ[d]î is mentioned (the end of this line is broken), but line 10 indicates that at least two persons were pledged (“UN.MEŠ”). The restoration “his wife” proposed by Kwasman and Parpola in SAA VI 307 is possible,146 but there are other possibilities (his son, his daughter etc.), and therefore this family is dened in this study as unclear. Nineveh, 668 B.C. For RÏmanni-Adad see families nos. 53–55, above. Family no. 130 is attested in VAT 5606 (= SAAS V, no. 28 = AoF 24, pp. 129–132 = Text no. 91): (1–4) “Lawsuit (dÏnu) that Šamaš-nÊÉir brought against Arbail-hammat, the wife of SanÊnu, (and) against Nabû-erÒb, her son, a total of two (persons) from the village of the King’s daughter . . . (14–16) Arbailhammat, Nabû-erÒba, BÏl-lÏxi, AhÊtu-lÊmur (and) ŠulmÒtu, a total of 5 persons, will work for Šamaš-nÊÉir”.147 The size and structure of this family are unclear. It seems that it is a single-parent family of at least two persons: a mother, Arbail-hammat, probably the widow of SanÊnu, and her son Nabû-erÒba. Lines 15–16 may indicate that three other females were included in this family (BÏl-lÏxi, AhÊtu-lÊmur and ŠulmÒtu). They are probably Arbailhammat’s daughters or maids (the rst possibility is more reasonable, see below). The scenario of this case might be as follows: after the death of SanÊnu, Arbail-hammat, his widow, made an effort to manage her late husband’s farm. But she failed, and was compelled to borrow money from a eunuch of the king (about one mina of silver). In lieu

145 For previous studies of this text see ARU 141; Tallqvist, 1918, p. 238a; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 286–287, no. 242; Radner, 1997, pp. 376, 379; PNA, pp. 264a(8), 383b(7). 146 For a similar opinion see R. Mattila, PNA, p. 383a(7). 147 For previous studies of this text see Radner, 1997, pp. 365–366; Radner, 1997a, pp. 129–133; Radner, 1997–1998, p. 384; Villard, 2000, pp. 184–185; see also Tallqvist, 1918, p. 211a; PNA, pp. 60a(1), 127a(1), 320b(12), 1087b(2).

90

chapter two

of the silver she pledged herself and her son to the creditor. The fact that she pledged herself and her son (in this case) and not the three females mentioned above might indicate that they were her daughters and not her maids; had they been her maids she would have pledged them, not herself and her son. Šamaš-nÊÉir (her relative?) redeemed her and her son from the estate of the king’s eunuch, and probably tried to take advantage of this widow’s economic difculties. He also offered her a loan of fty homers of barley, a plow, and an ox (which might indicate that she owned a large farm); and since she failed to return the loan he sued her for a large sum of silver (12.5 minas), which clearly includes interest and penalties for late payment. He probably tried to take over her farm, but he failed and the judge accepted Arbail-hammat’s proposal and pledged the family in lieu of the silver. Since the value of the work of ve people was about 50 shekels per year, and since they were pledged instead of the interest, the value of the loan, in the view of the judge, was probably much lower than 12.5 minas (assuming interest of 25%–33%). Aššur, 638* B.C. Family no. 131: “AhÊ[tÒ- . . ., (and) her son], in lieu of half [a mina of silver], will ser[ve] Al[a . . .]” (VAT 20786 = StAT 1 36 = Text no. 92).148 This is probably a single-parent family of two persons: a woman and her son. The form ipalluhÖ (pl. mas.) indicates that the woman is mentioned with her son, and Radner’s restoration is convincing. This unique text from the goldsmiths’ archive indicates that two persons (A[. . .] and Ha[. . .]) owed half [a mina of silver] to Al[a . . .]. In lieu of the silver, AhÊ[tÒ-. . ., (and) her son], are transferred to the creditor. On the one hand, this text is not formulated as a sale of persons, and the scribe points out that the two persons will serve the creditor, like other pledges. However, the text indicates that by transferring the people they paid their debt. The solution of this contradiction might be as follows: just as in restricted conveyance, this text “attached conditions to the conveyance which make it fall short of an irrevocable act of sale”.149 The woman and her son are “sold” for half a mina (a low price) and the loan is “paid off ”, but the sellers have the option to pay back the money in the future and to redeem the persons; meanwhile the woman

148 For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 59b(2), 481b(3), 642a(23), 688a(32), 1155a(31). For this text see also Pedersen, 1986, p. 135, N33(60). 149 Postgate, 1976, p. 28.

a survey of the lower stratum families

91

[and her son] are actually in the status of pledged persons, and therefore the scribe points out that they will serve the creditor (instead of the interest). Aššur, 614*B.C. Family no. 132: This single-parent family of two persons, a woman and her daughter, is attested in VAT 19500, a dÏnu text published by Radner (1997, p. 369, = Text no. 93): as follows: “You have placed a woman and her daughter in your house as a pledge”.150 The woman and her daughter are placed by Nabû-zÏru-iddina in his house as a pledge.151 This is why Nabû-apkal-ilÊni sues him, and as a result the latter pays him half a mina of silver. The context of this case is unclear: it is possible that a loan was repaid but the pledges were not returned, or that the persons were pledged in lieu of a loan, but the creditor did not transfer the money to the debtor. Aššur, year of SÒn-kÏnu-Òdi.152 Family no. 133: This family is attested in ADD 78 (= SAA XIV 181 = Text no. 94): “Amat-kurra, his wife; Abi-rahî, his daughter; Sukki-Aia, his son; [ . . .]ilu, his son; BÏl-Ïmuran[ni, his . . ., a total of 5], are placed (as a pledge) [in l]ieu of the silver.153 A debtor, whose name is lost, pledged his family (but not himself ) in lieu of a loan of 12(?) minas of silver in Nineveh probably in the 7th century B.C. The creditor is Šamaš-abÖxa, a horse trainer, and the interest is 12 shekels monthly per mina. The pledged family is of ve persons: the debtor’s wife, daughter, two sons and another male, BÏlÏmuran[ni], whose relation with the rest of the family is unclear: he might be the debtor’s son, brother or slave. It is possible that the relation of BÏl-Ïmuran[ni] with the debtor is mentioned at the beginning of line 8: (= “[DUMU/PAB/ARAD-šú PAB 5]” instead of “[PAB 5 ZI.MEŠ]” suggested in SAA XIV 181). 150 For this text see also Radner, 2001, p. 270, notes 28 and 31. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 804a(1), 910a(23). 151 The scribe used here, uniquely in Neo-Asssyrian texts, the Babylonian expression ana maškanÖti šakÊnu. 152 The text is dated to the year of the eponym ofcial SÒn-kÏnu-Òdi. Whiting (apud Millard, 1994, p. 73) identies this eponym ofcial with SÒn-Êlik-pÊni, a post canonicaleponym of the year 615* (see also PNA, p. 1135b). Parpola (PNA, I/1, p. xviii, note 25), listed SÒn-kÏnu-Òdi as one of the unassigned eponyms, and this study, as mentioned earlier, follows Parpola’s system of the post-canonical eponyms. 153 For previous studies of this text see ARU 155; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 388–389, no. 336; Radner, 1997, pp. 243, 380; PNA, pp. 12b(5), 99a, 294b(22), 1156a(49).

92

chapter two

Two facts in this text are amazing: 1. the value of the pledge (ve persons, most of them children) is very low compared with the very large sum of the loan (12[?] Minas of silver; the average price of ve persons was ca. 2.5 minas of silver); 2. the interest in this text (12 shekels monthly per mina = 20% monthly, 240% yearly), is the highest rate of interest in the Neo-Assyrian period, and it is more than double the highest penalty for late payment. This interest is even higher since the work of the pledged people was usually a substitute for it and not an addition. The text possibly indicates the debtor’s desperate attempt to get the money even at a very high price; on the other hand, the creditor (Šamaš-abÖxa, the horse trainer) might have been willing to risk his money, hoping to make large prots from this loan. Since the text is broken it is not clear whether a guarantor was involved in this case. Family no. 134: “[Tiurame], slave of Tarhu-[. . .], his [2 . . .]s, 1 wife, a total of 4 person[s. They are pla]ced [as a pledge] in lieu of 6 minas of silver” (ADD 79 = SAA XIV 209 = Text no. 95).154 This is a family of four persons: a couple and two other relatives, probably sons or brothers of the family head. They were pledged to Nahirî in Nineveh, probably in the 7th century B.C., in lieu of six minas of silver; the other details of this broken text are unclear, and the restoration of lines 5–7 presented in SAA XIV 209 is problematic. It is not clear who the debtor was: line 1 indicates that it was Tarhu[. . .], since the head of the pledged family is presented as his slave; but according to the restoration suggested in SAA XIV 209, line 5 indicates that Tiurame is the debtor (“Tiurame shall [give 6 min]as of silver”). Yet if Tiurame is the debtor, what role is played by of Tarhu-[. . .] in this case? And why did he agree that Tiurame would pledge his slaves? If Tiurame and his family were the slaves of Tarhu-[. . .] the situation seems even more problematic, since it is not clear why Tarhu-[. . .] permitted Tiuarme, his slave, to take a loan of six minas, a relatively large sum, and to pledge himself and his family in lieu of this silver. It seems that a different transliteration and translation of lines 5–8 should be suggested, presenting a different scenario of this case:

154 For previous studies of this text see ARU 130; Parpola, 1979, p. 121; Radner, 1997, pp. 380, 383; PNA, pp. 893a(14), 922b(3).

a survey of the lower stratum families 5 6 7 8

93

[ina ku-um 6 M]A.NA KUG.UD mti-ur-a-me [a-di UN.MEŠ-šú] MU.AN.NA-šú a-na mna-hi-ri-[i] [i-pal-lu-hu šum-m]a! KUG.UD la id-din mti-u[r!-a-me] [a-di UN.MEŠ-šú zar-p]u laq-qi-ú ru!-b[é-e la-šú]

Translation: (5–7a) [In lieu of 6 m]inas of silver, Tiurame [and his people will serve] Nahirî for a year. (7b–8) [I]f he does not pay back the silver, Tiu[rame and his people are purcha]sed and acquired. [There is no] inte[rest]. Tarhu-[ . . .] owes six minas of silver to Nahirî. In lieu of the silver he pledges his four slaves, Tiurame and his family. They will stay with Nahirî for one year and serve him (instead of the interest). On the day Tiurame completes “his year”, Tarhu-[ . . .] will pay back six minas of silver and redeem his slaves. If he does not pay, Tiurame and his family will be considered Nahirî’s property. The term MU.AN.NA-šú is also attested in other Neo-Assyrian loans with pledges with a same meaning: “his year(s) of service”; see, for example, SAA XIV 108. Family no. 135: This family is attested in ADD 85 (= SAA XIV 216 = Radner, 1999a, p. 105 = Text no. 96): “[Seal of ] Mannu-kÒ-InÖrta. [x mina(s) of sil]ver, his debt, [Âalam-ša]rri-iqbi pa[id ba]ck to the merchant (tamkÊru), (and) reedemed Mannu-kÒ-InÖrta, Arbail-šarrat, his wife (and) his daughter, a total of three persons, from the merchant. In lieu of interest in silver they will work for Âalam-šarri-iqbi”.155 Âalam-šarri-iqbi pays the debt of Mannu-kÒ-InÖrta (his relative?) to an unnamed merchant, and thus redeems Mannu-kÒ-InÖrta, his wife and his daughter, from the hands of the merchant, and prevents the enslavement of this nuclear family. But the socio-economic status of the family did not change, since their deliverer was not so generous: he indeed prevented their enslavement, but in fact he became their new owner and creditor. In lieu of the interest this family would now serve Âalam-šarri-iqbi until the silver was paid back. As mentioned above, the merchant in this text is unnamed (see also text no. 91, above), and Radner has pointed out that “it is highly unusual that the name of the creditor is not mentioned at all”.156 But actually this text is not an agreement between Âalam-šarri-iqbi and the anonymous merchant,

155 For previous studies of this text see ARU 656; Parpola, 1979, p. 122; Radner, 1997, p. 199; Radner, 1999a, pp. 105–106. PNA, pp. 127, 691b(3), 887b(52), 1165b(25)–1166a. 156 Radner, 1999a, pp. 105–106.

94

chapter two

but between Mannu-kÒ-InÖrta and Âalam-šarri-iqbi, and therefore the seal of Mannu-kÒ-InÖrta is mentioned at the beginning of this text. The creditor now is not the merchant but Âalam-šarri-iqbi. Nineveh, date is lost (probably in the 7th century B.C.)

C. “Land and People” C.1. “Land and People”—Legal Transactions Family no. 136: This family is attested in ADD 473/474 (= SAA VI 100/101 = Text no. 97): “A tower (and) an estate of 10 hec[tares of land] in the midst of a meadow in the town of [. . .]; (Family no. 136:) Abdi-KubÖbi, [his] wife, (and his) [2 sons/brothers], a total of 4 persons of H[arurÊnu] and [SalÒlÊnu]”.157 This is a family of four persons: a couple and two other relatives who might be two sons or two brothers of Abdi-KubÖbi (probably a Canaanite name). In SAA VI 100: 10 (= SAA VI 101: 7’) the family is dened by the pattern: “PN adi/u UN.[MEŠ-šú]”. HarurÊnu and SalÒlÊnu sell this family along with a tower and an estate of ten hectares of land to AplÊia, a “third man” of the crown prince UrduMullissu (Sennacherib’s son and one of his assassins). The price is lost. Nineveh, 698 B.C. Family no. 137: This unclear family is attested in ADD 427 (= SAA VI 37 = Text no. 98), as follows: “Two vineyards, an estate of three hectares of land in the town of Šiddi-hiriti; Qausu, AššÖr-bÏlu-taqqin, gardener, Ah-immê, palace farmer, 3 w[omen], 1 son, a grand total of 7 persons”.158 The relation between these seven persons is unclear. At least one family is attested in this text, since a son is mentioned in line 9. But it is not clear who was his father. The different professions of AššÖr-bÏlu-taqqin and Ahimmê probably indicate that they were not members of the same family.

157 For previous studies of this text see ARU 96–96a; Postgate, 1974a, p. 67; Parpola, 1979, pp. 187–188; AST, T197, no. 147; Parpola, 1983, p. 455, no. 22; Kwasman, 1988, pp. xl, 38–42, no. 27–28; Radner, 1997, pp. 324, 353; PNA pp. 6a, 116a(11), 463a(1), 1070b. Kwasman suggested that this text originate in Arrapha (1988, pp. xl, 40). 158 For previous studies of this text see 3R 48/4; Op. pp. 152–153; KB 4, pp. 114–117; ARU 186; Parpola, 1979, pp. 175–176; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 411–412, no. 358; Radner, 1997, pp. 224, 324; PNA, pp. 65b(3), 173b(8), 511b(1), 1011a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

95

The text possibly listed three couples, and one of them was the anonymous son’s parents. But there are other possibilities, for example, that Qausu and AššÖr-bÏlu-taqqin are two single persons, and Ah-immê is the head of a family of ve persons, a son and three women, who might be his wife and two daughters. In this study this family was dened as unclear, since none of these possibilities takes precedence. Il-amar, chief of the granaries of Maganuba (city near Dur-ŠarrukÒn), sold these seven persons along with two vineyards and an estate of three hectares of land in the town of Šiddi-hiriti (near Maganuba). This property was sold to Šumma-ilÊni, for 25 minas of silver, in Nineveh in 694 B.C. Most of the money was clearly for the two vineyards, and the large sum paid indicates their size and quality. Šumma-ilÊni was a rich chariot driver in Nineveh in the days of Sargon II and Sennacherib. For his transactions see families nos. 5–8, above. Family no. 138: This family of ve persons is attested in ADD 432 (= SAA VI 149 = Text no. 99), by the pattern “PN—a total of x persons”: “[ . . .]-erÒba(?), a total of 5 persons”.159 Most details of this broken sale of “Land and People” are lost. All that is clear is that the land is mentioned in the detailed description of the property before the people, and that in lines 5–7 at least eight persons are listed: (1) [. . .]lâ, a plowman, is mentioned in line 5 (probably a single person); (2) family no. 138 is mentioned in line 7; (3) another family is probably attested in line 6, also by the pattern “PN—a total of x persons”. But only the signs ZI.MEŠ are preserved at the end of this line, and since the number of the persons of this family is lost nothing is actually known about it; therefore it was not counted as a family in this study. Nineveh, 689 B.C. Family no. 139: This unclear family is attested in ADD 456 (= SAA VI 155 = Text no. 100): “BÊbu-[. . . . . . . . .], [his] 3 daughters [. . . . . .]”.160 Most details of this broken sale of “Land and People” are lost. What is clear is that the land is mentioned in the detailed description of the property before the people, and that in lines 7’–8’ a family of at least four persons is attested: a father (BÊbu- . . .) and three daughters, and probably other members of this family whose record is lost. Nineveh, 687 B.C.

159 160

For previous studies of this text see ARU 432; Parpola, 1979, p. 177. For a previous study of this text see ARU 451. See also PNA, p. 249b(3).

96

chapter two

Family no. 140: This unclear family is attested in ADD 443 (= SAA VI 169 = Text no. 101): “Tarhundapî, the . . ., his [. . . . . .], [his] son/daughter [. . . . . . . . .], [his] wife”.161 The size and structure of this family are unclear. Two main suggestions may be presented, but neither is preferable: (1) the text mentions only one family of at least four persons: a couple, a son or a daughter, listed at the end of line 13, and probably other members of this family, stated in lines 13–14; (2) two families are attested in this text: one in lines 12–13 and the other in line 14. Gad-il sells these people along with a vacant lot, a fowl, and an estate of 30 hectares of land near the town of Adian, on the mainland of Assyria. Nineveh, 686 B.C. Families nos. 141–143: These three unclear families are attested in ADD 453 (= SAA VI 163 = Text no. 102). The text is broken, and a new restoration of lines 5–10 is suggested below: 5 [mx x x] mmil-ki–su!-[ri] 6 [DUMU-šú MÍ. x x]-[a!] MÍ-šú [0] (Family no. 141) “[. . .], Milki-sÖrÒ, [his son?] (and) [ . . .], his wife; 7 [mx x x mba]l-¢a-a-a 8 [DUMU-šú MÍ.UR]U!.NINA!.KI!.i!-[tú] 9 [MÍ-šú mx] x mdIM–S[U] 10 [DUMU-šú MÍ.x x]- šá–NIGÍN!-hur M[Í!-šú] (7–9a) (Family no. 142) [. . .], Bal¢i-Aia, [his son?] (and) NinuxÒtu, [his wife]; (9b–10) (Family no. 143) [. . .], Adad-er[Òba, his son?] (and) [. . .]ša-lishur, [his] wi[ fe]”.162

Several families are evidently enumerated in lines 5–10, since a wife is attested at least at the end of line 6 and probably also at the end of line10. According to the proposed restoration, (1) each family includes three persons, a couple and a son or a brother of the family head; (2) all nine persons are named; (3) the names of all the family heads are lost; (4) Milki-sÖrÒ, Bal¢i-Aia, and Adad-er[Òba] are sons or brothers of the family heads; (5) the names of the wives are at least partly preserved ([. . .]a, NinuxÒtu, and [. . .]ša-lishur). Since this restoration is tentative, these three families are dened in this study as unclear. Ahu-dÖrÒ sells

161 For previous studies of this text see ARU 97; Tallqvist, 1918, p. 230a , Parpola, 1979, p. 180; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 440–441, no. 386; Radner, 1997, pp. 255–256, 314; PNA p. 418a. 162 For previous studies of this text see ARU 187; Parpola, 1979, p. 182; Radner, 1997, pp. 224, 324; PNA, pp. 25b(2), 73a(9), 260b(4), 753a, 965a(1).

a survey of the lower stratum families

97

these persons along with an estate, a house and a threshing oor in Šibaniba (on the mainland of Assyria). The property was sold to an unknown buyer in Nineveh in 686 B.C. The other details are lost. Family no. 144: This family is attested in ADD 430 (= SAA VI 173 = Text no. 103): “An estate of 20 hectares of land, an irrigated eld, a vegetable garden belonging to Zarî son (= ‘bur’) of Nabû-de’iq, his wife, his daughter . . .”.163 The size and structure of this family are unclear. It consists of at least three persons, a couple and a daughter, but since the rest of the text is broken off it may have additional members. The formulation of this text is unique: (1) the word “son” is written in an Aramaic form: “bur” (= br) and not in one of the usual Akkadian forms (A or DUMU); (2) moreover, Zarî is the only person listed as an “object” sold in a sale of “Land and People” whose father’s name is attested; (3) if we follow the restoration suggested in SAA VI 173, the father of the family is Zarî son of Nabû-dexiq, and the vegetable garden is presented as belonging to him (ša Zarî), as in a few texts of the “Harran Census”, where small parcels of land or an ox are sometimes dened as belonging to the cultivators (= ša ramanišu/ša ramanišunu). In this case we may suppose that the estate (of 20 hectares) belongs to the seller (the scribe, NabûÏ¢ir-napšÊti son of IbnÊia), while the vegetable garden, located in the same farm, belongs to Zarî son of Nabû-dexiq, probably the cultivator. Another possibility is that the word ša before the personal name Zarî is a scribal error. The people and the land were sold to a buyer, whose name is lost, in Nineveh in 685 B.C. Families nos. 145–148: These families are attested in ADD 447 (= SAA VI 90 = Text no. 104): (Family no. 145:) “RÏmÖt-ilÊni, his mother (and) his 3 brothers, a total of 5 persons; (Family no. 146:) Šamaš-uballi¢ (and) his son; (Family no. 147:) SÊsî, his 2 sons (and) his wife; (No family:) Nabûxa, his 3 brothers (and) his sister, a total of 5 persons; (Family no. 148:) ZabÒnu, gardener (and) his wife; An orchard of fruit; a grand total of 17 persons (and) an orchard in Nabur, “slaves” of Martu’ and Mardî”.164 The text lists 18 persons, so

163 For previous studies of this text see ARU 32; Parpola, 1979, p. 177; see also PNA, pp. 500b(3), 820b(4), 831b(5). 164 For previous studies of this text see KB 4, p. 11; ARU 61; Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 213b, 246a; Oded, 1979, pp. 94, 96; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 18–20, no. 14; Radner, 1997, pp. 221, 224; PNA, pp. 67b(1)–68a, 703b(5), 742b(1), 789b(31), 1046a(2), 1093b(3).

98

chapter two

the grand total “17” clearly contradicts the number of persons in the detailed description. It is probably a scribal mistake. These 18 persons are divided into four families and one “no family” of ve persons: four brothers and a sister (for the term “no family” see Introduction). All four families are nuclear: a mother with four sons (no. 145; one of the sons is presented as the family head); a father with his son (no. 146); a couple with two sons (no. 147), and a couple without children (no. 148, ZabÒnu “a gardener” and his wife). These 18 people and an orchard were sold by Martu’ and Mardî, to Ahi-¢allÒ, “governess of (the central city of ) Nineveh”, in 683 B.C. (the price is lost).165 Martu’ is designated as a “village manager of the queen”, but on the other hand as an “ARAD” of the governor of Barhalza, like Mardî.166 It is reasonable to suppose that Martu’ was a village manager of the queen in the area of Barhalza and therefore he was also under the jurisdiction of the local governor. The 18 people were also dened as “LÚ.ARAD. MEŠ”, a very rare term in sales of “Land and People”. The two sellers, Martu’ and Mardî, although dened as the governor’s ARAD.MEŠ, were probably not his slaves but his subordinates. The status of the “sold” persons is less clear: they might be slaves but it is also possible that they are the cultivators of the orchard. In this text the picture is especially vague and problematic since the price and size of the orchard are lost (for the status of the people enumerated in texts of “Land and People” see chapter III). Families nos. 149–150: These two families are attested in ADD 422/423 (= SAA VI 50/51 = Text no. 105): (Family no. 149:) “HašÊnu, his 4 sons (and) his wife; (Family no. 150:) Danqî, her son (and) [her] daugh[ter, a tot]al of 9 persons, “slaves” o[ f Bar-ahÊ]tÒ in Tixi”.167 Both are nuclear families, the rst of six persons, a couple and four sons, the second a singleparent family of three persons, a woman and her son and daughter. The people are designated as slaves, but their status is unclear, and it is even unclear if the status of both families is the same (see below). This text documents the purchase of a very large property, consisting of 50 hectares of land, 10,000 vines, a built house and nine persons.

165

For Ahi-¢allÒ see family no. 23, and note 39, above. For the location of Barhalza see Parpola—Porter, 2001, p. 7 and map 4. 167 For previous studies of this text see ARU 103–104; Parpola, 1979, pp. 173–174; AST, T204, no. 205; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 423–425, no. 370–371; Radner, 1997, pp. 252, 324; PNA, pp. 269a, 379a, 464a(2). 166

a survey of the lower stratum families

99

The price is extremely low: only six minas of silver (“by the mi[na of the king?]”). The average price of nine slaves is about four and a half minas of silver. It is unreasonable that a farm of 50 hectares of land, 10,000 vines and a built house would cost only about one and a half mina. If we assume that the people were not slaves the price appears far more reasonable. This property was sold by Bar-ahÊtÒ in Nineveh probably in the reign of Sargon II or Sennacherib. The buyer is ŠummailÊni, a well known chariot driver who bought at least 50 slaves in the course of about 30 years (709–680 B.C.; see families nos. 5–8, above). This estate is located in the town Tixi probably near Maganuba, a town in central Assyria, near Dur-ŠarrukÒn. Family no. 151: This unclear family is attested in ADD 455 (= SAA VI 112 = Text no. 106): “[. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .] his son [. . .], [. . ., his] suckling [son / daughter], a total of 6 per[sons, slaves? of] Bi-D[Êdi]”.168 The size and structure of this family are unclear. It consists of at least two children, a son and a suckling son or daughter. The total is six persons but it is not clear if all of them belong to this family. These people along with an estate of at least x thousand and 600 vines, elds and a well were sold by Bi-DÊdi in Nineveh probably at the end of Sennacherib’s reign. The buyer is SÏ’-ma’ÊdÒ, a village manager of the crown prince who in the last three years of Sennacherib’s reign (683–680) bought at least 17 slaves in three different legal transactions (SAA VI 109–111: see family no. 26, above). Families nos. 152–153: These two unclear families are attested in ADD 462 (= SAA VI 269 = Text no. 107): (Family no. 152:) “[PN, . . . . . . . . . . . .], [his?] 4 gi[rls . . . . . .]; (Family no. 153:) Šamaš-issÏx[a . . . . . . . . .], [ his?] 2 girl[s . . . . . . . . .]”.169 Each unclear family includes at least a father and two or four unnamed daughters designated by the relatively rare term MÍ.TUR.MEŠ.170 These people, together with three gardens, were sold by Haldi- . . . to a buyer, whose name is lost, for 10 [minas of silver] in Nineveh in 679 B.C.

168 For previous studies of this text see ARU 381, see also PNA, pp. 343b(2), 1090a(4), 1102a-b(1), 1103b(3). 169 For previous studies of this text see ARU 375; Radner, 1997, pp. 153–154; PNA, p. 442b(2). 170 For the restoration “4 MÍ.TU[R]” in line 2’ see Radner, 1997, p. 153, note 780.

100

chapter two

Families nos. 154–155: These families are attested in ADD 428 (= SAA VI 253 = Text no. 108): “(1’) [. . . . . . . . . . . .]; (2’) Šumma-Ad[ad, . . . . . . . . .]; (3’) Gabbu-Êmur, farmer, [. . . . . .]; (4a) (Family no. 154:) Nabû-nÊdin-ahhÏ (and) 1 son (of ) 4 span[s’] (height); (4b–5a) (Family no. 155:) [. . .], 1 wife (and) 1 son (of ) 4 span[s’] (height); (5b–6a) an estate of 60 hectares of land, 31 persons and a vineyard”.171 Each of these unclear families includes at least a father and a son of three or four spans’ height. The rst is probably a single-parent family of two persons, a father and a son; the second is probably of three persons, a couple and a son. This restoration of the text is based on the supposition that only the personal names of the heads of these families are stated. But there are also other possible ways to understand these lines so these families are dened as unclear. One of the other possibilities is that Nabû-nÊdin-ahhÏ is Gabbu-Êmur’s son of four spans.172 Since the beginning of this text is broken off, most of the 31 persons “sold” in this legal transaction are lost. Both ŠummaAdad and Gabbu-Êmur are possibly also heads of families, but all the details about them are lost. These people, along with a large estate of 60 hectares of land, and a vineyard (whose size is not stated), were sold by ParÖ¢¢u to IssÊr-dÖrÒ, scribe of the queen mother, for the large sum of 58.5 minas of silver (“1.5 minas less than 1 talent”), in Nineveh probably in Esarhaddon’s reign. Family no. 156: This unclear family is attested in ADD 804 (= SAA VI 251 = Text no. 109): “Nergal-ubal[li¢ x x x x] x, his wife”.173 The size and structure of this family are unclear. It has at least two people, Nergaluballi¢ and his wife, but the restoration of the ve signs between the name Nergal-uballi¢ and the signs “his wife” is unclear. A few proposals are possible. They could be (1) his wife’s personal name; (2) other member(s) of this family, for example, “his son (and) his daughter”, etc.; (3) the family head’s profession. These people, along with a garden, a house and land, were bought by the princess Šadditu, who is called 171

For previous studies of this text see ARU 106; Parpola, 1979, pp. 173–174; AST, T204, no. 206; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 136–137, no. 114; Radner, 1997, pp. 135–136, 224; PNA, pp. 413b(19), 570b(15), 849b(8), 990a(2). 172 For this possibility see PNA, p. 849b(8). But this proposal is problematic since the son of three spans in line 5’ is unnamed, and it is not reasonable that in line 4’ the scribe would mention the name of a young child while in the next line he would not. 173 For previous studies of this text see ARU 102; AST, T216, no. 312; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 461–462, no. 405; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 195, 252, 309; PNA, pp. 958a(7), 1115b.

a survey of the lower stratum families

101

in lines 5’–6’ “daughter of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, and sister of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria”. Her mother was probably Naqixa/ Zakutu.174 The property was sold by a few sellers whose names are lost, in Nineveh in Esarhaddon’s reign, for eight minas of silver, by the mina of Carchemish. Family no. 157: This unclear family is attested in ADD 452 (= SAA XIV 6 = Text no. 110), as follows: “[x x x x] x, [his] wife”.175 The size and structure of this family are unclear. It is a family of at least two people, a man, whose name is lost, and his wife, but the restoration of the signs at the beginning of line 1’ is unclear, and a few proposals are possible: the personal name of the wife or of her husband, or even other member(s) of this family. The gardener mentioned in line 2’ has probably no relation to this family. These people together with land were sold by Naxid-AššÖr and [Qu]rdi-IssÊr-lÊmur to Milki-nÖrÒ in Nineveh at the end of Esarhaddon’s reign or at the beginning of Assurbanipal’s reign. The other details are lost. Milki-nÖrÒ was a eunuch of the queen who bought people and “Land and People” at the beginning of Assurbanipal’s reign (see family no. 50, above). Family no. 158: This unclear family is attested in ADD 727 (= SAA XIV 3 = Text no. 111): “[PN, . . . . . . . . . . . .]a, a total of two sons, [ . . .] his [dau]ghter, [. . . .] a grand total of 10 persons”.176 The size and structure of this family are unclear. It is probably a family of at least four people, a father with two sons and a daughter. The scribe probably noted the personal names of all persons, but no name is preserved. At the beginning of line 4’ an additional member of this family is possibly mentioned (the wife?) or a total of persons of this family. These people, together with others (a grand total of ten persons) and a house and land, were sold to Milki-nÖrÒ in Nineveh at the end of Esarhaddon’s reign or at

174

For Naqixa/Zakutu see Melville, 1999. For previous studies of this text see ARU 556; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 213, no. 176; Radner, 1997, pp. 224, 245; PNA, pp. 752a(1a), 915b(5). Milki-nÖrÒ is active in the province of Lahiru (see SAA XIV 1–2), and in Kwasman’s opinion SAA XIV 6 and SAA XIV 3 are also related to this area (see Kwasman, 1988, pp. xlv, 212–213). For the location of LahÒru see Parpola-Porter, 2001, p. 12. 176 For previous studies of this text see ARU 92; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 212, no. 175; Radner, 1997, pp. 243, 252, 326, 349; PNA, p. 752a(1a). For the provenance of this legal transaction see previous note. 175

102

chapter two

the beginning of Assurbanipal’s reign. The other details are lost (for Milki-nÖrÒ, a eunuch of the queen, see family no. 50, above). Family no. 159: This family is attested in ADD 420/421 (= SAA VI 315/316 = Text no. 112): “Qarhâ, farmer, ¾nÒ-i[l], (his) weaned son, Abšâ, hi[s] brother (and) Papâ, their mother, a total of 5 per[sons]”.177 This is an extended family of at least four persons: a father with his son, mother, and brother. The total (“ve persons”) contradicts the detailed description since only four persons are mentioned. It might be the scribe’s error: he wrote ve instead of four, or mistakenly omitted the farmer’s wife. On the other hand, ¾nÒ-il may be the name of the father of this family, and not of the weaned son. According to this proposal Qarhâ, the farmer, is a single person and the weaned son is unnamed. But since the personal names of all the other persons are attested it is reasonable to believe that the weaned son’s name would also be mentioned. These people, together with an estate of 60.2 hectares of land, a barnyard and a threshing oor in Til-Nahiri, were sold in Nineveh in 666 B.C. by Nušhu-salahanni, a horse-trainer of the open chariotry, to RÏmanniAdad, chief chariot driver of Assurbanipal (for his transactions see families nos. 53–55, above). Family no. 160: This unclear family is attested in ADD 448 (= SAA VI 314 = Text no. 113): “[B]axal-sÖrÒ, g[ardener/farmer (. . .)], his [wife], his son (and) his daughter; [PN, his . . .], a grand total of 7 persons”.178 This is a family of at least four persons: a man with his son, his daughter, and probably his wife. The grand total is seven but only ve persons are attested: the four mentioned ones and the man, whose name is stated after the daughter. The two missing persons might be (1) a relative of the man mentioned in line 10 (his wife?), and (2) an additional member of the rst family (Baxal-sÖrÒ’s brother?), possibly stated at the end of line 9, after the title (if it is ENGAR and not NU.GIŠ.SAR). But other suggestions are possible. These people, together with two vineyards, two 177 For previous studies of this text see KB 4, pp. 134–137; ARU 100–100a; Parpola, 1979, p. 173; Oded, 1979, pp. 94, 96; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 293–295, no. 248–249; Radner, 1997, pp. 49, 56–57, 98–99, 135–136, 252; PNA, pp. 15b(1), 397a(5), 972b, 987b, 1007b(2), 1038a(4)–1041. 178 For previous studies of this text see ARU 443; Parpola, 1979, p. 181; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 315–316, no. 265; Radner, 1997, pp. 43, 50, 83, 224, 252; PNA, pp. 1b(2), 271a(4), 1038a(4)–1041.

a survey of the lower stratum families

103

houses and four stone walls in the town Ispallurê in the area of Izalla, were sold in Nineveh in 666 B.C. by BarÒku and AbÊ-il to RÏmanniAdad, chief chariot driver of Assurbanipal (for the latter’s transactions see families nos. 53–55, above). Families nos. 161–162: These two unclear families are attested in ADD 429 (= SAA VI 334 = Text no. 114): (27b–29a) (Family no. 161:) “Nabûahu-uÉur, farmer; Ahi-padâ, [PN, PN,] Silim-DÊdi (=) his 4 sons (and) [his wife/ daughter] a total of 6 persons; (29b–30a) (Family no. 162:) AbdÖnu, farmer (and) [PN], his [son/wife], a total of 2 persons; (30b) a grand total of 8 persons”.179 This text clearly indicates at least two families, one of six and the other of two persons. In SAA VI 334 a third family of two persons is presented in lines 27a–28a “Nabû-ahu-uÉur, farmer, Ahi-padâ, [his son, a total of two persons]”. If the grand total (“eight persons”) is not wrong, and refer to all people mentioned in this text (and there is no reason to suppose that it refers only to the last two families), the restoration presented in SAA VI is not possible, and a new one may be suggested, as follows: Nabû-ahu-uÉur is the head of a family of six persons: himself, four sons and an additional member (probably a wife or a daughter). According to this new proposal the names of all four sons are stated: two are preserved, those of the rst and the last (Ahi-padâ and Silim-DÊdi) and two others are lost (probably two short names that were given at the beginning of line 28). The second family is of two persons: AbdÖnu, the farmer; and probably his son or wife (whose personal name is lost). These eight people along with estates of at least 28 hectares of land, x barnyards and a vineyard (of which the size is not stated) in the Province of the Chief Cupbearer (rab šÊqê )180 were sold by KÏnuabÖxa and his father H[. . .] to RÏmanni-Adad, chief chariot driver of Assurbanipal, in Nineveh probably in the rst decade of Assurbanipal’s reign. The price is lost. (For the transactions of RÏmanni-Adad see families nos. 53–55, above.)

179 For previous studies of this text see CIS II/1 31; ABC no. 18; EA, no. 30; ARU 105; Lieb, no. 30; Ep.Ar. no. 30; Parpola, 1979, p. 176; Oded, 1979, pp. 93–94, 96; AST, T201, no. 178; Fales, 1986, pp. 170–175, no. 16; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 324–327, no. 274–276; Radner, 1997, pp. 57, 96, 177, 182, 224, 309, 324; PNA, pp. 8b(2), 66b(1), 612a(4), 802a(12), 1110b(1), 1038a(4)–1041. 180 For the location of the “MÊt rab šÊqê” (mt rbšqn, in the Aramaic caption) see Parpola-Porter, 2001, p. 13, and map 27.

104

chapter two

Family no. 163: “[. . . . . .], his wife (and) his daughter” (ADD 424 = SAA VI 341 = Text no. 115).181 RÏmanni-Adad, chief chariot driver of Assurbanipal, buys from ArbailÊiu in Nineveh, land, houses, and 30 persons for 30 minas of silver (for the transactions of RÏmanni-Adad see families nos. 53–55, above). Family no. 163 includes at least three people: the father, whose name is lost, and his unnamed wife and daughter; however, it is not clear whether a fourth member of this family, possibly a son, is attested at the end of line 8’, after the father’s name. The total “5 persons” (in line 10’) clearly includes the members of this family, but also Naxdi (or Naxdi-. . .) and possibly another single person, both listed in line 9’; yet they are not members of this family, since named males are not recorded after unnamed females. The possibility that the family consists of only three people and two single individuals are listed in line 9’, is more reasonable, but since it is just one possibility, this family is dened as unclear. Note that totals are also attested in lines 1’ and 8’ (“2” and “12”), but since the text is fragmentarily preserved it is not clear if families are listed in these lines. Families nos. 164–165: These two families are attested in ADD 471 (= SAA VI 326 = Text no. 116): (Family no. 164:) “Šulmu-BÏl, far[mer]; Ia-ahhÏ, his adolescent son (and) Uar[i . . .], his wife, a total of 3 (persons); (Family no. 165:) Kamasu, farmer; Hurubisa[. . .], his adolescent son (and) LÖ-bal¢at, his wife, a total of 3 persons; a grand total of 6 persons”.182 RÏmanni-Adad, chief chariot driver of Assurbanipal, buys land and people near NÏrab in the province of Arpad from three persons (Mannu-kÒ-NÒnua, SÒn-šumu-. . . and IkkÊru) for 17.5 minas of silver. RÏmanni-Adad buys an entire village (Musina-aplu-iddina) including its elds, a vineyard of 1500 vines and a vegetable garden but with only six persons: two nuclear families of three persons each, a couple and an adolescent son. Family no. 166: “The persons: ”uri-Aia, his two wives (and) his son” (Gezer 1 = Text no. 117).183 Marduk-erÒba and Abu-erÒba sell land and people, 181 For previous editions and collations see ARU 90; Parpola, 1979, pp. 174–175; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 329–330, no. 279; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 201, 252, 324. 182 For previous editions and collations see ARU 167; Postgate, 1974a, p. 178; Parpola, 1979, p. 186; AST, T201, no. 177; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 307–309, no. 260; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 50, 149, 224, 309, 324; PNA, pp 481b, 509b(5),600a, 666b(1), 696b(20), 1148a(2); Tallqvist, 1918, p. 224. 183 For previous editions and notes of Gezer 1 see Pinches, 1904, pp. 229–236;

a survey of the lower stratum families

105

the entire LÖ-ahhÏ estate including a polygenic family of four persons (Gezer, 651 B.C.). At the beginning of line 5, Becking transliterated *LÚ ÙKU.MEŠ, and translated “The Slaves”; however the transliteration should be *LÚ UN.MEŠ and the translation “The persons”. The signs at the beginning of line 6 (“3 *LÚ [. . .]”) indicates that additional persons are attested in this text, and it is clear that these signs are not related to this family, since it is of four and not of three persons. The land is described after the people (see line 7), and a guarantee clause (which is very rare in sales of “Land and People”) is attested in r. 3’–4’, as in SAA VI 334 and SAA XIV 339 (see discussion in Chapter III). Family no. 167: This unclear family is attested in ADD 435 ( = SAA XIV 168 = Text no. 118): “Ratulu, [PN, . . .], Bitâ, his wife, [. . .], IaqÒrâ [. . . . . .]”.184 A person whose name is lost, probably an ofcial of the chief-eunuch, buys from Ša[ngû-. . .] forty hectares of land, two houses and people, as attested in lines r. 2–4. The family head may be Ratulu or the male listed after him, whose name is lost; therefore it is not clear if it is a family of two or more people. They may all have been members of the same family, if the following restoration is accepted: “Ratulu; [PN, his son]; Bitâ, his wife; [fPN (and)] IaqÒrâ, [his daughters, a total of 5]”. Yet since other restorations are also reasonable this family is dened as unclear (Nineveh, 620* B.C.). Family no. 168: “[ . . .]-šarri (and) her daughter” (ADD 457 = SAA XIV 229 = Text no. 119).185 [. . .]-ilÊxi, a “third man”, buys from [. . .]me, chief tailor, land (the entire village of [. . .]-šumu-iddina) and 18 people, including [. . .]-šarri and her daughter. The beginning of this text is destroyed and only four persons are indicated in the fragment preserved: two males and two females. The two singles [. . .] and Baššaša

Sayce, 1904, pp. 236–237; Johns, 1904a, pp. 237–244; Johns, 1904b, pp. 401–402; Conder, 1904, pp. 400–401; Conder, 1905, p. 74; Macalister, 1912, pp. 22–27 and g. 1; Galling, 1935, pp. 81–86; Oded, 1979, p. 96; Becking, 1981–82, pp. 80–86; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 126, 176, 188, 252; Elat, 1998, p. 53; PNA, pp. 16a(8), 665b(3); 687b(27); 716b(20); 720a(7). 184 For previous editions and collations see ARU 447; Parpola, 1979, p. 178; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 252, 257, 324; PNA, pp. 493a, 654b. 185 For previous editions and collations see ARU 78; Parpola, 1979, p. 182; see also Radner, 1997, p. 245; PNA, p. 277a.

106

chapter two

are clearly not related to this single-parent family, as indicated by the total (line 1’): “in all 2 men” (Nineveh, 7th century B.C.). Family no. 169: “KubÊbu-lÖnu, his wife (and) his son, a total of 3 persons” (ADD 1168+ = SAA XIV 345 = Text no. 120).186 This nuclear family of three persons, a couple and a son whose age is unclear, is attested in a very fragmentary sale of land of people, originating in Nineveh, together with a planted vineyard and a eld of at least two hectares. The other details mostly lost, including the names of the parties, the price, and the date. Family no. 170: This unclear family is attested in ADD 1205+ (= SAA XIV 355 = Text no. 121): “[m x x x x (LÚ*) x MÍ-šú 1 DUMU].MÍ GA . . . PAB 3 ZI.MEŠ” = “[PN, (. . .), his wife] (and) suckling dau[ghter] . . . a total of 3 persons”. A person whose name is lost buys from Ilu-šal[ . . .] land and people for one mina of silver. This broken, undated, sale of “Land and People” (originating in Nineveh) was rst edited by Johns in 1926. In 2002 a new edition of the text was published by Mattila in the SAA series (= SAA XIV 355). Recently a different transliteration and translation of the obverse of this text have been presented.187 According to this proposal (cited above) a nuclear family of three persons, a couple with a suckling daughter, is attested in this text. Note that the total (“3 persons”—line 7’) is separate from the detailed description of the people (line 1’). Families nos. 171–173: These families are attested in BM 134551 (= SAA XIV 399 = Text no. 122): “(Family no. 171:) [PN, . . . (1) wo]man, a total of 2; (Family no. 172:) [PN, . . . (1) wo]man, a total of 2; (Family no. 173:) HanÖnu-il, [. . . (1) wo]man, a total of 2; Qansê, [. . .; a grand to]tal of 18 persons”.188

186 For SAA XIV 345 see also Radner, 1997, p. 135; PNA, pp. 73b(20), 82a(35), 631b, 826b(10), 890(14). 187 See Galil, forthcoming (b). 188 For a previous edition see Postgate, 1970, p. 145, pl. xxiv. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 176, 182, 328, 354; PNA, pp. 458b, 705a(3), 1007a–b.

a survey of the lower stratum families

107

Marduk-ahu-iddina sells an estate consisting of sixty hectares, three houses, two orchards and 18 persons, including these three couples without children. Since the restoration of the text is reasonable but not certain, these families are dened as unclear. The property located in Niku’a was sold by a person, whose name is lost, for 15 minas of silver. This price is remarkably low, and may indicate that the people were not slaves (see discussion in Chapter III). After HanÖnu-il’s name probably his profession is listed, possibly also the professions of the other men including Qansê, who might be a single. Family no. 174: “[PN, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .] (1’) [ fPN], his [. . . daug]hter, (2’) [. . .]-ili, his suckling son, (3’) [. . .]Éi, his daughter (of ) 4 spans’ (height), (4’) [. . .]ate, Nabû-kÏnu-ubbib, (5’) [. . .]-kittu, his maid (and) hi[s] 2 slaves” (ADD 426 = SAA XIV 198 = Text no. 123).189 LÖ-bal¢at a subordinate of Silim-InÖrta, a provincial governor, buys from ”ab-rigim-[. . .] land and people for one talent of iron. The members of one large family are possibly recorded in lines 1’–5’, all by their personal names (cf. texts no. 75 and 152). This family probably consists of at least seven persons: a father; two daughters, one of 4 spans’ height (line 3’) and the other probably an adolescent (line 1’); a suckling son; his three slaves (two males and one maid), and two additional males (line 4’); these names might be those of his slaves. It is not impossible that his wife and other sons are also included in this family. The order of the children is unusual, since the rst daughter is listed before the son; however other texts exist that enumerate daughters before sons (see Chapter III). Family no. 175: “[PN] (and) AššÖr-šumu-iddina, his son” (ADD 458+ = SAA XIV 265 = Text no. 124).190 This single-parent family is attested in a very fragmentary sale of “Land and People”. Most details are lost including the price, date, and the parties’ names. The items in the description of the object sold are intermingled: people are listed in lines 4–6 and 8, and land in line 7 and probably also lines 9–10. At least 11 persons together with a house and a barnyard are attested.

189 For previous editions and collations see ARU 89; Parpola, 1979, p. 175; AST, T 216, no. 308; Kwasman, 1988, pp. 177–178, no. 145, see also Radner, 1997, pp. 129, 136, 221, 309, 324; PNA, pp. 666b(17), 1111a. 190 For previous editions and collations see ARU 352; Parpola, 1979, p. 182; see also PNA, p. 224b(15).

108

chapter two

Family no. 176: “[. . .]ani, farmer, (and) [his] wife” (ADD 369 = SAA XIV 254 = Text no. 125).191 This couple is attested along with a vineyard in a very fragmentary sale of “Land and People” of which most details are lost, including the price, date, and names of the parties’ names. Families nos. 177–182: These families are attested in SH 98/6949 I 908 (= BATSH 6 180 = Text no. 126): (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family

no. no. no. no. no. no.

177 =) 178 =) 179 =) 180 =) 181=) 182=)

[. . . per]sons—IahimÒ, farmer 3  [per]sons—[. . .]la, ditto (= farmer) 3 [per]sons—[. . .], ditto (= farmer) 3 [per]sons—Nabû-dÖri, Bird-catcher 2 persons—(the woman) Gadi-[ . . .] [. . .persons]—Asusi



KÏnu-lÏšir and Hamadâ sons of Šamaš-šumu-iddina sell land and people in DÖr-Katlimmu. The other details are lost, including the name of the buyer, the price, and the date. The people are listed by a rare pattern: “x persons—PN”, which is actually identical to the pattern “PN—x persons” but in reverse (cf. Families nos. 188–189 and Chapter III). The scribe probably orders the families from the large to the small. Family no. 178 probably consists of three people, since three vertical lines are clearly attested at the beginning of line 12;192 Families nos. 179–180 consist of three persons (assuming that the family head is included in the total); and family no. 181, headed by a female, consists of two persons. It is reasonable to suggest that the last family was also of two persons. The grand total is probably at least 16 people. C.2. “Land and People”—A Schedule of “Land and People” Families nos. 183–187: These ve families are attested in ADD 825 (= SAA XI 232 = Text no. 127): 1–2 3–4 6

191

(Family no. 183:) (Family no. 184:) (Family no. 185:)

“[Urd]a-Nabû, [his wife] (and) his [(x) so]n(s) [ . . .]-kaša-atkal, his wife, (and) his 3 sons; Nabû-Êpil-kÖmÖxa, his wife (and) his son;

For a previous edition see ARU 388. Radner’s restoration of the beginning of lines 12–13 is clearly mistaken, since the sign “3” in line 13 is fully preserved (the same as in line 14). At the beginning of line 12, as mentioned above, three vertical lines are clearly attested. 192

a survey of the lower stratum families r. 1–3 (Family no. 186:) r. 4

(Family no. 187:)

109

Nabû-tÏšî-balli¢, his wife (and) his 3 sons, a total of 5 persons. Ana-mÒni-allak (and) his wife; a grand total of 7”.193

This schedule of “Land and People” (possibly the property of one person) includes ten hectares of tax-exempt land and at least 19 persons: ve families and one single. All families are nuclear and consist of 2–5 persons (the size of Family no. 183 is unclear). Only one total is attested, and the grand total “7” relates to the last two families.

D. Royal Grants and Private Votive Donations D.1. Royal Grants of Land or Tax Exemption to Ofcials Families nos. 188–189: These families are attested in NARGD 5 (= SAA XII 7 = Text no. 128): (Family no. 188:) “7 persons—Šamaš-[. . .]; (Family no. 189:) [3 persons]—[. . .]-ahu-iqiš; a grand total of 10 person[s]”.194

Adad-nÏrÊri III has bought land and people and given it exempt from taxes to his ofcial (eunuch?). Two main estates are attested: the rst was acquired for four talents and ten minas of silver from AššÖr-bÏlu-uÉur; the second in BÏt-šašširi includes land and ten persons: two families of seven and three persons (date lost). The grand total (10) indicates that family no. 189 includes its head [. . .]-ahu-iqiš and two additional persons, and the total of this family is “[3 persons]”. It is also clear that the family heads are included in the totals. The people are listed by the rare pattern: “x persons—PN” (cf. families nos. 183–187 and see chapter III). Families nos. 190–193: These families are attested in ADD 861 (= SAA XII 16 = Text no. 129):

193

See PNA, pp. 110a, 804a, 822b(4), 897a. For previous editions and collations see ARU 2; Postgate, 1969, no. 5; see also PNA, pp. 174a(2), 982a. 194

110 (Family (Family (Family (Family

chapter two no. no. no. no.

190:) 191:) 192:) 193:)

[PN], farmer—4 [persons]; [ . . .]-i—4 person[s]; BÏl-uballi¢—2 person[s]; SÊsu—7 person[s]”.

These families are attested in a fragment of a land grant, possibly part of SAA XII 15, a grant of “Land and People” of Tiglath-pileser III. Most details are lost including the name and position of the grantee, the date, the reason for the grant, etc. The people are listed by the pattern: “PN—x persons” and the family heads are probably included in the totals. BÊnî, the “gardener”, was probably also listed with his family (line 3’), but since its total is absent it was not counted as a family.195 Families nos. 194–196: These families are attested in K 14619 (= SAA XII 17 = Text no. 130): (Family no. 194:) “Urad-Gula—4 (persons); (Family no. 195:) Adda-naÉaba—5 (persons); (Family no. 196:) Gabrî—5 (persons)”. These families are listed in a fragment of a land grant, possibly part of SAA XII 15: a grant of “Land and People” of Tiglath-pileser III (see families nos. 190–193). The people are listed by the pattern: “PN—x (persons)”, and the family heads are probably included in the totals.196 Families nos. 197–240: These 44 families are attested in ADD 741+ and ADD 741bis (= SAA XII 27+28 = Text no. 131): 6 6–7 8a 8b 9a 9b 10 12–13

(Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family

no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no.

197:) “[ . . .]-InÖrta, gardener – (a total of ) 2 [persons]; 198:) [. . .]; (and) [. . .]-KUR, his wife – a total of 2 (persons); 199:) [ . . .]ni – (a total of ) 4 persons; 200:) Šamaš-bÏlu-uÉur – (a total of ) 2 pe[rsons]; 201:) [. . .]anni – (a total of ) 2 persons; 202:) NÖr-IssÊr – (a total of ) 2 persons; 203:) ŠÊr-IssÊr – (a total of) 2 persons; 204:) Urda-BÊnÒit[u]; [. . .]-harû’a; [. . .]; BakÒša, (his) mother – (a total of ) 4 persons;

195 For the restoration: “gar[dener]” (instead of “horse tra[iner]”) in line 3’, see PNA, p. 263b(3). See also PNA, pp. 683a(4), 1095b. 196 See PNA, pp. 48b, 416b(3).

a survey of the lower stratum families

111

13–14 (Family no. 205:) [. . .]aiu, the . . .; Urdî; Urda-IssÊr (and) IaÖ-id[r]Ò, his brothers; AhÖxa, his mother – [(a total of ) 4 or 5 persons]; 16a (Family no. 206:) LibÖšÖ – (a total of ) 2 persons; 16b (Family no. 207:) Mannu-kÒ-Adad – (a total of ) 2 persons; 18b (Family no. 208:) Bannâ and her 2 children; 19a (Family no. 209:) SukkÒtu and her 3 children; 19b (Family no. 210:) ÂÖÉu, shepherd – (a total of ) 3 persons; 20a (Family no. 211:) NÖrî, shepherd; Hanzabâ, his wife (and) his 2 sons – a total of 4 (persons); 20b (Family no. 212:) AwÒrâ (and) Asâ, [his wife – a total of 2 (persons)]; 21b (Family no. 213:) Nanî, camel driver, – (a total of ) 2 persons; 22a (Family no. 214:) Matixî, camel driver, – (a total of ) 2 persons; 23a (Family no. 215:) Adad-uballi¢ (and) Harrâ, his wife – a total of 2 (persons); 23b (Family no. 216:) IatÊmâ, – (a total of ) 2 persons; 23c (Family no. 217:) Nanî, – (a total of ) 2 person[s]; 24a (Family no. 218:) In-ili, weaver of multicolored fabrics – (a total of ) 2 persons; 24b (Family no. 219:) Ahu-lÏxi, weaver of multicolored fabrics – (a total of ) 2 persons; 24c (Family no. 220:) [. . .], – (a total of ) 3 persons; 25a (Family no. 221:) ŠamgaiÊnu, – (a total of ) 2 persons; 25b (Family no. 222:) QÒtÒ-ilÊni, – (a total of ) 2 persons; 26 (Family no. 223:) Hi¢ubarra and her [x] children; 30 A grand total of 1,700 (hectares) of field, 40 vineyards, 2 [vegetable] gar[den]s: 6 estates of Nabû-šarru-u[Éu]r, [chief eunuch of Assurba nipal, king of Assyria] 35 36a 36c 36d 37a 37b 38a 38b 39a 39b r. 3’ r. 16’ r. 17’ r. 18’ r. 19’ r. 20’ r. 21’

(Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family (Family

no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no.

224:) 225:) 226:) 227:) 228:) 229:) 230:) 231:) 232:) 233:) 234:) 235:) 236:) 237:) 238:) 239:) 240:)

Šarru-lÖ-dÊri, baker, Šarrî, farmer, [. . .]-IssÊr, farmer, [. . .], farmer, QÒtÒ-mÖtÒ, farmer, [Ba]iadi-il, farmer, Ahu-lÏxûtÒ, Nazibirî, Gagî, [. . .], Ab[ . . .], [. . .], [. . .], [. . .], [. . .], [. . .], [. . .],

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

(a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a (a

total total total total total total total total total total total total total total total total total

of ) 4 pe[rsons]; of ) 6 persons; of ) 2 persons; of ) 4 person[s]; of ) 6 persons; of ) 12 person[s]; of ) 4 persons; of ) 2 per[sons]; of ) 5 persons; of ) 2 persons; of x+) 2 persons; of ) 4 persons; of x+) 2 persons; of x+) 2 persons; of x+) 3 persons; of x+) 2 persons; of x+) 2 persons”.

112

chapter two

Text no. 131 consists of two main fragments (SAA XI 27 and SAA XII 28): SAA XII 28 is the continuation of SAA XII 27, lines 31–37, but there is no physical join and the space in between is unclear. The relation of SAA XII 27+28 and SAA XII 26 is a matter of controversy in the literature. Assurbanipal evidently exempted Nabû-šarru-uÉur, his chief eunuch, from taxes, and the grant document (dated to 657 B.C.) is clearly SAA XII 26. It is also generally held that SAA XII 27+28 is an appendix to SAA XII 26, describing the details of the exempted property and its personnel (details which are missing from the grant itself ). Johns suggested that the horizontal ruling after line 30 of ADD 741+ (= SAA XII 27) could indicate that a similar list of exempted property of another grant is presented in lines 32 ff.197 Kwasman and Parpola share this opinion and even suggest that the owner of this property (and the beneciary of this grant) is RÏmanni-Adad; these authors hint at a connection of ADD 741+, line 34 (“vineyard in SingÊra”) with SAA VI 329–331, indicating that RÏmanni-Adad owns vineyards in SingÊra.198 Kataja and Whiting suggest that additional properties of Nabû-šarru-uÉur in various areas are listed in lines 32 ff.; they present the schedule as an integral part of the grant itself, and reject the possibility that schedules to two grants would have been on a same tablet.199 Kataja and Whiting’s idea is convincing, while relating SAA XII 27: 32 ff. to RÏmanni-Adad is hardly acceptable for presumably he was not the only Assyrian ofcial who owned vineyards in SingÊra. This text includes dozens of families.200 Most are described by the pattern “PN—x persons”. Still, at least nine families are fully listed, recording all members of the family by their relation to the family head (and sometimes also by their personal names): in three cases a woman with her children (families nos. 208–209, 223) and in other six cases (families nos. 198, 204–205, 211–212 and 215) a man is indicated with

197

See ADD IV (1923), pp. 200–201. Kwasman—Parpola, 1991, p. XXXIX, n. 22. 199 Kataja—Whiting, 1995, pp. XXVI–XXVII. 200 For a previous edition of this text see Fales, 1973, pp. 68–74, no. 23–23bis. See also PNA, pp. 41b(5), 69a(9), 82b(13), 83b(3), 135b, 238a(1), 253b(3), 254a, 267b, 418b(3), 458b, 461a(1), 474b, 495b(2), 497b, 544a(1), 662a(10), 682b(25), 745a(2), 752a–b(2), 876–877(29), 927a(33–34), 939b, 969a(2), 970a(4), 1016b(4), 1156b; Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 216, 299b; Stamm, p. 316; Fales, 1988a, pp. 107–124. Most personal names in this text are Akkadian or Aramaic. 198

a survey of the lower stratum families

113

his wife, sons, and other relatives, including his brothers and mother. Clearly, in these cases the family head is included in the total (see families nos. 198, 204, 211–212 and 215). It is therefore reasonable to suggest that in the other families the scribe also included in the total the family head, and the pattern “PN—x persons” should be translated: “PN—(a total of ) x persons” (including the family head). The scribe clearly listed families and single persons in a mixed description. The size of 36 families is clear: together they number 112 persons, an average of 3.1 people per family: most families consist of only two persons (21 out of 36); three of three persons; eight of four persons; one consists of ve persons, two of six, and one of 12 persons. In the rst part of this tablet (to line 31) at least 116 persons are listed, including 23 single people (12 males and 11 females), 31 families, and 21 people about whom it is not clear if they are family heads or single (most probably the former). In the second part of this tablet (from line 34 on) at least 78 persons are listed, including 21 families. The total of people listed in the text is at least 194, and since it is fragmentarily preserved the gure undoubtedly exceeded 200. The average number of persons per family in the rst part is lower than that in the second part. The size of family no. 205 is unclear: it is possible that its head is mentioned in line 13: “[. . .]aia, the . . .”, and in line 14 his three brothers and mother are recorded (a total of ve persons). Another possibility is that Urdî was the family head and that it also includes his two brothers and mother, a total of four persons. D.2. Royal and Private Votive Donations to Temples Families nos. 241–248: These eight families are attested in VAT 8883 (= KAV 39 = SAA XII 87 = Text no. 132): r. 1 (Family no. 241:) “BÏl-Ubal[li¢; his wife]; KÏnu, his adolescent son (and) 2 daughters, a total of 5 persons; r. 2 (Family no. 242:) Nabû-šÏzib; [his] wife; [1] adolescent [son], 1 weaned son (and) 3 daughters, a total of 7 persons; r. 3 (Family no. 243:) Nabû-šumu-kaxxin; his wife; 1 weaned son, a total of 3 (persons); r. 4 (Family no. 244:) Nabû-rÏšÒ-išši; 1 adolescent son, 1 weaned son, a total of 3 (persons); r. 5 (Family no. 245:) Nabû-Ï¢ir-napšÊti; his wife, 1 weaned son, a total of 3 (persons);

114

chapter two

r. 6 (Family no. 246:) Âil-Nabû; his wife; 3 adolescent sons (and) 1 suckling (son), a total of 6 (persons); r. 7 (Family no. 247:) QÒsÊia; his wife; 2 daughters (and) 1 son; a total of 5 (persons); r. 8 (Family no. 248:) Nabû-Ï¢iranni; his wife (and) his 2 daughters, a total of 4 (persons)”.

Sennacherib builds a new temple in the city of Aššur before the Tabira gate in honor of the god ZabÊba (city god of Kiš and AššÖr’s son), and his consort, BÊbu. He makes their statue and dedicates to the newly founded temple 41 people who are brought from ArbÏla: eight families and ve single people. These people are donated as tillers (qatinnu) as stated in line r. 13: “ana LÚ qatinnÖte”.201 Their status is unclear: they might be temple slaves or temple employees of low rank. The second possibility seems more likely since the scribe does not use the term ARAD or “ana urdÊnÖti”.202 The scribe species all 41 people dedicated. All eight family heads as well as the ve single people are attested by their personal names (most of them include the theophoric elements Nabû or BÏl). The restoration of line r. 1 in SAA XII is problematic: KÏnu is probably the name of the son not the wife. Note that in this document the wife is always listed before the sons, and all wives are unnamed; likewise the daughters and the sons, with only one exception in line 1. The order of the family members is xed: after the family head the scribe records his wife always by the pattern “his wife”; the adolescent sons are listed after the wife and before the small children (weaned or suckling), and the daughters are listed at the end, with only one exception: in line r. 7 (family no. 247) a son is mentioned after the two daughters. This is also the only son whose age is not specied. It is interesting that the age of none of the daughters is listed. The grand total of the members of these eight families is 36, an average of 4.5 persons per family. All families are nuclear and monogamous, with one exception: no. 244 is a single-parent family: a father and two sons. All families include

201 For the term qatinnu see CAD, Q , pp. 172–173; AHw, p. 908b; Deller, 1965, pp. 476–477; van Driel, 1969, p. 188, note 70; Zablocka, 1972, p. 213; Menzel, AST, pp. 263–264; Parpola, 1983, p. 44; Radner,1999, pp. 115–116; Radner, 2000, p. 235, note 16. 202 Menzel (AST, pp. 264) compars this term with “ana urdÊnÖti” attested in her opinion in Sm 1730. However this term is not mentioned in this document, see SAA XII 89.

a survey of the lower stratum families

115

children (one to ve), an average of 2.6 children per family (12 sons and nine daughters).203 Families nos. 249–274: These 26 families are attested in VAT 9656 (= PKTA 27–30 = SAA XII 86 = Text no. 133): 22a (Family no. 249:) 22b (Family no. 250:) 22c (Family no. 251:) 23a (Family no. 252:) 23b (Family no. 253:) 23c (Family no. 254:) 24b (Family no. 255:) 24c (Family no. 256:) 25b (Family no. 257:) 25c (Family no. 258:) 26a (Family no. 259:) 26b (Family no. 260:) 26c (Family no. 261:) 27a (Family no. 262:) 27b (Family no. 263:) 27c (Family no. 264:) 28a (Family no. 265:) 28b (Family no. 266:) 29a (Family no. 267:) 29b (Family no. 268:) 29c (Family no. 269:) 30b (Family no. 270:) 30c (Family no. 271:) 31a (Family no. 272:) 31b (Family no. 273:) 31c (Family no. 274:)

“[. . .]-Adad—3 persons; Taxallu—15 persons; Nabû-zÊqip-enši—4 per[sons]; [. . .]—3 persons; IÊluzu—4 persons; Nabû-lÏxÊni—2 [persons]; Bal¢Êku-ammar—5 persons; Nabû-dÏnÒ-amur—3 [persons]; Nabû-kÊÉir—3 persons; Nabû-kÏnu-uÉur—7 person[s]; [KÒ]n-zÏru—3 persons; Urda-Gula—5 persons; Hanabax—4 person[s]; [Pi]rahu—4 persons; Nabû-balli¢—4 persons; AhÖxa—10 person[s]; [A]hÖnu—3 persons; Nabû-iddina—5 persons; [. . .]-aplu-iddina—2 persons; Urda-Nabû—2 persons; Nabû-šabši—7 person[s]; HarurÊnu—4 persons; Napusî—4 persons; [. . .-i]q-ili—14 persons; Il-iÊba—2 persons; Uqaiaqi—2 persons”.

Sennacherib dedicates to the newly founded bÏt akÒti in the city of Aššur at least 130 people (28 families and two single) who were brought from RaÉappa in 683 B.C. (Sennacherib’s 22nd year).204 The people are listed

203 For previous editions and notes see SVAT, III, pp. 9–12; Postgate, 1969, pp. 122–123, Appendix 4b; see also van Driel, 1969, p. 188; Pedersen, 1986, p. 81 (N5–26); Frahm, 1997, pp. 240–241; Gareli, 1998, p. 179; PNA, pp. 275b(1), 334a(6), 596a(4), 831a(7), 831b(6), 864b(3), 880a(7), 890a(1), 1015b(2), 1175b(3). 204 For previous editions and notes see SVAT I, pp. 3–9; Postgate, 1969, pp. 121–122, Appendix 4a; See also AST, p. 285, note 3808; Pedersen, 1986, p. 32 (N2–9); Frahm, 1997, p. 240. van Driel suggests that the people were deportees or prisoners of war

116

chapter two

in lines 22–31, after the king’s titles and the historical introduction which is paralleled in other documents of Sennacherib concerning the Akitu Temple.205 The families are recorded by the pattern “PN—x persons” three in each line. The size of 26 out of these 28 families is clear. Most of them consist of 2–5 people (21 out of 26), the other ve are of 7–15 people, including two families of 14 and 15 members, the largest attested in a Neo-Assyrian text. The average number of persons per family in this text is 4.77.206 Families nos. 275–276: These two families are attested in BM 118796 (= SAAB 1, pp. 57–63 = SAA XII 98 = Text no. 134): (Family no. 275:) “RÏmanni-IssÊr, farmer—3 person(s); (Family no. 276:) Âil-Nabû, shepherd—3 person(s)”.

AššÖr-reÉÖwa’s private donation of “Land and People” to Nabû is preserved on a copper amulet with drawings of deities at the top.207 This relatively large private donation includes a house in Calah, two estates, and probably nine persons: three single people and two families each consisting of three people and recorded by the usual pattern “PN—x persons”. Âil-Nabû, the shepherd, was “presented” together with a ock of sheep owned by the donor.

(van Driel, 1969, p. 188). For the same opinion see Oded, 1979, pp. 114–115. For the location of RaÉappa see Parpola—Porte, 2001, p. 15 and map 3. 205 Cf. Luckenbill, 1924, pp. 134–143. 206 For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 68b(4), 260b(1), 491a, 515b(2), 618a(2), 662a(2), 808b(2), 834b(3), 840a(4), 843b(1), 867b(3), 905a(2), 929a, 995a–b, 1048a(8); Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 26b, 229a. Only one name is clearly West-Semitic (IÊluzu); most of the others are Akkadian. 207 For a previous edition see Postgate, 1987, pp. 57–63. Aššur-reÉuwa might be the priest of Ninurta in Calah who writes a letter to the king concerning temple matters (ABL 493 = SAA XIII 128). For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 213a(3), 1044a(12), 1175b(7).

a survey of the lower stratum families

117

E. The “Harran Census” E.1. Families Families nos. 277–291: These fteen families are attested in ADB 1 (= SAA XI 201 = Text no. 135): I: 1–3 I: 4–7

(Family no. 277:) “Arnabâ, son of SÏx-aplu-iddina, gardener (and) his mother, a total of 2 (persons). (Family no. 278:) Ah-abû, gardener; SagÒbu, his adolescent son; Il-abadi, his son (of ) 4 (spans’ height, and) 2 women, a total of 5 (persons).

I: 12 (Single person:) Sin-naxdi, gardener. I: 13–15 (Family no. 279:) Nušku-ilÊ’Ò, ditto (=gardener); Našuh-qatar, his son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); 1 woman (and) 2 daughters, a total of 5 (persons). I: 16–17 (Family no. 280:) AhÖnu, gardener (and) his mother, a total of 2 (persons). I: 18–19 A total of 3 gardeners, 1 weaned son, 2 women, 2 daughters, a grand total of 8 (persons). I: 25–29 (Family no. 281:) Il-nÖrÒ, gardener; Il-sÏx-milkÒ, his adolescent son; 1 suckling son; 1 woman; 1 daughter (of ) 4 (spans’ height, and) 1 (daughter of ) 3 (spans’ height), a total of 6 (persons). I: 30–31 (Family no. 282:) SÏx-nâpi, gardener; 1 son (of ) 4 (spans’ height, and) 1 woman, a total of 3 (persons). I: 32–34 (Family no. 283:) IdrÒ-Anu, formerly of the confectioners, gardener (and) 1 woman, a total of 2 (persons). I: 41–44 (Family no. 284:) Nušku-ilÊxÒ, formerly of the cooks, gardener; 1 son (of ) 4 (spans’ height, and) 1 woman, a total of 3 (persons). I: 45–46 (Family no. 285:) Adi-mÊti-ilu, gardener; 1 woman; 1 daughter (of ) 5 (spans’ height, and) 1 (daughter of ) 4 (spans’ height), I: 47 a grand total of 7 (persons). II: 1–4

(Family no. 286:) SÏx-idrÒ, gardener; Našuh-idrÒ, his adolescent son; 1 woman (and) 1 nubile daughter, a total of 4 (persons).

II: 8–12

(Family no. 287:) Našuh-s[a . . .], formerly of the [. . .], gar[dener]; Naš[uh-. . ., his son/brother, . . .]; 1 woman (and) 1 [daughter?], [a total of 4 (persons)];

II: 16–23 (Family no. 288:) Han[. . .], cowherd [. . .]; KankÊnu (and) ŠÏr-dalâ, 2 adolescent sons; Lubâ-Našhu, son of KankÊnu, (of ) 3 (spans’ height); 3 women (and) 1 weaned daughter, a total of 8 (persons).

118

chapter two

II: 27–29 (Family no. 289:) RahÒmâ, goatherd; Našuh-sama’ani, an adolescent son; 1 woman (and) 1 daughter (of ) 3 (spans’ height), a total of 4 (persons). II: 33–35 (Family no. 290:) Il-šumkÒ, gardener; 1 son (of ) 3 (spans’ height); 1 woman (and) 1 weaned daughter, a total of 4 (persons). II: 38–42 (Family no. 291:) SÏx-aqÊba, guardian of the grove; ŠÏr-manÊni, his adolescent son (and) KÖsÊiâ, his son (of ) 4 (spans’ height), a total of 3 (persons)”.

This document records dozens of “farmers” and “gardeners” together with their families and the property of the farms which they cultivated.208 With most farms (six out of ten) only one family is attested, but with the other four, two or three families, probably without blood ties, are connected to one farm: the Assyrian administration probably settled these different families on one farm purposely. Most farms are based mainly on vineyards, with three exceptions: one has 61 horses and cattle, another has 57 goats, and the third has a grove of šaššugu trees. The size and structure of 14 out of these 15 families is clear: the grand total is 55 persons, an average of 3.93 souls per family. Family no. 277 consists of only two persons, an unmarried “gardener” and his unnamed mother; it is reasonable to suppose that the son succeeded the father after his death, and this might be the reason for the recording of the father’s name. Family no. 278 consists of ve people: a father, two sons, and two women. One woman is probably the family head’s wife and the other might be his second wife or his son’s wife (see chapter VI). Note that the mother, sisters, or daughters of the family head are specically mentioned by Scribe A, so it is not reasonable that one of these females should be identied with one of these two women. This then might be a multiple-family kinship group of two minimal nuclear families

208

For previous editions and collations of this text see Johns, ADB, pp. 29–38, no. 1, Pl. I–II; Fales, 1973, pp. 15–23, no. 1, with earlier bibliography; Postgate, 1974, p. 240; Parpola, 1975, pp. 110–111. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 126, 153, 162, 223; Fales, 2001, pp. 1773, 175. For the term ša ramanišunu see chapter I, note 39. Zaccagnini notes that “the physical survival of an Assyrian peasant family needed c. 5 (irrigated) to 10 (rained) hectares of farmed land” (Zaccagnini, 1999, p. 337). cf. also Postgate, 1989, p. 151. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 52a(3), 57b(6), 85b(5), 132a(1), 506b(2), 510b(1), 523a(1), 524b(2), 601a, 643a(1), 666b, 936a(1), 936b(1), 937a–b, 973b(2), 1028b(1), 1101a(1), 1103a, 1061b(2), 1098a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

119

with one son of 4 spans’ height, probably a son, not a grandson, of the family head, since grandsons are clearly attested in this text (see family no. 288, below). Family no. 279 consists of ve persons: a couple, a son of four spans’ height and two daughters. The grand total in line 19 lists this same son as weaned, and it is reasonable to suppose that this is a scribal error; it is less likely that the term “weaned” would refer to any young child no longer dependent on his mother. Family no. 280 is similar to no. 277. The mother is recorded in the grand total (line 19) as one of “two women”, together with the wife in family no. 279. The third gardener who cultivated this farm is Sinnaxdi, a single person attested in line 12. Families nos. 281–283 cultivate a farm of 29,000 stalks of vine and ten hectares of arable land. All of these families are nuclear: family no. 281 consists of six persons, a couple with two sons and two daughters; family no. 282 is a couple with one son, and family no. 283 is a couple without children. Most children are young and unnamed, with one exception, the adolescent son of family no. 281. Families nos. 284 and 285 cultivate a vineyard of 6,000 stalks of vine; both are nuclear, a couple with one son (284) or a couple with two daughters (285). All children are young, of four or ve spans’ height. Family no. 286 is a couple with two adolescent children, a son and a daughter who is dened by the term batÖssu. Adolescent daughters are very rare in the texts of the “Harran Census” (only four grown up daughters are attested in these texts, about two percent of the population). In another case the term batÖssu is listed (SAA XI 203 r. ii 10’; see family no. 311), and in a third case both terms batÖssu and Éahurtu dene two daughters (SAA XI 203 r. ii 14’–17’; see family no. 312). Family no. 287 is the only unclear one in this text. It consists of a couple and two other members, probably a daughter and a son; however, the second male might also be a brother of the family head (although brothers are not attested in this text; but see family no. 300), and the last member might also be a mother or a sister of the family head. Family no. 288 is a multiple-family kinship group of eight people, consisting of at least two nuclear families. The family husbands a herd of 61 horses and cattle. It is one of the few families that include three generations: a father with his two sons and his grandson. In addition to the four mentioned males, attested by their names, four females are listed: three “women” and one weaned daughter who might be a daughter or a granddaughter of the family head. One of the three

120

chapter two

women is probably the wife of the family head; another is probably his daughter-in-law, the wife of his son KankÊnu, and the mother of his grandson Lubâ-Našhu. The third woman might be another daughter-in-law of the family head rather than his second wife (see chapter VI). Families 289 and 290 are two nuclear families of four people each, two couples with two children, one son and one daughter; family no. 291 is a single-parent one of three persons, a father with two sons. Families nos. 292–301: These ten families are attested in ADB 2 (= SAA XI 202 = Text no. 136): I: 1’–4’

(Family no. 292:) “Ua[. . ., farmer]; Mušallim-Našhu, [his son/brother]; Han-DÊdi/dada, [his son/brother], (and) 1 Woman, a total [of 4? (persons)].

I: 10’–13’

(Family no. 293:) Il-Našuh-mil[kÒ] son of Ilu-ittÒja, farmer; Kul-ba-iadi-[il, his son/brother . . .]; 1 his sister, [(and) . . .; a total of 4? (persons)]; (Family no. 294:) [. . ., farme]r; [. . .], his adolescent son; 1 suckling son; 1 woman (and) 1 daughter (of ) 4 (spans’ height), a total of 5 (persons).

I: 14’–17’

I: 20’–21’ (Break)

(Family no. 295:) Il-ba[. . ., g]ardener; [. . ., his] adolescent [son]; . . .

II: 3’–4’

(Family no. 296:) [. . .]-ilÊni, farme]r; 1 woman (and) 2 daughters (of ) 3 (spans’ height), [a total] of 4 (persons); (Family no. 297:) Halmusu, farmer; SÏ’-dilÒni, his adolescent son; DÊdi-dilÒni, his adolescent son; Me’Òsu, his son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); 1 woman (and) 1 weaned daughter, a total of 6 (persons).

II: 5’–9’

II: 16’–19’ (Family no. 298:) Hannî son of PalÒ¢u, formerly of the scarf weavers, farmer; Nušku-šÏzibanni, his son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); 1 woman (and) 1 daughter (of ) 3 (spans’ height), a total of 4 (persons). III: 2’–5’ A total of 4 farmer[s . . .]; 2 adolescent (sons); 1 son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); [. . . . . .]; 2 women, (and) 1 [. . .] daughter, a grand total of 10 (persons). III: 8’–11’

(Family no. 299:) Ah-abû, formerly of the [. . .], guardian of the [grove . . .]; HanpašÊnu, [his . . .] son, (and) 2 women, a total of [4] (persons).

a survey of the lower stratum families

121

III: 15’–19’ (Family no. 300:) Mannu-iÊdi’ son of Ha[nÖnu], herder of donkeys [. . .]; Nanî, his brother; 1 son (of ) 3 (spans’ height); 2 wom[en]; [1] daughter (of ) 3 (spans’ height), a total of [6] (persons). r. III: 2’–5’ (Family no. 301:) LÒt-ili, son [of . . .], farmer, formerly of the [. . .]; AttÊr-šumk[Ò, . . .], (and) 1 woman, a total of 3 (persons)”. (Break)

This document, like the foregoing, records dozens of “farmers” and “gardeners” together with their families and the assets of the farms that they cultivated.209 With most farms (12 out of 13) just one family is attested; the exception is two families (nos. 296–297) connected to one farm, although probably no blood ties existed between them. The size and structure of six of these 13 families is clear: the grand total is 29, an average of 4.83 persons per family. Most of the unclear families consist of three or four persons (see below). A possessive sufx features in but few cases in this text: all except one of the wives and daughters are listed without such a sufx; the exception is “his sister” in family no. 293. Ten persons are listed in the summary in col. III: 2’–5’: four farmers, three sons (two adolescent and one of four spans’ height), two women, and a daughter. This description includes at the least the members of one family: since family members are not dened by their profession in these texts, the four farmers are probably family heads or singles. These lines admit many possible interpretations (of which two are noted below), but since all these options are tentative these people are not counted as a family in this book: 1. it is possible that three single farmers are listed along with one large family of seven persons: a father, his three sons, a daughter, and two women. 2. Two single farmers are recorded with two couples with two children each. The size and structure of Family no. 292 is unclear. In SAA XI 202 a family of three persons is reconstructed: a couple with one son (Han-dada), presenting Mušallim-Našhu, as the head of this family. But it is also possible that Ua . . ., listed in line 1, was actually the father,

209 For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 39–43, no. 2, Pl. III; Fales, 1973, pp. 23–27, no. 2, with earlier bibliography; Postgate, 1974, pp. 240–241; Parpola, 1975, p. 111. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 223, 304. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 57b(5), 236b(4), 362b(1), 445a(1), 451b, 454a(5), 455a, 457b(6), 522b(1), 526b, 530a(4), 635b(1), 664b(3), 679a, 747b(4), 776b, 926a(9), 974b(1)–975a, 982a(1), 1099b(1).

122

chapter two

and Mušallim-Našhu and Han-DÊdi/dada his sons or brothers. In this case the total is four. Family no. 293 is clearly an extended one, since the family head’s sister is included, but its size and structure are unclear. It probably consists of four persons: Il-Našuh-mil[kÒ] son of Ilu-ittÒja, the farmer; his son or brother, Kul-ba-iadi-[il]; his unnamed sister; and probably a fourth member of this family listed after his sister, possibly his wife or daughter. Family no. 294 consists of ve persons: a couple, two sons (an adolescent and a suckling),210 and a daughter of four spans’ height. The names of the father and the adolescent son are lost, and the other three are unnamed. The size and structure of Family no. 295 is unclear: it includes a father (the gardener Il-ba . . .) and his adolescent son, whose name is lost, but the rest of the text is broken. No. 296 is a nuclear family of four persons: a couple, with two (twin?) daughters of three spans’ height; and No. 297 is a relatively large family of six persons a couple with a weaned daughter and three sons: two adolescents and one of four spans’ height. Family no. 298 consists of four persons: a couple with a son of four spans’ height, and a daughter of three spans’ height. The family head, dened as a farmer, was formerly a scarf weaver. The family own one ox and cultivate thirty hectares of land. An additional person lives in this farm and since he is a son of Zur[ . . .] he is not a member of this family, but probably a single person like the single persons listed in I: 8’, and in r. IV: 9’–10’. Family no. 299 consists of four persons: Ah-abû, guardian probably of a grove; HanpašÊnu, his son, and two women, probably his wife and his daughter-in-law or his second wife and not his mother, sister or daughter. Ah-abû owns the land (12 hectares) and is listed in this text no doubt because he is also a guardian probably of a grove which is the property of another person. No. 300 is an extended family of six persons: a herder of donkeys, his brother; two young children, a son and a daughter both of three spans’

210 At the beginning of line 16’ Johns suggested reading: “1 apil ahi-šu” (ADB, p. 39); and Fales (1973, p. 24) proposed a different restoration (“1 PAP šú”); but “1 DUMU GA” should be preferred (see SAA XI, p. 126).

a survey of the lower stratum families

123

height; and probably the wives of the family head and his brother, or the family head’s two wives. Accordingly the young son and daughter might be his own children or his brother’s. Family no. 301 consists of three persons, a couple with a son or a brother of the family head. Families nos. 302–315: These ten families are attested in ADB 3 (= SAA XI 203 = Text no. 137): I: 12–13 I: 14–15 (Break) II: 1–3 II: 9–10

(Family no. 302:) “Našku-dÖrÒ, [. . .], (and) 2 women, a total [of 3 (persons)]. The wife (= widow?) of A[. . .], the . . . (Family no. 303:) IssÊr-dÖrÒ, farm[er]; Našuh-dilÒni (and) 1 woman, a total of 3 (persons). (Family no. 304:) A[. . ., f ]armer; [. . .], a son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); [. . . . . . a total of ] 4? (persons).

(Break) III: 10–12 (Break) IV: 1–3 2 IV: 11–12 IV: 15–16

(Family no. 305:) SÖrÊia son of Il-naqamÒ, farmer; [. . .], his adolescent son; [. . .], (and) [a dau]ghter (of ) 4 (spans’ height); [a total of x (persons)]. women, 2 daughters, a total of 4 women; A grand total of 8 cultivators [ERIM.MEŠ ZI] (Family no. 306:) AsanÖnu, farmer, (and) 3 persons, a total of 4 (persons). (Family no. 307:) [A]bdâ, shepherd, (and his) [2?] wome[n] or: (and) [his] daugh[ter], a total of [. . . (persons)].

(Break) r. I: 2’–6’

(Family no. 308:) Adad-bÏlu-uÉur, [farmer]; Šar-ilÊni-ilu (and) Samsi-ilÊxÒ, (his) 2 adolescent sons; 2 women, a total of 5 (persons).

r. I: 13’–16’

(Family no. 309:) Uasî son of Taxlâ, gardener; Našuh-dilÒni, his son (of ) 3 (spans’ height, and) 1 woman, a total of 3 (persons). (Family no. 310:) Zabdâ son of Il-banâ, ditto (= gardener); 1 woman, a total of 2 (persons).

r. I: 17’–19’ (Break) r. II: 4’–11’

(Family no. 311:) [ . . .] son of HarÒmâ, [gar]dener; [ . . .]hi-Našuh, [1 adolescent son; or: his brother]; Našuh-dimrÒ, 1 adolescent son; Abi-hÊri, (son of ) 3 (spans’ height); Nabû-nÊdin-apli, weaned (son); 1 woman; 1 nubile daughter, (and) 1 (daughter of ) 4 (spans’ height), a total of 8 (persons).

124

chapter two

r. II: 14’–17’ (Family no. 312:) Addî, farmer; Assî (his) son (of ) 3 (spans’ height); 1 woman; 1 nubile daughter, 1 (daughter of ) 4 (spans’ height), (and) 1 adolescent (daughter), a total of 6 (persons). (Break) r. IV: 1’–2’ (Family no. 313:) HalÊma, [ . . .], (and) 1 woman; a total [of 2 (persons)]. r. IV: 3’–5’ (Family no. 314:) Nanî, [ . . .]; Abi-hÊri, his ado[lescent] son (and) 1 woman; a total of 3 (persons). r. IV: 6’–8’ (Family no. 315:) DannÊia, shepherd; Il-natan (and) 1 woman; a total of 3 (persons).”

Like the preceding ones, this document records dozens of “farmers” and “gardeners” together with their families and the assets of the farms which they cultivated. This text is clearly related to the next, as suggested by Johns, Fales, and others (see also the discussion below).211 The size and structure of eight families are clear (nos. 302, 306, 308–310, 312–314). All but one consist of two to ve persons (the exception has six persons). The size of the other three families is also evident (but other details are vague): two are of three persons (nos. 303 and 315), and one is of eight persons (no. 311). The grand total of these 11 families is 42 people (an average of 3.8 per family).212 In one case a widow is probably attested, dened as “the wife of PN, the . . .” (I: 14–15). Unfortunately the text is broken off and the other details are lost, including a possible description of her family. A tentative hypothesis is that this widow “inherited” her husband, and was allowed to cultivate and manage the farm until her children were grown up, or until her remarriage. Two other similar cases are attested in SAA XI 213 (= text no. 143). (1) In r. I: 7–9, the woman SÒn-. . . is listed at the head of a paragraph along with 2000 vine stalks. Unfortunately these lines are also broken, but her family may be recorded in line 8; in this case the woman is not dened as “the wife of PN” but is presented as the head of this household. (2) In the previous paragraph of this text (r. I: 1–6) four women are listed by their personal names, again along with 2000 vine stalks. These women might be the daughters of a

211

Johns, ADB, pp. 48–50; Fales, 1973, p. 37; Parpola, 1975, pp. 99–101. For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 43–47, no. 3, Pl. IV–V; Fales, 1973, pp. 28–33, no. 3, with earlier bibliography; Postgate, 1974, p. 241; Parpola, 1975, pp. 99–101, 107, 111. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 153, 223, 299. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 3b(3), 9b(2–3), 24a(3), 51b(1), 136b, 137b(1), 376b(2), 441a(1), 460a, 513a(1), 522b, 570a(12), 851b(1), 926a(11), 935b, 973a, 1086a(1), 1159b(1). 212

a survey of the lower stratum families

125

gardener that recently died and are still waiting to marry. The socioeconomic status of women in the Neo-Assyrian period is discussed only in a few studies and the subject merits more scholarly attention.213 Family no. 302 might be polygamous: one male is listed with two women. The second woman is clearly not his daughter since Scribe A counts daughters separately, like sisters and mothers. The most reasonable possibility is that they are his wives. Children are not listed and this might be the reason for the bigamy. Families 303 and 315 consist of a couple and a third person who might be a son or a brother of the family head. The next four families are unclear: no. 304 includes a father and a son of four spans’ height. The editors of SAA XI suggested to read: “2 women” in line 11, but since some ve signs are missing, other possibilities should be preferred, such as “1 woman (and) 1 daughter”; no. 305 includes a farmer with his adolescent son and a young daughter (of four spans’ height). It is possible to reconstruct “x women” at the beginning of line 12, but this is not certain and other readings may be offered, such as “1 woman (and) 1 sister” or “1 daughter, adolescent” or “1 daughter (of ) 5 (spans’ height)”, and more; family no. 306 is recorded by the pattern: “PN—x persons; a total of x+1 (persons)”. Similar patterns are frequently attested in royal grants, but are rare in the texts of the “Harran Census”. The family type is unclear; Abdâ, the shepherd, head of family no. 307, is listed with two (?) women or with his daughter. Nos. 310 and 313 are minimal nuclear families without children, and no. 314 is a couple with an adolescent son. Nos. 311 and 312 are large families of eight and six persons: each consists of a couple with four or ve children; in 311 another male is listed by name after the family head; he might be his brother or another adolescent son The order of the daughters in family no. 312 is unusual: the adolescent daughter is listed after the young daughter of four spans’ height. It might be a scribal error. The reason for the distinction between the nubile and the adolescent daughters is unclear. Families nos. 308 and 309 are also attested in SAA XI 213, and a comparison of these texts is set out rst:

213 For discussions on this subject see Garelli, 1998, pp. 175–181; Teppo, 2005; Galil, forthcoming (c).

126

chapter two

SAA XI 203 = Text 137 (= Scribe A)

SAA XI 213 = Text 143 (= Scribe B)

Family no. 308 r. I: 2’–6’ Adad-bÏlu-uÉur, [ farmer]; Šar-ilÊni-ilu (and) Samsi-ilÊxi, (his) 2 adolescent sons; 2 women, a total of 5 (persons).

r. II: 9–15 Adad-bÏlu-uÉur, farmer; 2 sons; 2 women

Family no. 309 r. I: 13’–16’ Uasî son of Taxlâ, gardener; Našuh-dilÒni, his son (of) 3 (spans’ height); 1 woman, a total of 3 (persons).

r. I: 13’–16’ [U]asî, gar[dener]; [1] son; [1 Woman]

The differences in the descriptions of these two families are evident: Scribe A presents a detailed account of the family members (SAA XI 203 = Text 137); while scribe B (in SAA XI 213 = Text 143) omits patronymics, sons’ names, children’s ages, and totals. No. 309 is a nuclear family of three persons: a couple with a young son; and no. 308 consists of ve persons: a father with his two adolescent sons, and two women, probably his wife and his daughter-in-law, the wife of one of his sons (although the second woman might also be his second wife). Families nos. 316–317: These families are attested in ADB 13 (= SAA XI 205 = Text no. 138): I: 6’–7’

(Family no. 316:) “Taxlâ, farmer (and) 4 persons, a total of 5 (persons).

I: 11’–13’ (Family no. 317:) SÏx-šumkÒ, gardener (and) Našuh-iddina, his adolescent son; a total of 2 (persons)”.

Families nos. 318–319: These families are attested in ADB 8 (= SAA XI 206 = Text no. 139): I: 3’–9’

(Family no. 318:) “Hu-[ . . .] son of Adad-bi[xdÒ], shepherd; SamÖnu-aplu-iddina; BÏl-bÊni; [1] suckling son (and) 2 women, a total of 6 (persons).

I: 18’–23’ (Family no. 319:) Ahâ, farmer; Tiniâ (and) SÏx-dikir, his 2 adolescent brothers; Samsi-iÊbi, (his son of ) 4 (spans’ height), (and) 2 women, a total of 6 (persons)”.

a survey of the lower stratum families

127

Text no. 138 is probably the upper part of text no. 139, although there is no physical join between these two fragments.214 Col. I is almost completely preserved, but col. II is only fragmentary, like the reverse (of cols. 3 and 4). The size of these four families is clear, and they consist of 2–6 persons; the grand total is 19 people (an average of 4.75 per family). One family (316) is listed by the rare pattern “PN—x persons; a total of x+1 (persons)”; the others are fully described. Family no. 316 consists of ve persons; and no. 317 is single-parent family of two persons, a father and his young son. It is not clear what happened to the mother of this family: she might be divorced or deceased. Families nos. 318 and 319 consist of six persons each: in no. 318 they are the family head, two women, a suckling son, and other two males listed after the father, who might be his sons or his brothers (see the next family). One woman is probably the wife of the head of the family; the other might be the wife of one of the two other males. Family no. 319 is probably a multiple-family kinship group (units all on one level), since two brothers of the family head are attested, and it is reasonable to suppose that the second woman is the wife of one of these brothers.215 Families nos. 320–327: These families are attested in ADB 6 (= SAA XI 207 = Text no. 140): I: 1–2

(Family no. 320:) “Husazâ, gar[dener]; 3 sons (and) 3 women.

I: 7–8 I: 11–12

(Family no. 321:) SÏx-[. . .]di, ditto (= gardener); [x sons, (and) x] women. (Family no. 322:) [. . .]-BÏl; his [x son]s (and) 1 woman.

I: 15–16 r. II: 2’ r. II: 4’

(Family no. 323:) [. . .]sunu, farmer (and) [x wom]en. (Family no. 324:) SÊsî, ditto; 1 son (and) 1 woman. (Family no. 325:) Mannu-kÒ-SÏx, ditto; 2 sons (and) 2 women.

214

Fales, 1973, pp. 45–46; Parpola, 1975, p. 103; SAA XI, pp. 130–131. For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 62–64, 67–68, no. 8, 13, Pl. XII, XV; Fales, 1973, pp. 42–46, no. 9–10, with earlier bibliography; Postgate, 1974, p. 241; Parpola, 1975, pp. 103, 112–113. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 57, 71, 223, 299. For the personal names in this text see: PNA, pp. 56b(1), 288b(2),936a, 1085b, 1086b, 1099b, 1106b(1); Tallqvist, 1918, p. 229a. 215

128

chapter two

r. II: 8e–9e (Family no. 326:) DÒnÊnu, [ditto], (and) 2 wom[en]. r. III: 5’–6’ (Family no. 327:) Ilu-bÊni, the . . .; 1 son (and) 1 woman.

Family no. 328 is attested in ADB 14 (= SAA XI 208 = Text no. 141): 7’ Azi-il, ditto (= gardener), (and) 1 woman. Text no. 141 is probably a fragment of text no. 140.216 It was composed by Scribe B who describes the families in xed order. He opens with the family head’s personal name and profession (patronymics are not presented); the other family members are unnamed and are listed next by only two categories: rst the “son(s)” and later the “women” (all females are counted in this category). So when women are listed after the family head’s name, one may conclude that this family has no sons, even if the text is broken after the recording of women (see, e.g., family no. 326). At least some of the people attested in this text are deportees transported to the Harran area from the region of Gambulu and dened as captives (“hubtu”: SAA XI 207 r. III: 4’). This fact is also indicated in the next paragraph of this text: the head of family no. 327 is dened as “formerly of the runaways” etc. (SAA XI 207 r. III: 7’). These deportees were resettled and cultivated land and vineyards (in three cases 5,000 vines, in two cases 60 hectares, and in one case 20 hectares). Nine families are listed in these fragments, with a grand total of at least 34 persons. The size of six families is clear (23 people, an average of 3.84 per family); the remaining three families consist of at least three persons (no. 323), or at least four persons (nos. 321–322). No. 320 is a large family of seven: a father, three sons, and three women who might be his wife and daughters, or other possibilities. The number 4, written after the three women, does not relate to people but probably to property (oxen or other). Family no. 321 includes a father with at least two women and a son, and no. 322 is a couple with at least two sons. No. 323 consists of a farmer and an unclear number of females; and nos. 324 and 327 are nuclear families of three persons each: a couple with one son.

216 For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 58–60, 68–69, no. 6, 14, Pl. X, XVI; Fales, 1973, pp. 38–40, no. 5–6, with earlier bibliography; Postgate, 1974, p. 241; Parpola, 1975, pp. 103, 106, 112. See also Oded, 1979, p. 94; Radner, 1997, pp. 209, 223. For the personal names in this text see: PNA, pp. 239b(2), 385a(2), 482b, 526b(1), 697a(1), 1093b(2).

a survey of the lower stratum families

129

Family no. 325 consists of ve persons, a father with two sons and two women; and no. 328 is a childless couple (for no. 326 see discussion above). Families nos. 329–343: These families are attested in ADB 9+ (= SAA XI 209 = Text no. 142): r. III: 1’

(Family no. 329:) “Nergal-ilÊxÒ, ditto (and) 1 [woman?].

r. III: 3’

(Family no. 330:) SÏx-aqÊba, gate-guard (and) 1 woman.

r. III: 9’–10’

(Family no. 331:) SÖrâ, shepherd; [1 so]n (and) 1 woman.

r. III: 12’–13’ (Family no. 332:) [U]lÖlÊiu, ditto (= shepherd); 5 sons (and) 1 woman. r. III: 16’–17’ (Family no. 333:) Urad-IssÊr, gar[dener]; 1 son (and) 2 women. r. III: 19’–20’ (Family no. 334:) AttÊr-bi[xdÒ, garde]ner; 1 son (and) 1 [woman]. r. III: 23’

(Family no. 335:) Ah-abû, ditto (= gardener), (and) [2? Wo]men.

r. III: 24’

(Family no. 336:) Urad-IssÊr, ditto (= gardener); 2 son[s] (and) 1 [woman].

r. III: 26’

(Family no. 337:) Ilu-islaka, carpenter; 1 son (and) 1 woman.

r. III: 29’–30’ (Family no. 338:) Našuh-sagab, whitewasher; [x sons (and) 1] woman. r. IV: 4’–5’ (Family no. 339:) SÖrÒ-rÊmu, gar[dener] (and) 1 woman. r. IV: 10’–11’ (Family no. 340:) Il-DÊdi, farmer; 2 sons (and) 2 women. r. IV: 12’–13’ (Family no. 341:) Tela-il, gardener, 1 son (and) 3 women. r. IV: 17’–18’ (Family no. 342:) Kurzâ, shepherd; 1 son (and) 3 women. r. IV: 28’–29’ (Family no. 343:) Našuh-id[rÒ, . . . .]; 1 son; [. . .].

Four fragments of the reverse of this text are preserved: ADB 9, 11–12, and 16 (see the graphic restoration by Parpola,217 which should be updated by inserting ADB 16 in the middle of col. I next to ADB 11).218 In cols. III–IV Scribe B describes 15 families by the pattern 217

Parpola, 1975, p. 102. For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 64–67, 69, no. 9, 11+12, 16, Pl. XIII, XVI; Fales, 1973, pp. 46–54, no. 11, 13, 14, 16, with earlier bibliography; 218

130

chapter two

“PN, profession; x son(s), (and) x woman/women”. The size of 12 families is evident, and the grand total is 45 persons, an average of 3.75 per family. All families but one consist of 2–5 persons, the exception having seven persons. The size of three families is unclear (nos. 335, 338, 343). Most families are nuclear; a few are childless (330, 339, and probably also 329); others consist of a couple with one child (nos. 331, 334, 337, and possibly also 343); a couple with two sons (no. 336) or with ve sons (no. 332). The families with a few “women” probably are not polygamous; the second female is possibly the daughter, mother, sister, or daughter-in-law of the family head. Most personal names in this text are West-Semitic or Aramaic, as in the other texts of the “Harran Census”. Families nos. 344–352: These families are attested in ADB 4 (= SAA XI 213 = Text no. 143): II: 1’

(Family no. 344:) “[. . . . . . . . .], (and) 1 woman.

II: 4’–5’

(Family no. 345:) [. . .], farmer; [. . . . (and) 1] woman.

II: 7’–8’

(Family no. 346:) [. . .], farmer; [. . . .], (and) 1 woman.

III: 5’–6’

(Family no. 347:) RÒsÊia, [. . .], (and) x] women.

III: 8’–9’

(Family no. 348:) [I]drÒ-Anu, farmer; his brother; 1 son (and) 3 women.

III: 13’–14’ (Family no. 349:) Adda-lÖkidi, farmer; 1 son (and) 1 woman. IV: 3’–4’

(Family no. 350:) Padî, gardener; 1 son (and) 3 women.

r. II: 1–2

(Family no. 351:) Il-paxal, [gardener]; 1 son (and) 1 woman.

r. II: 16

(Family no. 352:) [. . .]sî, ditto (= gardener, and) 2 women.”

Families nos. 353–354 are attested in ADB 21 (= SAA XI 214 = Text no. 144):

Postgate, 1974, pp. 241–242; Parpola, 1975, pp. 102, 106. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 223, 296, 299, 304. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 26b–27a, 57b(7), 234b(3), 513a(1), 642b(1), 936a(2), 937a, 948b(6), 1098a(2), 1159b(1), 1160a; Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 232a, 239a.

a survey of the lower stratum families

131

3’–4’ (Family no. 353:) “BÏl-HarrÊn-idrÒ, [ farmer]; 2 sons (and) 5 women. 8’–9’ (Family no. 354:) Il-idrÒ, gardener (and) 2 women.”

Texts 143 and 144 (SAA XI 213–214) are possibly fragments of one document.219 The relation between this text and no. 137 (SAA XI 203) is evident (see the discussion on families nos. 308–309, above). It is clear that at least three paragraphs in text no. 143 have parallels in text no. 137: (1) SAA XI 213 r. I 10–13||SAA XI 203 III: 1–9; (2) SAA XI 213 r. II 4–8 || SAA XI 203 r. I: 1’–6’; (3) SAA XI 213 r. II 9–13 || SAA XI 203 r. I: 13’–16’. However, in SAA XI 213 r. I: 12–13 the owner of the vineyards is Adad-rÏmanni and in SAA XI 203 III: 7–9 the owner of similar property is SÒn-Ïreš, “a cook promoted by Adad-rÏmanni, chief cook (of the governor) of Harran”. It is possible that these two texts describe different situations, indicating a transfer of a few estates from the chief cook to the promoted cook. In this case SAA XI 213 is possibly a summary by Scribe B of a text similar but not identical to SAA XI 203.220 Scribe B, as usual, counts only the family heads, their professions, their sons, and their “women”, with at least one exception: “his brother” included in family no. 348. This comment indicates the possibility that other brothers are attested in the texts bearing Scribe B-type characteristics, for example, in the broken lines describing families nos. 344–346 and more. The size of seven out of the eleven families recorded in texts 143 and 144 is clear, and the grand total is 31 persons, an average of 4.43 souls per family. All families but one consist of 3–6 persons, the exceptional family having eight persons. Two families are nuclear (a couple with a child), and the relatively large families might be multiplefamily kinship groups: for example, one of the three women in family no. 348 may be the brother’s wife; and at least one of the ve women in family no. 353 might be a daughter-in-law, the wife of one of the sons of this family, but there are also other possibilities. In families nos. 345 and 346 a few sons are probably included.

219

Parpola, 1975, pp. 103, 106. For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 47–50, 71–72, no. 4, 21, Pl. VI–VII, XII; Fales, 1973, pp. 33–37, 41–42, no. 4, 8 with earlier bibliography; Postgate, 1974, p. 241; Parpola, 1975, pp. 103, 111–112; Fales, 2001, p. 173. See also Radner, 1997, pp. 223, 296, 299, 312. For the personal names in texts no. 143–144 see PNA, pp. 48a(1), 302b, 506b(1), 517b(3), 523a, 978a(2), 1053a(1). All these names are West Semitic or Aramaic. 220

132

chapter two

Families nos. 355–356 are attested in ADB 20 (= SAA XI 218 = Text no. 145): 1’–2’ (Family no. 355:) 6’–9’ (Family no. 356:)

“[. . .] 1 (son/daughter of ) 3 (spans’ height) [. . .]; [. . .]s, a total/a grand total of 10 [persons]. Mannu-lÊ-amÒni, guardian of [a grove (of poplars)]; ZÏr-IssÊr, his son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); AhÖnu, [his] son [. . .]; Aktur-la-Našuh, his son [...]; 1 woman (and) 1 daughter (of ) 4 (spans’ height), a total of [6 persons]”

This fragment bears Scribe A-type characteristics, but it is unclear if it was part of text no. 142 (= SAA XI 202).221 Family no. 356 is a nuclear family of six persons: a couple with three sons (one of four spans’ height and two younger), and an unnamed daughter of four spans’ height.222 The size and structure of family no. 355 is vague since it is not clear if “ten” is the total or a grand total which also includes members of other families. Only one member of this family is attested: a son or a daughter of three spans’ height. E.2. “Fathers and Sons” Families nos. 357–362 are attested in ADB 5 (= SAA XI 219 = Text no. 146): I: 1’–5’

(Family no. 357:) “Ahu-nÖrÒ son of Gabri-il; ”Êbî, his adolescent son; Našuh-qatar (his son of ) 4 (spans’ height); SÏx-sakâ, adolescent, son of Il-DÊdi, a total of 4 (persons).

I: 8’–9’

(Family no. 358:) Il-gabrÒ son of Nabû-ladÒ, ditto; Našuh-dalâ, his son (of ) 5 (spans’ height).

I: 12’–13’ (Family no. 359:) Ahu-nÖrÒ son of SÏx-iabÊba, ditto; Našuh-gabrÒ, his adolescent son. II: 2’–4’

221

(Family no. 360:) Adda-sÖrÒ, [. . .]; Nabû-ballÊssu-[iqbi, . . .]; TÏr-dalâ, suckling [son] of Il-DÊdi.

Parpola, 1975, p. 106. For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 71, no. 20, Pl. XVII; Fales, 1973, p. 56, no. 19 with earlier bibliography; Parpola, 1975, pp. 106. See also Radner, 1997, p. 223. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 85b(7), 96b–97a, 700a(1); Tallqvist, 1918, p. 248. 222

a survey of the lower stratum families

133

II: 10’–12’ (Family no. 361:) ¾risu son of Mannu-kÊ-DÊdi; InÖrta-Ïreš, his son (of ) 5 (spans’ height); Nabû-uÉalli, adolescent, a total of 3 (persons). II: 16’–20’ (Family no. 362:) Nabû-ušallim, ditto; InÖrta-uÉalli, ditto, 2 sons of Qunî; IlÊxÒ-abÒ, his adolescent son; Il-dalâ, his son (of ) 5 (spans’ height); a total of 4 (persons).”

Scribe A counts in this text only fathers and sons; wives, daughters, and other females are excluded. Six families are attested, and the grand total of the sons included in these families is nine (an average of 1.5 sons per family). In two cases two brothers are listed (I: 16’–20’; 21’–26’); these two pairs of brothers are not counted as families (see Introduction).223 Two families include an attaché child (nos. 357, 360), in one case an adolescent and in the other a suckling one; the scribe points out that both are sons of Il-DÊdi, and it is reasonable that this person died (during the transfer from Babylonia to the Harran area?) and his sons were annexed to two different families, as part of the reorganization of these families and their resettlement in the new places. During this process each family (originating in Gambulu—col. II: 27’) received 23 or 24 hectares of land for cultivation, probably as tenants: the owners of these parcels are mainly Assyrian ofcials. Family no. 362 is described in an unusual way: two brothers (Nabûušallim and InÖrta-uÉalli) are presented as the sons of Qunî without the family head being specied. The total (four) indicates that Qunî is not included, and is not the family head, and it is possible that he has already died. One might conclude that in the eyes of the Assyrian administration the two brothers lead this family. Two other sons are included in it: IlÊxÒ-abÒ, an adolescent, and Il-dalâ, of ve spans’ height; but it is not clear who is their father, Nabû-ušallim or InÖrta-uÉalli.

223 For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 50–58, no. 5, 21, Pl. VIII–IX; Fales, 1973, pp. 58–65, no. 21 with earlier bibliography; See also Oded, 1979, p. 94; Radner, 1997, pp. 209, 223. For the personal names in this text, see PNA, pp. 51a(2), 86b(5–6), 106a(3), 403b(1), 417a, 511a, 513a(2+3), 513b(2), 514b(1), 549a(6), 557b, 679b, 806b(3), 843a, 900b(1), 902b(1), 935b(1), 936a, 937a(3), 1018a(1), 1101a. Most names (14) are West Semitic (11), Semitic (1), or Aramaic (2); the others (9) are Assyrian or Akkadian (6), or Akkadian/West Semitic (3).

134

chapter two

The summary in Col. II: 25–28, ten farmers and 14 sons, probably includes family no. 362, and therefore it summarizes nine families with 14 sons, an average of 1.55 sons per family. Families nos. 363–373 are attested in ADB 7 (= SAA XI 220 = Text no. 147): I: 9’–11’ I: 12’–16’

(Family no. 363:) “IddinÊia: [. . .] (and) UlÖlÊiu, 2 sons [of his]. (Family no. 364:) Dalâ-[. . .]: SÏx-[. . .]; SÏx-[. . .] (and) Našu[h-. . .] [3 sons of his], a total of 4 (persons). I: 17’–19’ (Family no. 365:) Ahi-nÊgi [son of . . .]: Il-Našuh-[milkÒ, his son], a total of 2 (persons). II: 1’–5e (Family no. 366:) SÏx-[. . .] son of Ha[. . .]: KÏnî; Il-[. . .] (and) Iamaniâ, 3 sons of his, a total of 4 (persons), 1 house. III: 1’–2’ (Family no. 367:) [. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .]: [. . .]-HarrÊn, his son, [a total of 2 (persons), 1] house. III: 3’–5’ (Family no. 368:) [. . .]: [. . .] (and) [. . ., 2 son]s of his, [a total of 3 (persons)], 1 house. III: 6’–8’ (Family no. 369:) [. . .]: SÏx-manÊ[ni] (and) [ . . .], [2] sons of his, [a total of 3 (persons)], 1 house. III: 9’–10’ (Family no. 370:) [. . .]: Našuh-manÊ[ni] (his son), [a total of] 2 (persons), 1 house. III: 11’–13’ (Family no. 371:) [. . .]râ: SÏx-[. . .]; [. . .]-iababÊia; [. . .] (and) Šamaš-ahu-iddina, 4 [ sons of his]. III: 16’–18e (Family no. 372:) SalÊmÊ[nu-. . .]: HanÖ[nu, his son], a total of [2 (persons)]. L. side I: 2–4 (Family no. 373:) [. . .]rahî: SÏx-manÊni, (his son of ) 3 (spans’ height); [a total of 2 (persons). 1] house”.

This list of bronzesmiths, ironsmiths, and possibly others contains only fathers and sons.224 Scribe A uses two main patterns in this text: the rst is a division of the information into four main components: (a) father’s name (sometimes with a patronymic); (b) son’s(s’) name(s); (c) total number of sons (X A.MEŠ-šú—see no. 366, 369) or the phrase (A-šú) in cases where only one son is recorded (see, e.g., family no. 367); (d) grand total of all persons (father and sons): PAB X (see family no. 366). The second pattern denes two persons as sons of a third one:

224 For previous editions and collations see Johns, ADB, pp. 60–62, no. 7, Pl. XI; Fales, 1973, pp. 65–68, no. 22; see also Radner, 1997, pp. 152, 223. For the personal names in this text, see PNA, pp. 66b, 457b(7), 491b, 503b(1), 522b(2), 610a(6), 936b, 1069a(7), 1102b(1–2).

a survey of the lower stratum families

135

“PN1 (and) PN2, 2 sons (of ) PN3” (see II: 1–2, and probably left side, III, 14’–15’). These two pairs of brothers (whose father has probably died) are not considered families in this book (see Introduction). Families nos. 366–371 are evidently counted by the rst pattern; the situation is not clear in the descriptions of families nos. 363–365 and nos. 372–373, but in these cases the scribe possibly used the same pattern (see the restoration of these lines above, and note that in a few cases two names are distinctly listed in one line, e.g., III: 6’, 9’, 11’). Only once is a son’s height recorded (left side, I: 3 = family no. 373), but since the height of many children is clearly attested in the summaries (I: 7’; left side, II: 4) the height of other children may be listed at the end of other lines (which are mostly broken). Col. I, line 8’ is still incorrectly understood: Johns suggested that the number ve in this line may refer to “homers of land or houses or gardens”;225 Fales read “5 E[RÍN.MEŠ] = 5 lavoratori (?)”;226 and in SAA XI 220 this line is just transliterated as 5 x [x x x], without any interpretation. Since the beginning of this column is broken away, the most reasonable restoration is “5 G[A PAB 14]” = 5 suck[ling children, a total (of ) 14 (persons)]”. Note that a similar formulation is attested in the summary on the left side, II: 3–4: the scribe counts rst the 22 adult ironsmiths; next the ten children by their height; and lastly the grand total of adults and children (32). In both summaries no adolescents or sons of ve spans’ height are attested, probably because they are included in the number of the adults (with one exception: talmÒdu = apprentice, in s. II 3, who was probably also a young child). The ratio of adults to young children in these two summaries is 1:1 in the rst and 2.2:1 in the second (with only 0.45 young children per family). But this is not the ratio of adults to children in these families (for the reason mentioned above). The grand total of sons in families nos. 363–373 is probably 20, an average of approximately 1.82 sons per family (one son is attested in ve families: nos. 365, 367, and 372–373; two sons in four families: nos. 363–364 and 368–369; three sons in one family: no. 366; and four sons also only in one family: no. 371).

225 226

Johns, ADB, p. 60. Fales, 1973, p. 65.

136

chapter two

Families nos. 374–375 are attested in ADB 10 (= SAA XI 210 = Text no. 148): r. II: 2’ (Family no. 374:) “Hannî, ditto, (and) 1 son, [. . .]. r. II: 3’ (Family no. 375:) Našuh-. . ., ditto, (and) 2 [sons]”.

This text lists probably only fathers and sons (no females are attested). In the rst line, the editors of SAA XI (following the previous editions by Johns and Fales) proposed the restoration: 1 DUMU [x x x x x]; but one should rather read these signs as the beginning of the personal name MÊr- . . ., since in lines 2’ and 3’ Scribe B counts each family in a separate line, and line 4’ also opens with a personal name. The families listed in lines 2’–3’ include one or two sons (see above).227 It is not clear if other families are recorded in lines 1’ or 4’ (see also the following text). Families nos. 376–377 are attested in ADB 19 (= SAA XI 211 = Text no. 149): II: 3’ 4’–5’

(Family no. 376:) “Adda-hutnÒ, farmer, (and) 2 s[ons]. (Family no. 377:) IdrÒ-lî, [farmer]; 1 son, (and) 1 [brother?]”.

This text might be a part of the previous one.228 It also bears “Scribe B”-type characteristics, and probably also records only fathers and sons. In line 5’ the restoration 1[brother] is preferable to 1[woman], since in the previous text as well as in the previous family only the father and sons are listed. A son and a brother are listed separately in a same family by Scribe B in another case (see family no. 348 above).

F. Deportees and Displaced Persons Families nos. 378–389 are attested in ND 2443+ (= Text no. 150). The editio princeps was published by Parker in 1961,229 but there are still a few unsolved problems so a new translation of it is presented below: 227 For previous editions and notes see Johns, ADB, pp. 65–66, no. 10, Pl. XIV; Fales, 1973, pp. 48–49, no. 12; Parpola, 1975, pp. 103, 106. See PNA, p. 454a(6). 228 For previous editions and notes see Johns, ADB, pp. 70, no. 19, Pl. XVI; Fales, 1973, pp. 40, no. 7; Parpola, 1975, pp. 103, 106. For the personal names in this text, see PNA, pp. 46a(1), 507a. 229 See Parker, 1961, pp. 27–28, and pls. XIV and XX.

a survey of the lower stratum families

137

Obverse (ND 2443) I: 1–4 “[. . .—x persons, whom] Mannu-kÒ-AššÖr [bro]ught into Dimeti; I: 5 [. . . –] 10 persons, [. . .].” The rest is lost. II: 1 (Family no. 378:) “ÂiÉi—4 person[s]; II: 2–6 Quia—[. . .]; a total of [1]6 bearded men (and) 46 persons, whom Mannu-kÒ-AššÖr brought into Sagbat, at the disposal of HilqÒIÊu. II: 7 (Family no. 379:) Dugul-pÊn-ili – 4 person[s]; II: 8 (Family no. 380:) Liphur-ilu – 4 ditto (= persons); II: 9 (Family no. 381:) [. . .]-a – 3 ditto (= persons); II: 10 (Family no. 382:) [. . .]-ri – 2 ditto (= persons);” III: 1–9 A list of male names; IV: 1 “[1?]4 bearded men (and) IV: 1–3 105 persons, at the disposal of BÏl-HarrÊn-bÏlu-uÉur; IV: 4 76 ditto (= persons), at the disposal of HilqÒ-IÊu; IV: 5 16 ditto (= persons), at the disposal of BÏl-šamka; IV: 6 25 ditto (= persons), at the disposal of Ahi-dÖrÒ; IV: 7 34 ditto (= persons), at the disposal of Âil-IssÊr; IV: 8–9 a grand total of 25 eunuchs (and) 44 bearded men;” V: 1–9 A list of male names; Break; V: 10’–12’ (= ND 2621) A list of male names? V: 13’ “a total of 13 bearded men (and) 41 persons V: 14’–17’ the women Tangî, HazÖgâ, MÊr-gubbÒ, Agî-[. . .] V: 18’–19’ the woman [. . . -x] persons; the woman [. . .].” Reverse (= ND 2621) r. I: 1’ “[PN—x ditto (= person/persons)] r. I: 2’ [PN—x ditto (= person/persons)] r. I: 3’ Adda-[. . . – x ditto (= person/persons)] r. I: 4’ [. . .]-li-[. . . – x ditto (= person/persons)] r. I: 5’ HarrÊnÊiu [ – x ditto (= person/persons)] r. I: 6’ Uppahir-ilu [ – x ditto (= person/persons)] r. I: 7’ (Family no. 383:) Ilu-iddina – 5 ditto (= persons); r. I: 8’ (Family no. 384:) MatÒx – 4 ditto (= persons); r. I: 9’ (Family no. 385:) SagÒb-Adda – 3 ditto (= persons); r. I: 10’ (Single person?:) Gir-IÊu – 1 ditto (= person); r. I: 11’ (Family no. 386:) Ia-sÖrÒ – 4 ditto (= persons); r. I: 12’ (Single person?:) Ahu – 1 ditto (= person); r. I: 13’ (Single person?:) SagÒx – 1 ditto (= person); r. I: 14’ (Family no. 387:) SaxÒlu – 5 ditto (= persons); r. I: 15’ (Family no. 388:) Adda-sÖrÒ – 4 ditto (= persons); r. I: 16’ (Family no. 389:) GurÊdu – 2 ditto (= persons); r. I: 17’ (Single person?:) ErÒba/RÒba—[. . .]—1? ditto (= person);” r. I: 18’–20’ Traces of personal names; the rest is lost. r. II: 1’–2’ “[ . . .] persons—[at the disposal of BÏl-HarrÊn]-bÏlu-uÉur; r. II: 3’–4’ [ . . .] HilqÒ-IÊu. A grand total of 2[0]5 persons.” r. II: 5’–8’ Broken away. r. II: 9’–12’ “HilqÒ-IÊu BÏl-šamka; Ahi-dÖrÒ; Âil-IssÊr.”

138

chapter two

The rest is broken, with one exception: “x persons” at the end of line 14’. This administrative document probably records the allotment of deportees to Assyrian ofcials.230 It is not dated (or its date is lost), but it is reasonable to suppose that it was composed in Calah in the last years of the reign of Tiglath-pileser III, since the well known palace herald, BÏl-HarrÊn-bÏlu-uÉur, who served as the ofcial eponym of 741 B.C., is probably mentioned in this text (IV 3; r. II 2’). Moreover, Israelite deportees are clearly listed in this document (see below), indicating that it was composed after 733/2 B.C. Yet it should not be dated too many years later, since BÏl-HarrÊn-bÏlu-uÉur was appointed as palace herald before 772 B.C. (probably ca. 775 B.C.).231 At least two persons listed in this text bear Hebrew names with the theophoric element –IÊu: HilqÒ-IÊu (II: 6, IV: 4; r. II: 3’, 9’) and Gir-IÊu (r. I: 10’).232 Both are probably Israelites exiled from Galilee or Transjordan in 733/2 B.C.233 (for the position of these persons see the discussion below). Two main fragments of this text are preserved, but do not join: (1) ND 2443; a fragment of ve columns of the upper part of the obverse, with about 9–10 preserved lines in cols. II–V (the reverse of this fragment is mostly not inscribed, with only a few traces preserved in r. I and III); (2) ND 2621; a fragment of two columns of the right edge of the obverse (cols. IV–V; the reverse of this fragment, cols. r. I–II, consists of about 15–20 preserved lines. See the restoration, above). The people are described by the pattern PN—x persons (used for families; or PN—1 person, used probably for the single people). This pattern is clearly attested at the beginning of col. II, as well as in line 7 of this column and in r. II: 1’, 4’, and 13’. So it is clear that persons are listed and not other items.

230 In Parker’s opinion, “This list may relate to the distribution of prisoners of war or the handing in to their ofcers of prisoners taken by individual soldiers” (1961, p. 28). Oded accepts Parker’s conclusions and assumes “with a high degree of probability” that the text refers to “captives given to certain functionaries” (1979, pp. 112–113). For a similar opinion see Jursa, PNA, pp. 737b and especially 1060b. For this text see also PNA, pp. 328a, 461b(2), 688b(2), 1173b(5) and the following notes. 231 For BÏl-HarrÊn-bÏlu-uÉur and the his Tell Abta stele see Grayson, 1993, pp. 28–29; Grayson, 1996, pp. 241–242 (=RIMA 3 A.0.105.2:9); Magen, 1986, p. 50; Radner, PNA, p. 301a–b(2); Mattila, 2000, pp. 29–31. 232 For HilqÒ-IÊu and Gir-IÊu see PNA, pp. 425b, 472a. 233 For the deportations from these areas in 733/2 B.C. see Tadmor, 1994, pp. 80–81, 279–282; Galil, 1996, pp. 69–70; Galil, 2001, pp. 64–65.

a survey of the lower stratum families

139

Three main terms dene persons in this text: (1) ša rÏši (LÚ.SAG) = eunuch;234 (2) ša ziqni (LÚ ša NUNDUN) = bearded men; (3) napšutu (ZI) = souls, persons. The rst term is attested only once in, IV: 8, the second four times (II: 3; IV: 1, 9; V: 13’), and the third at least ten times (I: 5; II: 1, 3, 7; IV: 2; V: 13’, 18’; r. 1’, 4’, 15’; and its abbreviation “ditto” occurs 18 times). In IV: 8–9 the scribe presents a total of 25 eunuchs vis-à-vis 44 non-eunuchs (“bearded men”); and in the other cases (II: 3; IV: 1; r. I: 13’) a total of “bearded men” and (their?) persons is recorded (it is possible that “bearded men” are also listed in I: 1 and 5 before the totals of persons). Since these bearded men are “brought” to a certain city by an Assyrian ofcial (Mannu-kÒ-AššÖr) and allotted to other ofcials, it is reasonable to suppose that these people are deportees; however, the term ša ziqni usually denes ofcials. One possible solution to this contradiction is that these are deportees appointed by the Assyrian administration as ofcials, now being transferred to their new places (a few with their families, others as singles) to serve under the authority of the named senior ofcials. Note that the Assyrian ofcials such as BÏl-HarrÊn-bÏlu-uÉur, BÏl-šamka, Ahi-dÖrÒ, Âil-IssÊr and HilqÒIÊu are not dened by these three terms or by any other term but are mentioned just by their personal names. The relation between the totals and the detailed description is not always clear: for example, IV: 8–9 is not a summary of IV: 4–7 since the total of these lines is 151 while only 69 are listed in lines 8–9; therefore, the “ditto” in these lines must refer to persons, and not to eunuchs or “bearded men”. It is possible that the total of “persons” is presented in the next line (IV: 10), but unfortunately it is lost. The bearded men might be the family heads: the ratio of “bearded men” and “person” in one case is probably 1:7.5 (IV: 1–2), and in the other two cases it is about 1:3 (II: 3; V: 13; see the discussion below on the average size of a family in this text, 3.66 or 4.67).235 Clearly, at least one deportee, namely HilqÒ-IÊu already functions in this text as an Assyrian ofcial, and probably not of a low rank, indicating that the deportees were placed by the king of Assyria in various positions and on the various levels of Assyrian society (see Introduction).

234 For eunuchs in the Neo-Assyrian period see note 7, above. The Tell Abta stele clearly indicates that Bel-Harran-bel-uÉur was a eunuch, but he is not dened as such in ND 2443+. 235 In V: 18’ a woman is probably presented as a family head, with an unclear number of persons (see the restoration, above).

140

chapter two

Although it is possible that the family heads were already appointed, and even assigned to a denite destination, these deported families are still in transit, so they are dened in this book as “deportees”. In sum, this administrative text probably documents the distribution of deportees of various ranks to be resettled in different places and serve under the authority of various ofcials. A total of 12 families are preserved, consisting of 44 persons, about 3.66 persons per family. If the family head is not included in each of these family totals, the grand total will be 56, making an average of 4.67 persons per family. Since this point is not certain these families are dened as unclear. Moreover, if indeed the family head is not included in each family total, three or four additional families, of two persons each, are attested in r. I: 10’, 12’–13’ (and possibly also in r. I: 17’).236 The possibility that they are single people (or “no families” consisting of a man with his brother/sister or slave/maid) is preferred in this book, since in most cases the family head is in fact included in the total of his family (see also Chapter III). Most personal names of the family heads are West Semitic or Aramaic.237 Families nos. 390–397 are attested in ABL 212 (= SAA XV 181 = Text no. 151): 8b–10a

(Family no. 390:) “UbÊru; Nabû-bÊni, his brother; 1 suckling son (and) 2 women, a total of 5 (persons). 10b–12a (Family no. 391:) PÊlihka-liblu¢; Nabû-ahu-Ïreš, his brother; 1 son (of ) 4 (spans’ height, and) 2 women, a total of 5 (persons). 12b–13a (Family no. 392:) ZÊzÊia; 1 son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); 1 woman (and) 2 daughters, a total of 5 (persons). 13b–14 (Family no. 393:) HarrÊnû; Amat-BÏl-uÉur (and) 3 women, a total of 5 (persons). 15–16a (Family no. 394:) Na’id-Ešeriga; Nabû-nÊdin-ahi, his brother (and) 3 women, a total of 5 (persons). 16b–17 (Family no. 395:) BÏl-lÊmur; Anu-Ïreš, his brother (and) 1 woman, a total of 3 (persons).

236 In that case the grand total of these 16 families will be 64 persons, an average of four people per family. 237 For their personal names see PNA, pp. 50b, 386b(2), 431a, 529a(2), 663a(2), 745a, 1060b(1), 1063b(5), 10176(2–3), 1177a–b.

a survey of the lower stratum families

141

18–19a

(Family no. 396:) IqÒšû (and) RÏhÊnu, fowlers; 1 son (of ) 3 (spans’ height), (and) 2 women, a total of 5 (persons). 19b–20a (Family no. 397:) PaltaÉi (and) her sister, a total of 2 daughters (of ) HazÊnu. 20b–25 A grand total of 12 strong men (ERIM.KALAG.MEŠ), 1 son (of ) 5 (spans’ height), 2 sons (of ) 4 (spans’ height), 1 son (of ) 3 (spans’ height), 1 suckling son, 15 women, (and) 2 daughters, a total of 35 men (with their) persons. 5 out of them are missing: 3 have been sold for money in Babylon.”

This letter was probably sent to Sargon II by AššÖr-bÏlu-taqqin, the Assyrian governor of a place east of the Tigris, on the frontier with Babylonia.238 It also mentions Il-iadax, governor of DÏru (Tell Aqar) in the time of Shalmaneser V and Sargon II (he is clearly attested as governor of DÏru in 724 B.C.).239 The text records the transfer of a group of deportees (possibly from Babylonia), dened as “the people of HazÊnu”: since his two daughters are listed among the persons of this group, HazÊnu is probably not an ofcial responsible for these people but their head or leader; he is not counted in the summary in lines 20b–25 nor is he listed in the detailed description, which records 35 people (including the two daughters of HazÊnu). The grand total 35 agrees with the detailed description, but the totals in lines 20b–22b count only 34 people: 12 men, 5 sons, 15 women and 2 daughters: while the detailed description counts 12 men, 5 sons, 14 women and 4 daughters. It is possible that the scribe listed the rst daughter of HazÊnu as a woman, but forgot her sister. In any event, HazÊnu is excluded from these descriptions, and if he is added the grand total is 36 (it is less likely that he was executed, or managed to escape, before his group was rounded up and prepared for deportation). The letter species the difculties that befell this group during their transfer: three were sold into slavery in Babylonia, probably by corrupt Assyrian ofcials, and two other people are also “missing” (possibly also enslaved or they made their escape). The group is now in the hands of AššÖrbÏlu-taqqin and he is sending them to the king.240 It is unclear who the

238 For previous editions of this text see Harper, ABL, no. 212; Mendelsohn, 1949, p. 93; Fales, 1973, p. 120; Oded, 1979, p. 110; Radner, 1997, p. 125; Postgate-Mattila, 2004, p. 254. 239 For the activity of Il-iada’ in northern Babylonia see PNA, pp. 515b(1)–516b; Fuchs—Parpola, 2001, pp. xv–xx, xl–xlv; Postgate—Mattila, 2004, pp. 235–254. 240 AššÖr-bÏlu-taqqin is often mentioned together with Il-iadax in other texts. For

142

chapter two

ve missing persons are, but it is reasonable to suppose that they are included in the detailed description since the sender mentions them only after counting the people (“Five out of them are missing”). The relation of Il-iadax to these people is unclear: he might have claimed that they are his servants or at least under his authority; but AššÖr-bÏlutaqqin points out that “only one servant/slave” of Il-iadax “is among these people” (r. 2–6), without specication of who this person is. The sender of the letter also claims ignorance of “what has been given to the house of Il-iadax” (26–r. 2; another possible translation: “we don’t know who has been sold in the house of Il-iadax ”). All families consist of 3–5 persons, an average of 4.5 persons per family. Family no. 392 is probably nuclear, and no. 395 an extended one (consisting of a couple and the brother of the family head); but the types of the other families are unclear: the women in each family might be the wives of the family head and his brother (in families nos. 390–391, 394, and possibly also no. 396), or his wife, mother and sister in family no. 393. Polygamy is very rare in this period, but each family that has two or three women might be polygamous, although other possibilities are more likely (see nos. 390–391, 393–394, 396). The relation between the two males in family no. 396 is not clear: they might be brothers or a father and an adult son (only in this case are the professions of the persons attested). All personal names in this text are Akkadian.241 Families nos. 398–400 are attested in ND 451 (= CTN II 113 = Text no. 152): (Family no. 398:) 1’ 2’ 3’ 4’ 5’ 6’ 7’–8’

[PN;] “[ fPN], his wife; Rabba-il, (his) s[on] (of ) 5 sp(ans’ height); [I]lÊia-takara, (his) son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); Gameu, (his) son (of ) 4 (spans’ height); Ribsiru, (his) suckling son; EbÒsu, (his) daughter (of ) 4 (spans’ height), (and) Saiâ, his maid, [. . .], a total of 8 (persons).

his activities see PNA, pp. 172b(7)–173b; Fuchs—Parpola, 2001, pp. xv–xx, xl–xlv; Postgate—Mattila, 2004, pp. 247–248. 241 For the personal names in this text, see PNA, pp. 99a, 111b, 319b(5), 462a–b, 469a–b(3), 562b(1), 798b(1), 809a(2), 851b(1), 923a, 980b, 982b, 1037a(1); Tallqvist, 1918, pp. 238b–239a, 247a.

a survey of the lower stratum families (Family no. 399:)

(Family no. 400:)

9’ 10’ 11’ 12’ 13’ 14’ 15’

143

[. . . . . .; fPN], the wife . . .; [. . .; . . .,] his [2 brother]s? (or: his [2 son]s; [. . ., (his) son (of )] 5 sp(ans’ height); [. . ., (his) nu]bile [daughter]; [. . ., (his) daugh]ter (of ) 4 sp(ans’ height), [a total of x (persons)]. [. . . . . .; . . .]talÊ, the wife”; The rest is broken away.

This administrative text originated in Calah, in the governor’s palace, room S.242 Postgate suggested that this text lists: “groups of prisoners or deportees being handled by the Administration”.243 He supposed that the personal names in this text refer to the fathers of unnamed children and that the total of eight in line 8’ records only the children.244 Fales’s proposal that the names refer to the children is more reasonable.245 The scribe counts the names of all persons, male and female, and even the name of a maid. In lines 2’–7’ and 11’–13’ only one name of a child is listed in each line with its height, but the relation of these children to the family head is not indicated by a possessive sufx. However a sufx is attested in other lines (1’, 10’ and 15’). Most personal names in this text are non-Assyrian and this supports Postgate’s suggestion that it document deportees.246 Family no. 398 is a large family of eight persons: a couple with four sons, one daughter, and one maid. The name of the family head is lost; it is followed by the name of his wife, not his daughter (contra Postgate), since daughters are usually counted after sons. Family no. 399 is probably also a large family: the rst two lines of its description (9’–10’) are fragmentarily preserved, and line 14’ is lost. It is clear that it includes two daughters and a son (lines 11’–13’). The last three signs of line 9’ are unclear, but may relate to the wife of the family head, and line 10’ might list the names of two adult sons or two brothers. So it probably consists of seven persons: a couple, three children and two brothers (or two additional adult sons). Family no. 400 includes at least a couple, but the rest of this text is broken so its size and structure are unclear.

242 For previous editions and notes see Postgate, 1973, pp. 25, 139–140, no. 113, Pl. 49; Fales, 1974a, p. 187, note 6; Oded, 1979, p. 15; Radner, 1997, pp. 152–153. 243 Postgate, 1973, p. 25; for a similar opinion see Oded, 1979, p. 15. 244 Postgate, 1973, p. 140. 245 Fales, 1974a, p. 187, note 6. 246 For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 393a, 420b–421a, 1027a, 1052b, 1063a. The names are West Semitic or Aramaic.

144

chapter two

Family no. 401 is attested in CT 54 401 (= SAA XVII 114 = Text no. 153): S. 1–2 “Nabû-Ïreš, his 2 sons, his 2 daughters (and) 2 two maids; [ . . ., together with the people of Nabû-Ïreš], I am hereby sending to the king, my lord.”

This family is attested in a letter sent from Babylonia (Gambulu) to the king of Assyria (probably Sennacherib) by AqÊr-BÏl-lÖmur. It is not dated but was probably sent before 693 B.C.247 At the end of line s. 1 there is room for a personal name possibly Nabû-Ïreš himself or an ofcial responsible for the transfer of this family to the king. At the beginning of s.2 it is possible to read: [a-d ]i, and it is reasonable to suppose that all the members of this family are listed in line s. 1 (a total of seven persons). It is not clear what happened to the wife of NabûÏreš, but one should not suppose that she is listed after his maids, at the end of line s. 1. The circumstances surrounding this letter are vague: it is not clear why this family was transferred from Babylonia and in what way HanÊna and BÏlet-taddina are connected to this case.248 Families nos. 402–403 are attested in ADD 763 (= SAA XI 169 = Text no. 154): 7–8 (Family no. 402:) “Pu¢i-HÖru; 1 woman; 10–11 (Family no. 403:) Fugitive: Âumaššer[i], 1 woman, (and) 1 (daughter of ) 3 [spans’ (height)].”

This family is attested in a list of deportees probably from the reign of Esarhaddon or Assurbanipal. The text lists 17 persons (9 males and 8 females)—12 single people and two families, who were given to A[. . .]. After the opening lines (1–3) the scribe has recorded three singles, a woman and two men (ll. 4–6), and later family no. 402: a couple without children. The woman is clearly related to the man since the single females are attested by their personal names. The second family consists of three persons: a couple and a daughter (the grand total in r. 5–6 clearly indicates that the child is a daughter and not a son). The head of the second family is dened as a fugitive, as are seven other persons in this text (about 40% of those listed in this text). 247

See Dietrich, 2003, pp. xxvii, xxxvi. For previous notes on this text see Dietrich, 1967–1968, pp. 193, 195–199, 228; Dietrich, 1979, Pl. 98; see also PNA, pp. 121b(1)–122b, 297a(1), 449b(3), 826a(3); Dietrich, 2003, pp. xxvii, xxxvi. 248

a survey of the lower stratum families

145

The deportees clearly originate in Egypt since most personal names are Egyptian.249 Families nos. 404–406 are attested in ADD 882 (= SAA XI 174 = Text no. 155): 1–3,5 (Family no. 404:) “RÏmÖtu; ‘third man’; 3 sons; 2 women; [1 dau]ghter (and) 1 son of a sister [ . . .]; a total of 8 (persons); 6–8 (Family no. 405:) Kiribtu, [. . .], (and) 1 woman; . . .1 [slave]; 9–11 (Family no. 406:) La-abâši, cavalry(man); 2 slaves (and) 2 women, a total of 5 (persons).”

These families are attested in a list of deportees with their animals from various areas including Babylon and Uruk. The scribe counts ve groups: three families and two non-families, the latter being a man with his slave (13–14) and two Urukites, probably single persons (r. 1–2). At least two family heads are former cavalrymen or the “third man” probably on the chariot; they may be taken into the Assyrian army or administration to serve a similar function. But now they are in transit, and therefore are listed as deportees in this book. They own property, including slaves, camels, and donkeys: the rst family owns at least a camel and a donkey; the second a camel and a donkey and probably a slave (see below); and the third owns two slaves and four donkeys (the grand total of the donkeys in line r. 4 is a scribal mistake). Note that 20% of the people in this text are slaves. A total is missing in line 8, but the grand total “16” in line 12 clearly indicates that family no. 405 consists of three persons: a couple with a male, probably a slave (1 L[Ú.ARAD]). The two women in the rst family might be this man’s wife and sister, since his sister’s son is clearly attested in line 3. Family no. 406 consists of ve persons: a male with two females and two slaves (listed before the women). The women might be his wives, but since polygamy is rare, the second female may be his mother or sister (and it is also possible that the family head is unmarried and the women are his mother and sister). The text is not dated and was probably composed in the 7th century B.C.250

249

See PNA, pp. 1001b, 1002a–b, 1170b(3), 1178b. For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 295b(14), 619b(5), 647b(10), 1092a(3), 1048b(30). 250

146

chapter two

Family no. 407 is attested in ADD 891 (= SAA XI 154 = Text no. 156): 1–11 “BÏl-iddin son of BÏl-ahhÏšu, architect; RÏmÖt-Gula, his son; Qunnabatu (his wife?); InqÊia, KullÊia, AdÒrtu (and) Bittû, a total of 4 daughters of his, a total of 7 (persons), family of the house of Arad-Nergal.”

This family is attested in a list of deportees from Babylon and Cutha. All people are listed by their names; the rst woman is probably a wife, since the total lists four daughters. The text is not dated and was probably composed in the 7th century B.C.251 Families nos. 408–411 are attested in ADD 783 (= SAA XI 173 = Text no. 157): 1–6

(Family no. 408:) “[. . .]-hi-hi-[. . .], [. . .]; his wife; [his . . .] son; his second son, [ . . .]; his young daughter, his two nubile (daughters), a total of 7 persons. 7–12 (Family no. 409:) MÒnu-a[h¢i], farmer; his wife; [his] 2 son[s]; [1] young (daughter); a daughter of his (of ) 4 spans’ (height); a son (of ) 3 spans’ (height); his second [son], weaned; [a total of 8] persons. 13–16 (Family no. 410:) [. . .]nu-ili, farmer; his [wife]; his adolescent son; [a son/daughter (of ) x] spans’ (height); [a son/daughter (of ) x] spans’ (height); Rest is broken away. r. 1’–4’ (Family no. 411:) [. . .]-Ša[maš]; (his) weaned [son/ daughter]; (and his) suckling [son/ daughter, a total 3 persons]; r. 4’–5’ a grand total of 29 (“1 less than 30”) persons.

This text probably documents deported families. Since only the family heads are listed by their personal name, the person attested in r. 1’ must be the head of the last family. The wife is mentioned in the rst two families after the family head, and before the sons, so it is reasonable to read “his [wife]” at the beginning of line 14. The last group is a single-parent family of three persons: a father with his two small children: one weaned and one suckling. The description of the

251 For the personal names of the members of this family see PNA, pp. 53b-54a, 282a(7), 313a(28), 349a, 544b(2), 636a, 1018a–b, 1046a. The names of the parents and the son are Akkadian but the daughters bear probably West Semitic names. For other personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 418, 1091b(3).

a survey of the lower stratum families

147

children in family no. 409 is mixed: the sons and the daughters are counted by their size, but it is not clear if a similar order was used in the description of the rst family. Moreover, the scribe distinguished between the young (TUR) and the nubile daughters of this family; since the TUR is mentioned rst, she might be the elder one. This text probably counts ve groups of deportees: families no. 408–411, and an additional group, probably also a family that was recorded at the end of the obverse, (the edge) and the beginning of the reverse. The grand total is 29, but only 23 persons are mentioned in the preserved lines: seven of the rst family, eight of the second, ve of the third, and three of the last; six persons are lost, and since it is unlikely that the fourth family consisted of 11 persons, these persons are probably included in the fourth group/family and in the lost one recorded after it. All families are nuclear: no. 408 consists of seven persons: a couple with two sons and three daughters. All daughters are probably adults but still at home. Family no. 409 consists of eight persons: a couple with six children: four sons and two daughters. Three of the children are probably adults, and the other three small: two of them are of 4 and 3 spans height, and the third is a weaned child. The size and structure of family no. 410 is unclear since the text is broken, but it includes at least a couple with three children: one adolescent and two small ones of unclear age. Most personal names are lost or fragmentarily preserved: the only one that can be reconstructed is MÒnu-a[h¢i], the head of family no. 409.252 Families nos. 412–414 are attested in ADD 826 (= SAA XI 172 = Text no. 158): 1–2 3–4 5–6 5–6

(Family no. 412:) (Single persons =) (Family no. 413:) (Family no. 414:)

r. 1–2

“2 son(s) of Abu-lÊmur; the wife of Abu-lÊmur; BÊbî; KubÊbu-ilÊxÒ; Iqbi-IssÊr; his wife (and) his 3 daughters; Qurdi-IssÊr, confectioner; his 3 sons; his wife (and) his [daughter]; a grand total of 17 persons who are not (inscribed) on the writing-board.”

This text is a list of deportees who for an unclear reason were not inscribed on the writing-board. This group was probably part of a larger

252

See PNA, p. 753b(5).

148

chapter two

one. The grand total (17) is mistaken, since the detailed description counts only 16 persons; it is possible that the scribe included Abu-lÊmur, although only his two sons and wife are attested. The text lists three families and two single people, who are recorded between the rst two families. Only in one case is the profession of the family head given (a confectioner, head of family no. 414). The scribe counts the sons before the women, and the wife before the daughters. All families are nuclear: no. 412 seems to be a single-parent family of a woman and her two sons; but Abu-lÊmur should be added as the father of this family and it is possible that he was recorded on the writing-board. The unique description of this family indicate that Abu-lÊmur is still alive and is regarded as this family’s head; were he dead, the scribe would enumerate this family differently: one of the sons would be presented as the head of the family and listed by his personal name, and its other members as his brother and mother. No. 413 is the only family whose size and structure are clear: it consists of ve persons, a couple with three daughters. Family no. 414 consists of six people: a couple with three sons and probably a daughter. Most personal names in this text are Akkadian.253 Families nos. 415–421 are attested in ADD 911 (= SAA XI 146 = Text no. 159): 2’

(Family no. 415:)

3’

(Family no. 416:)

4’ 5’

(Family no. 417:) (Family no. 418:)

6’ 7a’ 7b’ 8’ 9’–10’

(Family no. 419:) (Family no. 420:) (Family no. 421:) (No-Family:)

11’–12’

“[. . .]; his [wife]; his daughter; [his] mother (and) [his . . .]; [. . .]umu; his mother; his brother; his son (and) [his daught]er; [. . .]na; his wife (and) his son; [. . .]mu; his wife; his mother; his brother (and) his sister; [. . .]-abi; his mother; his wife (and) his 2 sons; [. . .]ri (and) his wife; Zarhi-ili; his mother (and) his female slave; [. . .], (and) his female slave; ZizibÊiu freed [t]hese (people, and) bequeathed them to hi[s] daughters. [. . .] as he approached the king, [ . . .]aiu, the nobleman, [. . . . . .\ . .].”

The rest is broken away. 253 For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 17b(6)–18a, 250b(3), 562a(2), 631b(9), 1024a(23).

a survey of the lower stratum families

149

Zizibaiu “freed” 30 persons and bequeathed them to his daughters. The person whose people have been “freed” approached the king and complained against ZizibÊiu’s crime.254 There may be a conict between two ofcials. The text is divided by three horizontal lines and is fragmentarily preserved; its left side, the beginning and end are missing. Its rst and last parts probably describe the previous owners of these people. Eight groups are listed: seven families and one “no-family”: a man with his maid. Only the family heads’ names are listed, but all are lost except Zarhi-ili.255 No totals are attested, but in most cases the size of the family is clear. The family members are not listed in a xed order: in three or four cases the wife is listed after the family head (ll. 4’–5’, 7’ and possibly also 2’), but in line 6’ the mother is recorded before the wife. Most families are extended ones and consist of two to ve persons (an average of four persons per family). Five out of seven families include the mother of the family head: in two of them a brother or a brother and sister are listed (no. 416, 418, and possibly also 415). The presence of the mother probably indicates that the couples were relatively young, a possibility also deduced from the fact that only a few children are attested in this text (six, less than one per family). Nos. 416 and 421 are single-parent families: the latter one includes an unmarried male with his mother and maid; the former is an extended family of ve persons: a man with his mother, brother, and two children. The wife has died or was divorced. All other families are monogamous (Nineveh, no date). Family no. 422 is attested in CT 53 321 (= SAA XI 200 = Text no. 160): 1’ 2’ 3’ 4’ 5’

“[. . . . . .] x [. . . . . .] [. . . . . .]-si-[. . . . . .] [. . . . . .]; PÊn-AššÖr-[. . .] [. . . Ur]ad-IssÊr, a toal of 3 [sons/persons]; [. . . 1 s]on, suckling, 2[+x women/daughters].” The rest is broken away.

This small fragment documents at least one family, as clearly attested by the suckling son listed in line 5’. There are a few possible ways to interpret this text: (1) Line 5’ counts a family of at least four persons: a male with a suckling son and at least two females (women or daughters).

254 255

For a similar interpretation of this text see SAA XI, pp. xxviii–xxix. For this name see Tallqvist, 1918, p. 247a.

150

chapter two

The persons counted in ll. 1’–4’ have no relation to this family, and the total “3” in line 4’ refer to three single males or to another family. (2) All persons listed in these lines are members of one large family of at least seven people: a couple with four sons and at least two daughters. At the beginning of line 5’ the personal name of the suckling son is listed; the total “3” in line 4’ refers to three sons of this family, including PÊn-AššÖr-[. . .]256 and [Ur]ad-IssÊr; and the parents of these children are listed in the previous line. Family no. 423 is attested in CT 53 325 (= SAA XV 309 = Text no. 161): 1’ “[PN, ado]les[cent (son/daughter)]; = [ x x x x x x Éa-]hur-[tu/ti]; 2’-3’ [PN, a son/daughter (of )] 4 spans’ (height); [. . . . . .], a total of 7 persons.”

This fragment of a letter from Nineveh, documents a deported family of seven persons entrusted to a bodyguard. It includes at least two children, of whom the rst is an adolescent (for my new proposed restoration of line 1’ compare, e.g., SAA XI 173: 8, 14). Family no. 424 is attested in CT 53 604 (= SAA XV 303 = Text no. 162): 2’–3’ “[PN;] her daughter; [. . .].”

This fragment of a letter originating in Nineveh probably documents people whom the king transferred (see line 5’). It lists a few groups of persons including a single-parent family of at least two persons: a female whose name is lost and her unnamed daughter. The other two groups are “[. . .]bi with his people” (line 1’); and a few males listed in lines 3’–4’, probably not related to the rst two groups. It is not clear if an additional member of this family is attested at the beginning of line 3’. Families nos. 425–426 are attested in K 14233 (= SAA XI 199 = Text no. 163): 2’–3’ (Family no. 425:) “[. . .r]a-nu-u; [his 2 sons/brothers]; 1 woman; (and) 1 maid, a total of 5 (persons); 4’–5’ (Family no. 426:) [PN]; his 2 sons; (and) [1 daug]hter or [1] woman; a total of 4 (persons).” The rest is broken away. 256

See PNA, p. 985a(3).

a survey of the lower stratum families

151

This fragment lists a few families. No. 425 consists of ve persons: a couple, a maid, and probably two sons or brothers; no. 426 consists of four persons: a father, his two sons, and a female, probably a wife or a daughter (in both cases there is room for two or three additional signs at the beginning of line 5’, but the total clearly indicates that this space was not inscribed). Nineveh, date lost or not dated. Families nos. 427–428 are attested in ADD 719 (= SAA XI 181 = Text no. 164): 2’ (Family no. 427:) “[. . .]; his wife; (break) r. 3 (Family no. 428:) [. . .]-nu, gardener (and) his wife.”

This fragment documents at least six farmers and two gardeners (single people and family heads). Since the text is broken it is not clear if children (or others) are also included in the rst family. Nineveh, date lost or not dated. Families nos. 429–431 are attested in ADD 811 (= SAA XI 194 = Text no. 165): 2 (Family no. 429:) “Ahu-iddina; 1 son, (and) [his] wife, [a total of 3 (persons)]; 3 (Family no. 430:) BÊssÒ (and her) 3 children, a total of [4 (persons)]; 4 (Family no. 431:) SagÒbÒ (and her) child, a total of 2 (persons).”

This text documents at least 16 persons (probably deportees): three families and seven single people (four males and three females). The heads of the two last families are women (possibly widows), and these families also include one or three children. The rst family is a nuclear one of three persons, a couple with a son. Nineveh, date lost or not dated.257 Families nos. 432–433 are attested in K 20348 (= SAA XI 195 = Text no. 166): 5’–6’ (Family no. 432:) “[. . .]su, shepherd; [. . .]; [. . .]; 2 weaned son(s), (and) 2 [suckling so]n(s) or 2 dau[ghters]; 7’ (Family no. 433:) [. . .; 1 son (of )] 4 (spans’ height, and) 1 son (of ) 3 (spans’ height)”.

257

For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 76a(24), 276b(7), 1061a(12).

152

chapter two

This text lists single males and families. Nineveh, date lost or not dated. The rst family consists of at least ve persons: a shepherd with his four children, these being two weaned sons and two suckling sons or two daughters. The copy in SAA XI, p. 210 distinctly indicates that two weaned sons are included in this family and not “[x+]1” (contra SAA XI, p. 117). Since sons of four and three spans’ height are attested in line 7’ it is clear that they are members of another family. It is possible that the shepherd’s wife is listed at the end of line 5’, and that additional children are counted at the beginning of line 6’. So the total of this family might be seven or even more persons. The second family is a single parent one and probably consists of three persons: a father with his two small sons, of four and three spans. Only the personal names of the family heads and the single male are listed in this text, but most lost. Family no. 434 is attested in K 18317 (= SAA XI 196 = Text no. 167): 2’–3’ “[. . .]-IssÊr, eunuch, (with) his mother, a total of 2 (persons)”.

This small fragment documents deported eunuchs, each with his mother or his “woman”, probably his maid. The eunuch [ . . .]-IssÊr with his mother are counted as a family, but the others are considered “no-families”. The eunuchs are listed by their personal names, and the women are unnamed. The only name fully preserved is HamatÊiu.258 Nineveh, date lost or not dated.

G. Recipietents of Rations Families nos. 435–438 are attested in A 1182 (= StAT 2 11 = Text no. 168): 1’ (Family no. 435:) “[6 seahs (and) 5 (qû) – BÏl-lÏxi] (and) her daughter, HammÊia; 2’ (Family no. 436:) [3 seahs (and 5 qû) – ŠÒt]i-ahÊtÒ (and ) her daughter; 3’ (Family no. 437:) [3 seahs – Aia]-lÊmur (and) her daughter; 8’ (Family no. 438:) [4 seahs (and) 5 (qû) – Attar]-aiÊlÒ, (and) her daughter”.

258

For this name see PNA, p. 446b(3).

a survey of the lower stratum families

153

This fragment is a part of a monthly ration list of barley originating in Aššur in archive N4. It possibly joins VAT 8680: 18 ff., a text dated to 615*—vi. The scribe uses a xed pattern in this fragment, with only one exception: in line 1’ he lists the personal name of the daughter while in the other cases the daughters are unnamed. So it is reasonable to suppose that HammÊia is the daughter of BÏl-lÏxi, and she is also attested as her daughter in another unpublished text (VAT 8674: 17 = text no. 174, 614*—ii). BÏl-lÏxi and an unnamed daughter of hers are also attested in the following unpublished texts: VAT 8669: 16 (615*—ix = text no. 170); VAT 8586: 15 (615*—xii = text no. 171); and possibly also in VAT 8681: 16 (614*—i = text no. 173). ŠÒti-ahÊtÒ and her daughter are also attested in three other texts: VAT 8669: 17 (615*—ix = text no. 170); VAT 8586: 16 (615*—xii = text no. 171); and VAT 8674: 18 (614*—ii = text no. 174); after BÏl-lÏxi and her daughter and before Aia-lÊmur and her daughter (see VAT 8669: 18; VAT 8586: 17, and VAT 8674: 19). Attar-aiÊlÒ with her daughter is also listed in the same texts (see VAT 8669: 23; VAT 8586: 22; VAT 8674: 24).259 Families nos. 439–442 are attested in KAJ 243 (= VAT 8833 = Text no. 169): 1’

(Family no. 439:)

10’ (Family no. 440:) 13’ (Family no. 441:) 15’ (Family no. 442:)

[4 BÁN 5 MÍ. k]i-qi-lu-tú 2 DUMU.MÍ “[4 seahs (and) 5 (qû)—K]iqillutu (and her) 2 daughters; [6 BÁN] MÍ.DÙ-tú–AMA 2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ [6 seahs]—BÊnÒtu-ummi (and her) 2 daughters; [4 BÁN 5 M]Í.il-u-tú DUMU.MÍ-sa [4 seahs (and) 5 (qû)—Ilûtu (and) her daughter; [4 BÁN 5 MÍ.Éa-lim]-t[ú DU]M[U.MÍ-sa] [4 seahs (and) 5 (qû)—Âalim]t[u, (and) her dau]gh[ter]”.

This fragment, published by Ebeling in 1927 only in cuneiform, is a part of a monthly ration list of barley originating in Aššur in archive N4. The quantities of grain and the date are lost. All the daughters in this fragment are unnamed, and the scribe uses two main patterns: 2 DUMU.MÍ / 2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ or DUMU.MÍ-sa. Family no. 439 is also attested in another unpublished text (VAT 8674 r. 1 = text no. 174, 614*—ii) with four sÖtu and ve qû. Kiqillutu and her two daughters are probably also listed in two other texts: VAT 8586: r. 1 (= text no. 259

For the personal names in this text see PNA, pp. 91a, 234b, 320b, 448a(3).

154

chapter two

171, 615*—xii), with ve sÖtu and ve qû, and in 8665: r. 1 (= text no. 176, date lost).260 Family no. 440 is also attested in ve other unpublished texts: VAT 8586: r. 10; VAT 8605: r. 5; VAT 8674: r. 10; VAT 8678 r. 7; VAT 8681 r. 1: 10 in most of them with six seah of barley.261 Ilûtu (and) her daughter are also attested in other three text (VAT 8586 r. 13; VAT 8681 r. 4; VAT 8674 r. 13): in the last two they receive four seah and ve qû, and in the rst one only two seah.262 Family no. 442 is also attested in four other texts: VAT 8586: r. 15; VAT 8605 r. 10; VAT 8674 r. 15; VAT 8681 r. 6’. They are always listed after the woman Gula-ramÊt, so in a few items in PNA Âalimtu is presented as Gula-ramÊt’s daughter;263 but according to the formulation of these texts one should distinguish Gula-ramÊt from Âalimtu and her daughter, since they receive separate rations.264 In VAT 8605 Âalimtu and her daughter receive four seah and ve qû of grain; in the other texts they usually receive three seah. Families nos. 443–447 are attested in the following unpublished texts which are presented below in a chronological setting (all of them monthly ration lists of barley originating in Aššur in archive N4): VAT 8669 (615* –ix = text no. 170); VAT 8586 (615* –xii = text no. 171); VAT 8664 (615*, month lost = text no. 172); VAT 8681 (614* –i = text no. 173); VAT 8674 (614* –ii = text no. 174); VAT 8605 (date lost = text no. 175); VAT 8665 (date lost = text no. 176); VAT 8678 (date lost = text no. 177).

(Family no. 443:) 5 seahs—Baqâ (and) her son. This family is attested in six texts: VAT 8586: 8; VAT 8664: 10; VAT 8669: 9; VAT 8674: 9; VAT 8680: 10; and VAT 8681: 9.265 (Family no. 444:) 7 seahs—Nabû-naxid, his wife (and) his son. This family is attested in two texts: VAT 8586: 24 and VAT 8674 b.e. 26.266 260

For this family see PNA, pp. 410a, 619a. For this family see PNA, p. 267a–b(2). 262 For this family see PNA, p. 536b(1). It is clear that Ilûtu is not the daughter of IssÊr-ilÊxÒ, contra PNA, p. 536b(1); see also PNA, p. 572a(6). 263 See PNA, pp. 429b, 1166b(3). 264 For this interpretation of these texts see PNA, p. 357b. 265 For this family see PNA, p. 268a–b(2). 266 For this family see PNA, p. 854b(29). 261

a survey of the lower stratum families

155

(Family no. 445:) 4 seahs (and) 5 qû—Enqâ (and) her daughter. This family is attested in two texts: VAT 8586: 25 and VAT 8674 b.e. 27.267 (Family no. 446:) 4 seahs (and) 5 qû—Adad-bÏssunu, his wife (and) his son. This family is attested only in one text: VAT 8695 r. 12. In four other texts (VAT 8586 r. 18; VAT 8674 r. 17; VAT 8681 r. 8’; KAJ 243 r. 18’) only the son of Adad-bÏssunu is listed (with one seah and 5 qû), but it is not clear if it is the same person, and if it is, why he was separated from his parents.268 (Family no. 447:) 3 seah (and) 5 qû—BÊnÒtu-abu-uÉur (and) her son. This family is attested only in one text: VAT 8605 r. 13.269 11 of these 13 families are single-parent ones, consisting of only a woman and her daughter (seven families, nos. 435–438, 441–442, 445), or a woman with her son (two families, nos. 443 and 447), or with her two daughters (two, nos. 439–440). The other two families are nuclear and consist of three persons: a couple with a son (nos. 444 and 446). The grand total of these families is 30 persons, an average of 2.31 souls per family. There is a wide diversity between the amounts received by these families, and as shown above sometimes the same family receives different amounts. Each person receives at least one seah, and the largest amount per person is 3.25 seah. A woman with her daughter receive usually 3–4.5 seah, but in one case the amount is 6.5 seah (family no. 435), an average of 2.1 seah per person; a woman with one son receive 3.5–5 seahs, an average of 2.125 seah per person; a woman with two daughters receive in one case 4.5 or 5.5 seah and in the other 6 seah, an average of 1.5–2 seah per person; and the nuclear families that consist three persons receive 4.5–7 seah, an average of 1.5–2.3 seah per person. There might be different reasons for this diversity of amounts, such as the children’s age, the recipients’ occupations and more. The dozens of single males and females also attested in this group of texts receive similar amount of grain.270 267

For this family see PNA, p. 397b. For this family see PNA, p. 24b(2). 269 For this family see PNA, pp. 265b–266a. 270 See the previous items in PNA mentioned in the notes above, and see also PNA, pp. 266b(2), 410a(1), and more. 268

CHAPTER II

APPENDIX A: THE TABLES

These tables summarize the conclusions of Chapter II. Each family is presented by its number, source, full description of family members (including its total), family type (see chapter IV), provenance and date of the text, with additional notes concerning various issues including the archive in which the text is included, Aramaic captions, children’s height and age, alternative readings, and more. Each table reects the information attested in each one of the seven working groups, with a distinction between the clear and the unclear/broken texts. The following abbreviations are used in these tables (for the abbreviation of the family types see chapter IV): Ar. cap. = Aramaic caption; Ass = Assurbanipal; Ašš. = Aššur; at = attaché; B = bÊtussu = young girl, nubile; BR = brother; D = daughter; DÖr-Kat. = DÖr–Katlimmu; Esa = Esarhaddon; F = father; FT = family type; fSl = female slave; G = ša zizibi = suckling child; GA / GAB = see G; GS = grandson; GT = grand total; ina UGU–(hi) zi–zi = see G; M = mother; MÍ.TUR = young girl; Nin. = Nineveh; pir / pirsu = see U; S = son; S II = Sargon II; Sen = Sennacherib; Si = sister; Sl = slave; S n. d. = sons not described as G, U, 3, 4, 5, Éa; Â = Éa = Éa/uhurtu = young, adolescent, adult; T = total; TP III = Tiglath–pileser III; U = UD = pirsu = weaned child; W = wife; 3 = child of 3 spans’ height; 4 = child of 4 spans’ height; 5 = child of 5 spans’ height; 1 = one named person; 1 = one unnamed person.

32

27 28 29 31

22 24 26

41 42 43 46 47 48 49

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 17 22 25 26 27 28 29 31 36 38 40

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 11 14 17 18 19 20

No. of Family

No. of Text

ND 673: 3–5 StAT 2 101: 5 VAT 19872: 5–6 SAA VI 6: 1’–2’ SAA VI 52: 6 SAA VI 52: 7 SAA VI 52: 8a SAA VI 52: 8b SAA VI 53: 3–4 SAA VI 116: 3b–4 O 3660: 6 SAA VI 96: 3–4 O 3706: 6, r 3 SAA VI 177: 3–4 SAA VI 110: 3–6 SAA VI 195: 3–5a SAA VI 193: 3 SAA VI 193: 4 SAA VI 193: 6 SAA VI 86: 4’a SAA VI 229: 3–6 SAA VI 284: 2–3; e16–17 O 3709: 4 SAA XIV 64: 3–6 SAA VI 250: 3 SAA XVI 53: 4 SAA XVI 53: 5–6 SAA VI 294: 1’ SAA VI 294: 2’

SOURCE

(2) 3 (2) (3) (2) (2) (4)

6 (2) (3) 7 3 5 (2) (2) [2] (2) (3) 4 (2) (10) 7 6 2 2 [2] (2) 3 2

T

– 1 – – – 1 1

1 [1] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 – – 1 1 1 1 1 [1] [1] – 1 1 –

F

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 – 1 1 1 1 1 1 – [1] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 [1] 1 – 1

W

– – – 2 – – –

3 – 1 1 – 3 – – – – – – – 3 – 4 – – 1 – 1 1

S

1 1 1 – 1 – 2

1 – – 4 1 – – – – 1 2 1 – 2 – – – – – – 1 –

D

1 2

1

–

–

BR

– 1

1

1

M

– 2

Si

Sl

Table 1: Slave Families

A4 A2 A4 A4 A4 A1 A2

A2 A5 A2 A2 A2 A2 A1 A1 A5 A4 A4 B2 A1 C2 B3 A2 A1 A1 A4 A1 A3 A4

FT

GT: 6

GT: 5

Handî (700–670) “her D” = “3” Abi-rahî

Silim-Affur (680–670) Ar. cap.: brh

Handî (700–670) “her D” Handî (700–670) + his brother’s 2 sons SÏx-maxÊdÒ (683–680)

Mufalim-IssÊr (742–713) eumma-ilÊni (709–680) eumma-ilÊni (709–680) eumma-ilÊni (709–680) eumma-ilÊni (709–680) eumma-ilÊni (709–680)

Nabû-tuklatÖxa Archive: N 25

NOTES

(Continued on next page)

MaxallÊnÊte, 670 Nineveh, 669 Nineveh, Esa Nineveh, Esa Nineveh, Esa Nineveh, end Esa Nineveh, end Esa

Calah, 800 Affur, 744 Affur, 727 Nineveh, 713 Nineveh, SII/Sen Nineveh, SII/Sen Nineveh, SII/Sen Nineveh, SII/Sen Nineveh, SII/Sen Nineveh, 700 MaxallÊnÊte, 700 Nineveh, 695? MaxallÊnÊte, 693 Nineveh, 684 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, 675 Nineveh, 671

PROVENANCE OF THE TEXT AND DATE

a survey of the lower stratum families 157

58 59 62 63

64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 73 74

75

76

37 38 41 42

43 44 45

50

51

48 49

46

55 56 57

SAA XIV 16: 3–4

BATSH 6 56: 5–6

SAA VI 345: 3–6 SAA XIV 65: 1’ SAA VI 319: 3–4 SAA XIV 24: 5–6; s. 1–2 BATSH 6 46: 2 ND 3426: 4–5 VAT 9582: 4 VAT 9582: 5 SAA XIV 146: 2a SAA XIV 146: 2b SAA XIV 146: 3 SAA XIV 146: 4 StAT 2 140: 3 BATSH 6 53: 3–4

SAA VI 342: 3’b–4’ SAA VI 343: 5a SAA VI 343: 5b–7

SAA XIV 5: 2’–4’

52

35 36

SAA XIV 4: 3 SAA XIV 5: 1’

50 51

33 34

SOURCE

No. of Family

No. of Text

Table 1 (cont.)

[2]

(2)

(2) 2 (2) (3) (2) (2) (3) (2) (2) 2

[3] 2 2 (2)

(2) 2 (3)

(4)

(2) (2)

T

1

–

– – – 1 1 1 1 1 – –

1 [1] 1 –

1 [1] –

[1]

1 [1]

F

–

[1]

[1] 1 1 1 1 1 – – 1 1

1 – 1 1

1 1 –

–

1 –

W

–

–

– 1 1 1 – – – 1 1 –

– – – –

– – 2

2

– 1

S

–

[1]

1

1 – – – – – 2 –

1 – – 1

– – –

1

– –

D

–

–

–

BR

1

1

1

M

Si

Sl Milki-nÖrÒ (668–666) Milki-nÖrÒ (668–666); S = “4” Milki-nÖrÒ (668–666); 2S = “3”, pirsu; GT: [6] RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) GT: 5; AMA–gu–nu RÏmanni-Adad (671–660)

NOTES

A5

A4

A4 A4 A4 A2 A1 A1 A3 A3 A4 A4

Archive: N 29; S = “3” eulmu-farri (667–630*) D = ina UGU zi-zi eulmu-farri (667–630*) D = M[Í.T]UR DUMU. MÍ-[sa] NÒnuÊiu (641*–633*)

GT: 7

“her S”; GT: 5

eulmu-farri (667–630*) S = “3”

A2 A5 A1 RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) A4 Luqu; Ar. cap.: dnt xmtx..w brth

A1 A1 A5

A3

A1 A3

FT

(Continued on next page)

Nineveh, 639*

DÖr-Katlimmu, 639*

DÖr–Katlimmu, 650 Calah, 649 Affur, 649 Affur, 649 Nineveh, 642* Nineveh, 642* Nineveh, 642* Nineveh, 642* Affur, 641* DÖr-Katlimmu, 641*

Nineveh, 668–660? Nineveh, 668 Nineveh, 665 Nineveh, 659

Nineveh, 671–660? Nineveh, 668–660? Nineveh, 668–660?

Nineveh, end Esa/Ass

Nineveh, end Esa/Ass Nineveh, end Esa/Ass

PROVENANCE OF THE TEXT AND DATE

158 chapter two

81 82 83 84

85 86 88 90 91 92 93

94 96 97 99 100 101 108 110

55 56 57 58

59

60 62 63 64 65

66 68 69 71 72 73 77 79

54

77 78 80

52

Table 1 (cont.)

BATSH 6 97: 3 SAA XIV 49: 3–4 VAT 9755: 12–13 SAAB 9, 78: 4–5 BATSH 6 34: 4–5 SAA XIV 186: 3 SAA XIV 337: 5’ SAA XIV 196: 2’

VAT 8232: 8 SAA XIV 34: 4–8 SAA XIV 37: 1’–5’ SAA XIV 38: 8–12; s. 2 SAA XIV 155: 6–7 SAA XIV 155: 9–10a ARU 70: 4–5 SAA XIV 165: 1’–2’ SAAB 5 17: 5–6 VAT 20363: r.4 BATSH 6 91: 4–5

SAA XIV 424: 4–7 SAA XIV 424: 8–10 BATSH 6 66: 3; a

(2) 3 2 2 3 (2) (2) (2)

(2) (2) (2) [2] (2) (2) (2)

(4) (2) (2) (2)

5 4 (2)

– 1 – – 1 1 1 1

1 1 – – – – –

– 1 1 1

1 1 –

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1 1

– – – 1 1 – – –

– – – 1 1 – 1

2 – – –

2 1 –

1 1 1 – – – – –

– – 1 – – 1 –

1 – – –

1 – 1 1

A4 A2 A4 A4 A2 A1 A1 A1

A1 A1 A4 A4 A4 A4 A4

A4 A1 A1 A1

A2 B2 A4

eulmu-farri (667–630*) S = ina UGU–hi zi-zi eulmu-farri (667–630*) KakkullÊnu (630*–617*) SAAS 6, 226, note 1253 Archive: N 15

D = pirsu S = GA Archive: N 9

KakkullÊnu (630*–617*) KakkullÊnu (630*–617*) KakkullÊnu (630*–617*) Ar. cap: xgt g{rdnbw

S = “5”; S = “4” or “3” S = pirsu eulmu-farri (667–630*) Ar. cap: wbrth; D = GA

DÖr-Katlimmu, Ass or later Nineveh, Ass or later Nineveh, Ass or later Affur, After Ass DÖr-Katlimmu, After Ass Nineveh, 7th Cen? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, 627* Nineveh, 627* Affur, 625* Nineveh, 622* Affur, 622* Affur, 616* DÖr-Katlimmu, Ass or later

Affur, 631* Nineveh, 630* Nineveh, 630* Nineveh, 629*

Nineveh, 638* Nineveh, 638* DÖr-Katlimmu, 631*

a survey of the lower stratum families 159

39

44

25

30

33

20 21

23

SAA VI 57: 3’–4’

30 32

15 16

34 35 37

SAA VI 193: 5 SAA VI 57: 1’–2’

23 24

13

22

SAA VI 40: 4 SAA VI 40: 5 SAA VI 41: 4–7

19 20 21

SAA VI 266: 1’–2’

SAA VI 297: 6–7

SAA VI 86: 1’b–2’a SAA VI 86: 2’b–3’a SAA VI 111: 3–7 Ar. Cap. 1+6 =

SAA VI 89: 3–5 SAA VI 172: 3–4

SAA VI 128: 2’–3’ SAA VI 40: 3

16 18

SAA VI 130: 5b–6a SAA VI 130: 6b

14 15

10 12

SAA VI 130: 3–4a SAA VI 130: 4b–5a

12 13

9

SOURCE

No. of Family

No. of Text

?

?

[?] 4 7 7

10

? 10

3? ?

6 4 ?

? 5

3 ?

? 7

T

1

1?

[1] [1] 1

[1]

[1] [1]

1 [1]

1 [1] 1

[1] 1

1 1

1 1

F

[1]

[1]?

[1] [1] 2

2

? 1

1? 1

?

1

? 1

? [1?]

W

1

1?

2 2 2?

3

2 1

1? ?

3

[1]

? –

2 2

S

–

2

1 – 2

?

– ?

– ?

?

1

– –

1 1

D

?

?

–

?

?

?

BR

?

–

–

M

?

–

–

Si

[3]

2

2

Sl

Table 2: Slave Families: Broken/Unclear Texts

T = [2–3]; GT: 17; FT = A1 or B2 One or two families? eumma-ilÊni (709–680) PN – 5 ZI.MEe PN – 6 ZI.MEe [PN] – 4 ZI.MEe; GT: 15 eumma-ilÊni (709–680) T  (4); One or two families? Ahi-¢allÒ (687–681); = “É” One or two families? T or GT: 6 T = [3–4?]; FT = A or B FT = A2 or B2 S = GA; 5 BR or D? FT = A2 or B1 or B2 D or M or Si; “his two W” T = [4–5]; FT = A FT = A SÏx-maxÊdÒ (663–680) 2 D = pirsu; 2 S or 2 BR? “his two W”; FT = A2 or B2 RÏmanni-Adad (671–660); T > (3); S or B; T or GT: 5 T = [3]?; FT = A2 or A3

T = [4–5]; FT = A2 or A3 2 f Sl. W or S or BR? FT = A2 or A3 or B2

FT and NOTES

(Continued on next page)

Nineveh, Esa

Nineveh, 671

Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, 680

Nineveh, Sen

Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, Sen

Nineveh, 686 Nineveh, 685

Nineveh, 693 Nineveh, 693 Nineveh, 693

Nineveh, 696 Nineveh, 693

Nineveh, 696 Nineveh, 696

Nineveh, 696 Nineveh, 696

PROVENANCE AND DATE

160 chapter two

72

79

87

89

95 98

102 103 104 105 106 107 109 111 112 113 114

115 116

47

53

59

61

67 70

74 75 76 77

78 80 81 82 83

84 85

StAT 2 119: 1’–2’ A 3660: 1–6

SAA XIV 247: 2–3 SAA XIV 213: 4’–10’ SAA XIV 326: 1’–7’ SAA XIV 337: 1’ SAA XIV 337: 2’ SAA XIV 337: 3’ SA A XIV 475: 5–7 SAA XIV 414: 3–4 BATSH 6 185: 1’–3’ BATSH 6 200: 3 StAT 2 118: 3

StAT 2 137: 1’–3’ VAT 15538: 2’–3’

SAA XIV 155: 10b–11 CTNMC 68 = FNALD 18: 11–14

BATSH 6 142: 3–5

BATSH 6 141: 1’–2’

SAA VI 256: 3 SAA VI 313: 4–5

SAA VI 342: 2’b–3’a

54

60 61

SAA VI 266: 3’ SAA VI 342: 1’–2’a

45 53

39 40

35

Table 2 (cont.)

4 ?

[?] [?] ? ? ? ? [?] 5 [?] ? ?

? ?

?

(2)

?

?

? 5

(4)

? (4)

[1] –

[1] [1] 1 [1] [1] [1] 1 1 [1] ? 1

[1] ?1

1

1

[1]

–

1 1

[1]

1 1

[1] ?

1 ? ? 1 1 – 1 ? ?1 1 1

? 1

?1

[1]

[1]

1

2 1

1

[1] 1

2 ?

2 5–3 4 ? ? ? ? ? – – 2

1 –

–

–

?

[1]

2

[1]

1 [1]

?

? – – 1 2 ? [?] 1 – – ?

?

?

?

?

?

1

1 1

1

–

?

–

–

1

– 1

?

?

?

?

?

The relation of W to F & D is unclear. T or GT: 3; FT = A2 or A3 Archive: N 28; T > [4] MÍ.TUR-sa = pirsu; T = (2–3) FT = A T = [5–6]; FT = A or B T = (4–6?); 1 S = “3” T = (5–6?); 1 S = pirsu T  (2) T  (2) T  (2) T  [5]; S or B; FT = A2 or B2 PN+[4 . . .] = 5 U[N. MEe] 1 or 2 D; T = [3–4]; FT = A2? T  (2); FT = A4? Archive: N 25; T  (4); DUMU.MEe-gú; FT = A2 Archive: N 25; FT = A2? 4 ZI.MEe; T  (4)

FT = A1 or A3 or A5

T = [3]?; FT = A2 or A3 RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) D = pirsu; S or BR? FT = A2 or B2 S or BR? FT = A2 or B2; IddÖxa; T  (3) RÏmanni–Adad (671–660); M or BR?; FT = B1 or B2 S = pirsu: FT = A4 T  (2) T > (3); FT = A or B

Affur, ? Affur, ?

Nin., 7th cen. Nin., 7th cen. Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? DÖr-Kat., ? DÖr-Kat., ? Affur, ?

Aff., Ass or later Nin., Ass or later

Affur, 625*

DÖr-Katlimmu, 644*/629* DÖr-Katlimmu, 634* Nineveh, 627*

Nineveh, 671–660? Nineveh, 668? Nineveh, 666

Nineveh, Esa Nineveh, 671–660?

a survey of the lower stratum families 161

92 93 96

89

88

87

86

SAA VI 245: 12 (2) StAT 1 36: 1 (2) VAT 19500: 4 (2) SAA XIV 216: 4–6 3

128 131 132 135

(5) (2) (7) (2) (7) (4) (3) (4) (5) (4) (4)

T

SAA VI 81: 7 SAA VI 81: 8 SAA VI 97: r 2–3 SAA VI 97: r 4b SAA VI 91: 4 SAA VI 91: 5a SAA VI 91: 5b–6a SAA VI 91: 6b SAA VI 91: 6c–7a SAA VI 91: 7b–8a SAA VI 245: 10–11

SOURCE

117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127

No. of No. of Text Family

1 – – 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 – 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

W

– [1] – –

3 – 3 – 3 2 1 – 1 – –

S

1 1

–

– – 2 1 2 – – – – – 2 1 1 1

1 1 1

D BR M

Si

Table 3: Pledged People Sl

A1 A4 A4 A2

A2 A1 A2 A3 A2 A2 A2 B3 B3 B3 A2

FT

GT: 27 DannÊia (676–672); 2 MÍ.TUR MEe-gú DannÊia (676–672) Archive: N 33 Date: SÒn-kÏnu-Òdi

GT: 7

NOTES

Nineveh, 672 Affur, 614* Affur, PC Nin., 7th cen.

Nineveh, 694 Nineveh, 694 Nineveh, 693 Nineveh, 693 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 681 Nineveh, 672

PROVENANCE AND DATE

162 chapter two

129

130

133

134

90

91

94

95

No. of No. of Text Family

SAA XIV 209: 1–2

SAAS V 28: 2–4, 14–16 SAA XIV 181: 5–8

SAA VI 307: 6

SOURCE

4

[5]

5

(2)

T

[1]

–

–

1

F

1

1

1

?

W

[2]

2

1

?

S

–

1

?

?

D

BR

M

Si

?

Sl

Table 4: Pledged People: Broken/Unclear Texts

RÏmanni-Adad (671–660); F with W or S or D; FT = A1 or A3 3 D or 3 fSl; FT = A4 + 1 S or BR or Sl; FT = A or B 2 S or 2 BR?; FT = A or B

FT and NOTES

Nineveh, 7th cen.

Nineveh, 7th cen.

Affur, 638*

Nineveh, 668

PROVENANCE AND DATE

a survey of the lower stratum families 163

117 119 120 125 126

166 168 169 176 179 180 181

165

164

116

GEZER 1: 5 SAA XIV 229: 3’ SAA XIV 345: 4 SAA XIV 254: 2’ BATSH 6 180: 13 BATSH 6 180: 14 BATSH 6 180: 15

SAA VI 326: 8’b–10’a SAA VI 326: 10’b–11’

SAA VI 50: 5b–6 SAA VI 315: 4’–6’

150 159

112

SAA VI 90: 8

148

SAA VI 50: 4–5a

SAA VI 90: 6b–7a

147

149

SAA VI 90: 6a

146

105

SAA VI 90: 5

145

104

SOURCE

No. of Family

No. of Text

(4) (2) 3 (2) 3 3 2

3

3

(3) 4

(6)

(2)

(4)

(2)

5

T

1 – 1 1 [1] 1 –

1

1

– 1

1

1

1

1

1

F

1

2 [1] 1 1

1

1

1 –

1

1

1

–

–

W

1 – 1 –

1

1

1 1

4

–

2

1

–

S

1 – –

–

–

1 –

–

–

–

–

–

D

–

3

BR

1

1

M

1

Si

Sl

Table 5: “Land and People” (A: Legal Transactions)

A2 A4 A2 A1 ? ? A

A2

A2

A4 B3

A2

A1

A2

A3

A5

FT

Nineveh, 668–660?

Nineveh, 668–660?

Nineveh, SII/Sen Nineveh, 666

Nineveh, SII/Sen

Nineveh, 683

Nineveh, 683

Nineveh, 683

Nineveh, 683

PROVENANCE AND DATE

Gezer, 651 Nineveh, 7th cen Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? X ZI.MEe – PN DÖr-Kat., ? X ZI.MEe – PN DÖr-Kat., ? X ZI.MEe – PN DÖr-Kat., ?

S = Éu-hur-tú; GT: 6

Ahi-¢allÒ (687–681) Ahi-¢allÒ (687–681) Ahi-¢allÒ (687–681) Ahi-¢allÒ (687–681) eumma-ilÊni (709–680) GT: 9 RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) S = pirsu S = Éu-hur-tú

NOTES

164 chapter two

136

137

138 139 140 141 142 143 144 151

152 153 154 155 156 157

158

97

98

99 100 101 102

107

111

109 110

108

103 106

No. of Family

No. of Text

SAA XIV 3: 1’–4’

SAA VI 269: 1’–2’ SAA VI 269: 3’–4’ SAA VI 253: 4a SAA VI 253: 4b–5a SAA VI 251: 3’–4’ SAA XIV 6: 1’

SAA VI 149: 7 SAA VI 155: 7’–8’ SAA VI 169: 12–14 SAA VI 163: 5–6 SAA VI 163: 7–9a SAA VI 163: 9b–10 SAA VI 173: 6–7 SAA VI 112: 1–3

SAA VI 37: 7–9

SAA VI 100: 5:6

SOURCE

?

? ? (2?) (3?) ? ?

5 ? ? (3?) (3?) (3?) ? ?

?

4

T

[1]

[1] 1 1 [1] 1 [1]

[1] 1 1 [1] [1] 1 1 [1]

1

1

F

[1]

? ? – 1 1 1

? 1 1 1 1 1 ?

?

1

W

2

– – 1 1 ? –

? ? 1? 1? [1?] – ?

1

?

S

1

4 2 – – – –

3 ? – – – 1 ?

–

–

D

BR

M

Si

Sl AplÊia (698–683); 2S or 2BR or 2D etc.; FT = A or B eumma-ilÊni (709–680); 3 men + 3 w[omen]+ 1 son = GT: 7. 1–3 families? PN – PAB X ZI.MEe T > [4] One or two families? FT = A2? FT = A2? FT = A2? T  (3); FT = A2? SÏx–maxÊdÒ (683–680); S or D = GA; T or GT: 6 T > (5); 4 MÍ.TUR MEe T > (3); 2 MÍ.TUR MEe S = “4”; FT = A3? S = “3”; FT = A2? eadditu; T  (2) Milki-nÖrÒ (668–666); T  (2) Milki-nÖrÒ (668–666); T or GT; 10; More than one family?

FT and NOTES

Table 6: “Land and People” (A: Legal Transactions): Broken/Unclear Texts

(Continued on next page)

Nineveh, 679 Nineveh, 679 Nineveh, Esa Nineveh, Esa Nineveh, Esa Nineveh, end Esa or Ass Nineveh, end Esa or Ass

Nineveh, 689 Nineveh, 687 Nineveh, 686 Nineveh, 686 Nineveh, 686 Nineveh, 686 Nineveh, 685 Nineveh, Sen

Nineveh, 694

Nineveh, 698

PROVENANCE AND DATE

a survey of the lower stratum families 165

SAA VI 334: 27b–29a

SAA VI 334: 29b–30

161

162

114

SAA XIV 265: 8–9 BATSH 6 180: 11

BATSH 6 180: 12

BATSH 6 180: 16

175 177

178

182

124 126

123

SAA XIV 168: r 2b–3 SAA XIV 355: 1’, 7’ SAA XIV 399: 1’b–2’a SAA XIV 399: 2’b–3’a SAA XIV 399: 3’b–4’a SAA XIV 198: 1’–5’

167 170 171 172 173 174

118 121 122

SAA VI 341: 8’b–9’a

163

115

SAA VI 314: 9–10a

160

113

SOURCE

No. of Family

No. of Text

Table 6 (cont.)

?

?

? ?

? 3 2 2 2 ?

?

2

6

?

T

1

[1]

[1] 1

1 [1] [1]? [1]? 1 [1]

[1]

1

1

1

F

?

1 [1] 1? 1? 1? [?]

1

?

?

[1]

W

1

? – – – – 1

?

?

4

1

S

–

? 1 – – – 2

1

?

?

1

D ?

BR

M

Si

3

Sl RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) T = (4–6); W or BR? RÏmanni-Adad (671–660) D or W?; FT = A RÏmanni-Adad (671–660); GT: 8; FT = A RÏmanni-Adad (671–660); T = (3–4); FT = A or B T = (2–5) D = GA; FT = A2? FT = A1? FT = A1? FT = A1? T(7)?; S = GA; D = “4”; 1 fSl T = (2)? T  [3]?; X ZI.MEe – PN T = [3]?; X ZI.MEe – PN T = [2]?; X ZI.MEe – PN

FT and NOTES

DÖr-Kat., ?

DÖr-Kat., ?

Nineveh, ? DÖr-Kat., ?

Nineveh, 620* Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, 668–660?

Nineveh, 668–660?

Nineveh, 668–660?

Nineveh, 666

PROVENANCE AND DATE

166 chapter two

127

187

186

185

184

183

No. of No. of Text Family

SAA XI 232: 1–2 SAA XI 232: 3–4 SAA XI 232: 6–7 SAA XI 232: r. 1–3 SAA XI 232: r. 4–5

SOURCE

(2)

5

(3)

(5)

?

T

1

1

1

1

1

F

1

1

1

1

?1

W

–

3

1

3

1

S

–

–

–

–

–

D

–

–

–

–

–

BR

–

–

–

–

–

M

–

–

–

–

–

Si

–

–

–

–

–

Sl

Table 7: A Schedule of “Land and People”

A1

A2

A2

A2

A2?

FT

GT: 7

UNCLEAR. T(3)?

NOTES

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

PROVENANCE AND DATE

a survey of the lower stratum families 167

188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 206 207 208 209 210 211 213 214 215 216

128

131

130

129

No. of Family

No. of Text

SAA XII 7: 7a SAA XII 7: 7b–8 SAA XII 16: 1’ SAA XII 16: 2’ SAA XII 16: 4’ SAA XII 16: 5’ SAA XII 17: 2’ SAA XII 17: 3’ SAA XII 17: 4’ SAA XII 27: 6 SAA XII 27: 7a SAA XII 27: 8a SAA XII 27: 8b SAA XII 27: 9a SAA XII 27: 9b SAA XII 27: 10b SAA XII 27: 16a SAA XII 27: 16c SAA XII 27: 18b SAA XII 27: 19a SAA XII 27: 19b SAA XII 27: 20a SAA XII 27: 21b SAA XII 27: 22 SAA XII 27: 23a SAA XII 27: 23b

SOURCE 7 [3] 4 4 2 7 4 5 5 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 (3) (4) 3 4 2 2 2 2

T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 – – 1 1 1 1 1 1

F

FT = A

GT: 10

FT and NOTES

1

FT = A2 FT = A FT = A FT = A1 FT = A

2

Sl

1

Si

2 3

M

1 1

BR

FT = A FT = A FT = A FT = A FT = A FT = A FT = A4 FT = A4

D

FT = A FT = A1

S

1

W

Table 8: Royal Grants of Land or Tax Exemption to Ofcials

(Continued on next page)

Nineveh, Adad-nÏrari III Nineveh, Adad-nÏrari III Nineveh, TP III ? Nineveh, TP III ? Nineveh, TP III ? Nineveh, TP III ? Nineveh, TP III ? Nineveh, TP III ? Nineveh, TP III ? Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass

PROVENANCE AND DATE

168 chapter two

131

217 218 219 220 221 222 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 235

Table 8 (cont.)

SAA XII 27: 23c SAA XII 27: 24a SAA XII 27: 24b SAA XII 27: 24c SAA XII 27: 25a SAA XII 27: 25b SAA XII 27: 35b SAA XII 27: 36a SAA XII 27: 36c SAA XII 28: 36d SAA XII 27: 37a SAA XII 27: 37c SAA XII 27: 38a SAA XII 27: 38b SAA XII 27: 39a SAA XII 27: 39c SAA XII 27 r. 16

2 2 2 3 2 2 4 6 2 4 6 12 4 2 5 2 4

1 1 1 [1] 1 1 1 1 1 [1] 1 1 1 1 1 [1] [1] FT = A

FT = A

FT = A

FT = A FT = A

FT = A FT = A FT = A

Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass

a survey of the lower stratum families 169

131

SAA XII 27: 12c–13a SAA XII 27: 13–14

SAA XII 27: 20b SAA XII 27: 26c

SAA XII 27: r. 3’a SAA XII 27: r. 17’ SAA XII 27: r. 18’ SAA XII 27: r. 19’ SAA XII 27: r. 20’ SAA XII 27: r. 21’

212 223

234 236 237 238 239 240

SOURCE

204 205

No. of No. of Text Family

2?+ 2?+ 2?+ 3?+ 2?+ 2?+

[2?] ?

4 ?

T

[1] [1] [1] [1] [1] [1]

1 –

1 1

F

? 1

? –

W

?

?

S

?

1 1

D BR M Si Sl FT = A5 or B1 T = [4–5?]; 2–3 BR?; FT = A5 [MÍ-gu] (T>3); [x] DUMU.MEega FT = A4 (T>2) (T>2) (T>2) (T>3) (T>2) (T>2)

FT and NOTES

Table 9: Royal Grants of Land or Tax Exemption to Ofcials—Broken/Unclear Texts

Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass

Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass

Nineveh, Ass Nineveh, Ass

PROVENANCE AND DATE

170 chapter two

133

132

241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257

No. of No. of Text Family

SAA XII 87: r. 1 SAA XII 87: r. 2 SAA XII 87: r. 3 SAA XII 87: r. 4 SAA XII 87: r. 5 SAA XII 87: r. 6 SAA XII 87: r. 7 SAA XII 87: r. 8 SAA XII 86: 22a SAA XII 86: 22b SAA XII 86: 22c SAA XII 86: 23a SAA XII 86: 23b SAA XII 86: 23c SAA XII 86: 24b SAA XII 86: 24c SAA XII 86: 25b

SOURCE 5 7 3 3 3 6 5 4 3 15 4 3 4 2 5 3 3

T

– 2 2

2 3

W S D BR M Si Sl

1 [1] 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 – 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 – 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F

A

A2 A2 A2 A3 A2 A2 A2 A2

FT S = “Éa” 2 S = “Éa”; U S=U 2 S = “Éa”; U S=U 4 S = 3 “Éa”; 1 GA

NOTES

Table 10: Royal and Private Votive Donations to Temples

(Continued on next page)

Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, Sen Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683

PROVENANCE AND DATE

a survey of the lower stratum families 171

134

133

258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276

No. of No. of Text Family

Table 10 (cont.)

SAA XII 86: 25c SAA XII 86: 26a SAA XII 86: 26b SAA XII 86: 26c SAA XII 86: 27a SAA XII 86: 27b SAA XII 86: 27c SAA XII 86: 28a SAA XII 86: 28b SAA XII 86: 29a SAA XII 86: 29b SAA XII 86: 29c SAA XII 86: 30b SAA XII 86: 30c SAA XII 86: 31a SAA XII 86: 31b SAA XII 86: 31c SAA XII 98: 5a SAA XII 98: 5b

SOURCE 7 3 5 4 4 4 10 3 5 2 2 7 4 4 14 2 2 3 3

T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F

W S D BR M Si Sl

FT = A FT = A PN –3 ZI PN – 3ZI

FT = A FT = A

FT and NOTES Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, 683 Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ?

PROVENANCE AND DATE

172 chapter two

294 296 297 298 299 300

277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 288 289 290 291

NO.

SAA XI 202 I: 14’–17’ SAA XI 202 II: 3’–4’ SAA XI 202 II: 5’–7’ SAA XI 202 II: 16’–19’ SAA XI 202 III: 8’–11’ SAA XI 202 III:15’–19’

TEXT 136

SAA XI 201 I: 1–3 SAA XI 201 I: 4–7 SAA XI 201 I: 13–15 SAA XI 201 I: 16–17 SAA XI 201 I: 25–29 SAA XI 201 I: 30–31 SAA XI 201 I: 32–34 SAA XI 201 I: 41–44 SAA XI 201 I: 45–47 SAA XI 201 II: 1–4 SAA XI 201 II: 16–23 SAA XI 201 II: 27–29 SAA XI 201 II: 33–35 SAA XI 201 II: 38–42

TEXT 135

SOURCE

5 4 6 4 [4] [6]

2 5 5 2 6 3 2 3 (4) 4 8 4 4 3

T

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

F

1 1 1 1 2 2

– 2 1 – 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 –

W

D

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

1 1

2

[1]

1

1 2 1

1

1 2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1 1

1 1

1

S G U 3 4 5 Â D G U 3 4 5 Â B

S

Table 11: The “Harran Census”: A. Families

1

1

1

1

(Continued on next page)

A2 A2 A2 A2 A, B, C B2–3, C2

Scribe A

A5 A2; B; C1 A2 A5 A2 A2 A1 A2 A2 A2 C1;GS = “3” A2 A2 A3

Scribe A

M BR GS FT and NOTES

a survey of the lower stratum families 173

320 324 325

319

316 317

310 312 313 314

309

302 306 308

NO.

T

SAA XI 207 I: 1–6 SAA XI 207 r. II: 2’–3’ SAA XI 207 r. II: 4’

TEXT 140

SAA XI 206 I: 18’–23’

TEXT 139

SAA XI 205 I: 6–7 SAA XI 205 I: 11–13

TEXT 138

(7) (3) (5)

6

5 2

SAA XI 203 I: 12–13 [3] SAA XI 203 IV: 11–12 4 SAA XI 203 r. I: 2’–6’ 5 = SAA XI 213 r. II: 5 SAA XI 203 r. I:13’–16’ 3 = SAA XI 213 r. II:9–10 SAA XI 203 r. I:17’–19’ 2 SAA XI 203 r. II:14’–17’ 6 SAA XI 203 r. IV: 1’–2’ [2] SAA XI 203 r. IV: 3’–5’ 3

TEXT 137

SOURCE

Table 11 (cont.)

1 1 1

1

1 1

1 1 1 1

1

1 1 1

F

3 1 2

2

–

1 1 1 1

1

2 ? 2

3 1 2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1 1

2

(Continued on next page)

A2; B; C2 A2 A2; B1–2; C2

Scribe B

B2–3; C2? 2BR = “É#”

Scribe A

1+4 ZI.MEe A3

Scribe A

A1 A2 A1 A2

A2

A1, B1–2 F+3ZI = 4 A, B, C

Scribe A

W S G U 3 4 5 Â D G U 3 4 5 Â B M BR GS FT and NOTES

174 chapter two

SAA XI 209 r. III: 24’–25’ SAA XI 209 r. III: 26’ SAA XI 209 r. IV: 4’–5’ SAA XI 209 r. IV: 10’–11’ SAA XI 209 r. IV: 12’–13’ SAA XI 209 r. IV: 17’–18’

TEXT 142

SAA XI 209 r. III: 3’ SAA XI 209 r. III: 9’–10’ SAA XI 209 r. III: 12’–15’ SAA XI 209 r. III: 16’–18’ SAA XI 209 r. III: 19’–22’

TEXT 142

SAA XI 208: 7’

TEXT 141

(5)

(5)

(3) (2) (5)

(4)

(3)

(4)

(2) (3) (7)

2

SAA XI 207 r. II: 8e–9e (3) SAA XI 207 r. III: 5’–9’e (3)

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

1

1 1 1

1

1 1

1

– 1 5

–

– 1

3

3

1 1 2

1

1

1

2

1

2

[1] 1

2

1 1 1

1

2 1

#

#

#

# The number of the daughters may be included in the number of the women.

342

341

337 339 340

336

334

333

330 331 332

328

326 327

Table 11 (cont.)

(Continued on next page)

A2; B1–3; C2

A2; B1–3; C2

A2 A1 A2; B1–2; C2

A2

Scribe B

A2

A2; B1–2; C2

A1 A2 A2

Scribe B

A1

Scribe B

A1–2;B1–2 A2

a survey of the lower stratum families 175

SAA XI 218: 6’–9’

TEXT 145

SAA XI 214: 3’–6’ SAA XI 214: 8’–9’

TEXT 144

SAA XI 213: III 8’–11’ SAA XI 213: III 13’–15’ SAA XI 213: IV 3’–6’ SAA XI 213: r. II 1–4 SAA XI 213: r. II 16

TEXT 143

SOURCE

[6]

(8) (3)

(6) (3) (5) (3) (3)

T

1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1

F

1

5 2

3 1 3 1 2

2

2

1 1 1 1

1

# #

#

#

#

1

1

A2

Scribe A

A2; B1–3; C2 A1–2; B1–2

Scribe B

B1–3; C2 A2 A2; B1–3; C2 A2 A1–2; B1–2

Scribe B

W S G U 3 4 5 Â D G U 3 4 5 Â B M BR GS FT and NOTES

# The number of the daughters may be included in the number of the women.

356

353 354

348 349 350 351 352

NO.

Table 11 (cont.)

176 chapter two

SAA XI 202 I: 20’–21’ SAA XI 202 r. III:2’–5’

295 301

318

303 304 305 307 311 315

SAA XI 202 I: 10’–13’

293

SAA XI 206 I: 3–9

TEXT 139

SAA XI 203 II: 1–3 SAA XI 203 II: 9–11 SAA XI 203 II: 10–12 SAA XI 203 IV: 15–16 SAA XI 203 r. II: 4–12 SAA XI 203 r. VI: 6–9

TEXT 137

SAA XI 202 I: 1’–4’

TEXT 136

SAA XI 201 II: 8–12

TEXT 135

SOURCE

292

287

NO.

6

3 ? ? ? 8 3

? 3

?

?

[4]

T

1

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1

1

1

1

F

2

1 ? ? 2? 1 1

? 1

?

1

1

W

2? 1

1?

1?

[1]?

[1]?

?

[?]

1 1

[1] 1

[1]

?

S G U 3 4 5 Â

?

?

[1?]

1

1 1

?

A/B

A/B A/B

A/B

A/B

Si A/B

A/B

[?] A/B

D G U 3 4 5 Â B M BR FT

Table 12: The “Harran Census”—A. Families: Broken/Unclear Texts

(Continued on next page)

2S or 2BR

Scribe A

S or BR? T = 4–5 T = 4? T3 +1S or BR S or BR?

Scribe A

1–2 S or BR; T = 3–4 1S or BR; T = 3–4 T>2 S or BR?

Scribe A

S or BR?

Scribe A

NOTES

a survey of the lower stratum families 177

SAA XI 218: 1’–2’

TEXT 145

SAA XI 213 II: 1’–3’ SAA XI 213 II: 4’–6’ SAA XI 213 II: 7’–8’ SAA XI 213 III: 5’–7’

?

? ? ? ?

?

? ?

(2)

? ? ?

T

?

[1] [1] [1] 1

1

1 1

1

1 1 1

F

?

1 1 1 2

?

2 1

?

2 1 ?

W

* Family 355 – Note: T or GT = 10; S or D = “3”

355

344 345 346 347

TEXT 143

SAA XI 209 r. III: 23 SAA XI 209 r. III: 29’–30 ’ SAA XI 209 r. IV: 28’–29’

335 338

343

SAA XI 209 r. III:1’–2’

TEXT 142

SAA XI 207 I: 7–10 SAA XI 207 I: 11–14 SAA XI 207 I: 15–16

TEXT 140

SOURCE

329

321 322 323

NO.

Table 12 (cont.)

?

[?] [?] [?] [?]

1

? ?

?

? 2 ?

S G U 3 4 5 Â

D G U 3 4 5 Â B M BR FT

*see below

Scribe A

T2 T2 T2 T3

Scribe B

T2

W or S; FT = A T3 T3

Scribe B

T4 T4 T3

Scribe B

NOTES

178 chapter two

No. of Family

357 358 359 361 362

363 364 365 366 367 370 371 372

374 375

376

No. of Text

146

147

148

149

SAA XI 211: 3’

SAA XI 210 r. II 2’ SAA XI 210 r. II 3’

SAA XI 220 I: 9’–11’ SAA XI 220 I: 12’–16’ SAA XI 220 I: 17’–19’ SAA XI 220 II: 3’–5’e SAA XI 220 III: 1’–2’ SAA XI 220 III: 9’–10’ SAA XI 220 III: 11’–13’ SAA XI 220 III: 16–18e

SAA XI 219 I: 1’–5’ SAA XI 219 I: 8’–9’ SAA XI 219 I: 12’–13’ SAA XI 219 II: 10’–15’ SAA XI 219 II: 16’–24’

SOURCE

(3)

(2) (3)

(3) 4 2 4 [2] 2 (5) [2]

4 (2) (2) 3 4

T

1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 [1] 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

F

2

1 2

2 3 1 3 1 1 4 [1]

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

T of Sons G

U

3 1

4

1 1

1

5

1 1 1

1

Â

Table 13: The “Harran Census”—B. “Fathers and Sons”

1

BR Scribe A

Éa

Scribe B

Scribe B

Scribe A

FT = B or C

NOTES

at

a survey of the lower stratum families 179

360

368 369 373

377

146

147

149

No. of No. of Text Family

SAA XI 211: 4’–5’

SAA XI 220 III: 3’–5’ SAA XI 220 III: 6’–8’ SAA XI 220 L.S.I 2’–4’

SAA XI 219 II: 1’–9’

SOURCE

(3?)

[3] [3] ?

(4?)

T

1

[1] [1] 1

1

F

1

2 2 ?

(1+2)

T of Sons G

U

3

4

5

Â

[1?]

S BR n.d.

Table 14: The “Harran Census”—B. “Fathers and Sons”—Broken/Unclear Texts

Scribe B

1S = “3”

Scribe A

Scribe A +1S or BR; at = GA

NOTES

180 chapter two

155

154

151

SAA XI 174: 1–5

SAA XI 174: 9–11

406

SAA XI 169: 10–11

403

404

SAA XI 169: 7–8

402

397

395

394

393

392

5

8

(3)

(2)

(3)

3

5

5

5

5

SAA XV 181: 10b–12a SAA XV 181: 12b–13a SAA XV 181: 13b–14 SAA XV 181: 15b–16a SAA XV 181: 16b–17 SAA XV 181: 19b–20a

391

T

SAA XV 181: 8–10a 5

SOURCE

390

No. of No. of Text Family

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

F

2

2

1

1

–

1

3

3

1

2

2

W

–

3

–

–

–

1

1

1

1

S

–

1

2

–

–

–

2

–

–

–

–

–

1

1

–

–

1

1

D BR M

Si

2

.

Table 15: Deportees and Displaced Persons

Nineveh, Esa or Ass Nineveh, Esa or Ass

Nineveh, S II

Nineveh, S II

Nineveh, S II

Nineveh, S II

Nineveh, S II

Nineveh, S II

Nineveh, S II

PROVENANCE AND DATE

(Continued on next page)

FT = C2 ? Nineveh, 7th cen + 1 son of [his] sister FT = A1 or B1–2 Nineveh, 7th cen

FT = A2; + S or D = “3”

FT = A1

FT = A3

FT = A1 or B1–2; S = “5” FT = A5 or B1–3 or C2 FT = B2

FT = B2 or C2; S = GA FT = B2 or C2; S = “4” FT = A2; S = “4”

FT AND NOTES

a survey of the lower stratum families 181

412 413

417 418 419 420 421

428

429

434

158

159

164

165

167

SAA XI 196: 2’–3’

SAA XI 194: 2

SAA XI 181: r. 3

SAA XI 146: 4’ SAA XI 146: 5’ SAA XI 146: 6’ SAA XI 146: 7’a SAA XI 146: 7’b

SAA XI 172: 1–2 SAA XI 172: 5–6

SAA XI 173: 6b–12 [8]

409

1 1 1 1 1

1 1

1

1

1

F

2

[3] 1

1

(2) [1]

(3) (5) (5) (2) (3)

(4) (5)

7

SAA XI 173: 1–6a

408

7

157

SAA XI 154: 1–11

T

407

SOURCE

156

No. of No. of Text Family

Table 15 (cont.)

–

1

1

1 1 1 1 –

1 1

1

1

?1

W

–

1

–

1 – 2 – –

2 –

4

2

1

S

–

–

– – – – –

– 3

2

3

4

–

–

– 1 – – –

– –

–

–

–

1

–

– 1 1 – 1

– –

–

–

D BR M

–

– 1 – – –

– –

–

–

Si

–

– – – – 1

– –

–

–

.

Nineveh, 7th cen

PROVENANCE AND DATE

FT = A5; F = eunuch

FT = A2

FT = A1

FT = A2 FT = B3 FT = B1 FT = A1 FT = A5; fSl

FT = A2 FT = A2

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ? Nineveh, ?

FT = A2 Nineveh, ? 3 D = 1 MÍ.TUR; 2B FT = A2; 4 S=2 (Éa); Nineveh, ? 3; U; 2 D = “4”; Éa-hu-ur-t[i]

FT = A2; Babylonians

FT AND NOTES

182 chapter two

ND 451: 1’–8’

ND 451: 9’–14’

ND 451: 15’

398

399

400

152

SAA XV 181: 18–19a

396

151

ND 2443+ II: 1 ND 2443+ II: 7 ND 2443+ II: 8 ND 2443+ II: 9 ND 2443+ II: 10 ND 2443+ r. I: 7’ ND 2443+ r. I: 8’ ND 2443+ r. I: 9’ ND 2443+ r. I: 11’ ND 2443+ r. I: 14’ ND 2443+ r. I: 15’ ND 2443+ r. I: 16’

378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389

SOURCE

150

No. of No. of Text Family F

?

?

8

5

1

[1]

[1]

1

4–5 1 4–5 1 4–5 1 3–4 [1] 2–3 [1] 5–6 1 4–5 1 3–4 1 4–5 1 5–6 1 4–5 1 2–3 1

T

1

1

[1]

2

W

?

1

4

1

S

?

2

1 [2]

1?

D BR M

Si

1

. Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III? Calah, TP III?

PROVENANCE OF AND DATE

(Continued on next page)

S = ga GAB; “4” Calah, 8th cen (2); “5”; 1D = “4”; 1 fSl; FT = A2? T = 7? 1S = “5” Calah, 8th cen + 2BR or S; 2D = “4”; B; FT = A or B T > (2) Calah, 8th cen

1 S = “3”; 1 BR or Nineveh, S II S?; FT = A or B

PN – 4 ZI.[MEe] PN – 4 ZI.[MEe] PN – 4 dittto PN – 3 dittto PN – 2 dittto PN – 5 dittto PN – 4 dittto PN – 3 dittto PN – 4 dittto PN – 5 dittto PN – 4 dittto PN – 2 dittto

FT AND NOTES

Table 16: Deportees and Displaced Persons: Broken/Unclear Texts

a survey of the lower stratum families 183

SAA XI 173: 13–16

SAA XI 173: r. 1’–3’

410

411

157

422

423

424

161

162

SAA XV 303: 2’

SAA XV 309: 1–3

SAA XI 200: 1’–5’

SAA XI 146: 3’

416

160

SAA XI 146: 2’

415

159

SAA XI 172: 7–10

414

158

SAA XI 174: 6–8

405

155

SAA XVII 114: s 1–2

401

SOURCE

153

No. of No. of Text Family

Table 16 (cont.)

?

7

?

(5)

?

(6)

[3]

?

(3)

7

T

–

?

[1]

1

[1]

1

1

1

1

1

F

[1]

?

2?

–

[1]

1

–

[1]

1

–

W

–

?

4?

1

?

3

?

3?

–

2

S

1

?

–

[1]

1

1?

?

?

–

2

1

–

–

1

1

–

D BR M 2fSl

.

?

– [1?]

Si

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, 7th cen

Nineveh, Sen

PROVENANCE OF AND DATE

Nineveh, ?

T = (2)?

2S or 2D = “4”; [Éa]-hur-[tú]

1S = GA;1 or 2 families?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

T = (4–5); + 1S or Nineveh, ? BR; FT = B FT = B3? Nineveh, ?

FT = A2?

2S or 2D = U; GA Nineveh, ? FT = A3

T  [5]; 1S = Éahur-tú

FT = A1?

FT = A3?

FT AND NOTES

184 chapter two

SAA XI 195: 6

SAA XI 195: 7

432

433

166

SAA XI 194: 3 SAA XI 194: 4

430 431

165

SAA XI 181: r. 2

SAA XI 199: 4’–5’

426

427

SAA XI 199: 2’–3’

425

164

163

Table 16 (cont.)

?

?

[4] 2

?

4

5

[1]

[1]

– –

[1]

[1]

1

?

?

1 1

1

?

1

2

2

? ?

?

2

?

2?

? ?

?

–

?

1

Nineveh, ?

2S = pir; T  (5); 2D or + 2S = [GA]; FT = A2? 2S = “3”; “4”; T  (3); FT = A3?

Nineveh, ?

Nineveh, ?

FT = A4; 3 S or D Nineveh, ? FT = A4; 1 S or D Nineveh, ?

T > (2)

fSl; + 2S or 2BR; Nineveh, ? FT = A2 or B2 W or D; Nineveh, ? FT = A2 or A3

a survey of the lower stratum families 185

StAT 2 11: 1’¥8680: 18; VAT 8586: 15 ; 8669: 16 VAT 8674: 17; VAT 8681: 16

StAT 2 11: 2’ VAT 8586: 16; 8669: 17 VAT 8674: 18

StAT 2 11: 3’ VAT 8586: 17; 8669: 18 VAT 8674: 19

StAT 2 11: 8’ VAT 8586: 22; 8669: 23 VAT 8674: 24

KAJ 243: r. 1 VAT 8586: r. 1; VAT 8665: r. 1 VAT 8674: r. 1;

436

437

438

439

SOURCE

435

No. of Family

(3)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

T

–

–

–

–

–

F

1

1

1

1

1

W

–

–

–

–

–

S

2

1

1

1

1

D

Table 17: Rations of Baraley and their Recipietents

A4

A4

A4

A4

A4

FT

(Continued on next page)

Affur, 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

PROVENANCE AND DATE

186 chapter two

KAJ 243: r. 10 VAT 8586: r. 10 VAT 8605: r. 5 VAT 8674: r. 10 VAT 8681: r. 10 VAT 8687: r. 7

KAJ 243 r. 13’; VAT 8586 r. 13; VAT 8674 r. 13; VAT 8681 r. 13.

KAJ 243: r. 15 VAT 8586: r. 15 VAT 8605: r. 10 VAT 8681: r. 6 VAT 8674: r. 15

VAT 8586: 8; 8664: 10 VAT 8669: 9; 8674: 9 VAT 8680: 10; 8681: 9

VAT 8586: 24 VAT 8674: b. e. 26

VAT 8586: 25 VAT 8674: b.e. 27

VAT 8605: r. 12

VAT 8605: r. 13

440

441

442

443

444

445

446

447

Table 17 (cont.)

(2)

(3)

(2)

(3)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

–

1

–

1

–

–

–

–

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

–

1

1

–

–

–

1

1

1

2

A4

A2

A4

A2

A4

A4

A4

A4

Affur, PC

Affur, PC

Affur, 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

Aššur 615*–614*

Affur, 615*–614*

a survey of the lower stratum families 187

CHAPTER THREE

THE TERMINOLOGY, THE FORMULATION OF THE TEXTS, AND THE STATUS OF THE PEOPLE

The terms which dene people and families in the Neo-Assyrian Period, particularly, and in the Ancient Near East in general, may mislead. It is well known that the terminus ARAD = urdu “may designate everybody from the lowest slave to the most exalted servant of the king, and even to the king himself in relation to the gods”.1 Other terms, like É = bÏtu, may dene a large diversity of kinship groups from nuclear families to clans and tribes.2 The terms É–AD = bÏt abi or qinnu are also exible. “Understanding of terminology is no key to an absolute understanding of social reality”,3 claims van Driel. He is right, but no one will deny the importance of terminology for the understanding of society and economy in all ages. This chapter examines the terminology designating people and families in Neo-Assyrian texts as well as the formulation of these texts, and the status of these people. The study concentrates on the 177 texts mentioned in chapter I, above, but other relevant texts are considered too. The chapter is divided into six main parts as follows: A. Slaves; B. Pledged Persons; C. Persons and families enumerated in sales and lists of “Land and People”; D. Royal Grants; E. The “Harran Census”; F. Deportees and Displaced Persons.

A. Slaves The terms which dene slaves in the Neo-Assyrian period were discussed recently by Radner.4 The most usual terms designating male and female

1

van Driel, 1970, p. 174. Garelli, 1972, pp. 73–76. 3 van Driel, 1970, p. 174. 4 Radner, 1997, pp. 203–219. Cf. also Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 81–102, 469–471; Cole, 1996, p. 61; Baker, 2001, p. 20; Teppo, 2005, pp. 67–68, 90–91. 2

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

189

slaves in this period are ARAD = urdu and GEMÉ = amtu/antu,5 but the Babylonian equivalents LÚ.QÀL = qallu and MÍ.QÀL = qallutu are also attested. A slave born in his master’s house is called unzarhu,6 and a bought one: DUMU/LÚ.ŠÁM = ša šÒme; slaves born in the palace are sometimes dened as DUMU GEMÉ É.GAL = mÊr amat ekalli, and a person donated to a temple is called šÏlûtu. In sales of people two main terms are used: ARAD or GEMÉ (attested 241 times—see appendix A to this chapter); a third term, DUMU/LÚ.ŠÁM, occurs only in six sales of people. In other cases slaves are dened by general terms such as UN.MEŠ = nÒšÒ = people; ZI = napšutu = person, soul; LÚ.ERIM.MEŠ = people, workers (see CTN II 9), or ARAD.MEŠ LÚ*.TUR.MEŠ = slaves, young people of PN (see SAA XIV 56: 3).7 In other cases maids are dened by the terms MÍ, MÍ.MEŠ and even MÍ-šú = his woman, see e.g., SAAB 5 17: 5.8 The formulation of sales of people was thoroughly studied by Postgate (1976) and Radner (1997).9 This issue will be enlarged and augmented in the following pages, with special attention to the terms dening the people sold. The terms which dene slaves are included in four particular patterns attested in sales of people in four main places: (1) in the opening lines, in the presentation of the seller; (2) in the detailed description of the slaves, right after the personal name of the slave, maid or family head; (3) in the summary of the detailed description of the slaves; (4) in the formula that designates the completion of the transaction. The most usual patterns are as follows (see Appendix C. 1 to this chapter, which presents the formulation of 49 sales of slave families): (1) (2) (3) (4)

5 6 7 8 9

PN, EN LÚ.UN.MEŠ SUM-ni . . . PN, ARAD-šú/GEMÉ-šú . . . PAB X LÚ.ZI.MEŠ LÚ.ARAD.MEŠ ša PN . . . LÚ.UN.MEŠ (šuÊtu) zarip laqi . . .

For the terms urdu and amtu see CAD A/II, pp. 80–85, 243–253. Deller, 1984, pp. 235–239; Deller, 1990, p. 63. For the term LÚ*.TUR see Fales–Jakob-Rost, 1991, pp. 40–41, 125–126. See chapter II, Family no. 91, and cf. Radner, PNA, p. 1066b(4). Postgate, 1976, pp. 25–28; Radner, 1997, pp. 316–356.

190

chapter three

(1) The seller is usually dened in the opening lines of the sale as “the owner of the sold/given people” = PN, EN (LÚ).UN.MEŠ SUM-ni …; only in very rare cases are slaves designated by the pattern ARAD/ ARAD.MEŠ (see Appendix C, 1, text no. 24), or GEMÉ/GEMÉ.MEŠ (texts nos. 65–66). In sales of families that include only females (e.g., a maid and her daughter) the scribe usually will use in this place the term MÍ.MEŠ (texts nos. 29, 42, 50, 54, and possibly no. 7); but in other sales of maids the general term (LÚ).UN.MEŠ is used (texts nos. 49, 60). In a few cases the seller is listed only by his personal name, with no indication that he owns the slaves (see texts nos. 1, 26, 72). (2) The terms ARAD-šú or GEMÉ-šú . . . are usually attested in sales of a single male or female slave immediately after the personal name of the slave/maid (see discussion below); but in sales of slave families the picture is much more complicated: the term ARAD-šú is listed right after the personal name of the family head only once (text no. 15), but the term GEMÉ-šú is attested seven times, that is, in all but two of the sales of slave families headed by a maid (see texts nos. 26, 42, 49, 54, 60, 62, 65; the two exceptions are nos. 48 and 50). (3) In the rst part of the summary of the detailed description of the slaves they are called PAB X LÚ.ZI.MEŠ in 39 out of 49 texts. In the second part of the summary they are dened as LÚ.ARAD.MEŠ ša PN, ARAD.MEŠ-šú, ARAD.MEŠ-šú ša PN, or ARAD.MEŠ-ni [ša LÚ.ME]Š-e an-nu-ti. The term ARAD occurs in 26 out of 49 texts (in one of these texts, no. 21, the order is reversed: “his slaves . . . people of PN”); in three other cases the editors proposed to reconstruct this term (nos. 13, 32, 36); in another text the term is GEMÉ-šú ša PN (no. 49, and possibly also no. 50); in the other 16 cases the summary is absent (nos. 1, 5, 17, 29, 33, 37, 38, 42, 44, 48, 54, 60, 62, 65, 66, 72). In six out of these 16 texts the term GEMÉ occurs immediately after the personal name of the rst maid (nos. 42, 54, 60, 62, 65), or in the opening lines that present the seller (no. 66). In two other cases the text is broken (nos. 15–16; in the rst of these the term ARAD is attested in the detailed description of the people). (4) In the formula that designates the completion of the transaction the slaves are usually dened by the term “people” = LÚ.UN.MEŠ; sometimes the maids are called by this pattern: “women, females” = MÍ.MEŠ (nos. 50, 54), or “maid/his maid” = GEMÉ-šú/GEMÉ (nos. 49, 65); and only once by the rare terms: “woman (and) son = MÍ DUMU (no. 62). In one text only the verb ilqi is attested. In the Aramaic caption of this text the slaves are dened as the “people of

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

191

PN” = ’nš 7 zy PN; in the Akkadian part of the text they are called “people, slaves of PN” = ZI.MEŠ LÚ*.ARAD.MEŠ ša PN. The term ARAD is attested in 34 texts, and possibly in four additional ones, and is missing in ten texts. In two other texts (nos. 2 and 31), which are not sales of people and therefore not mentioned in the discussion above, the slaves are dened as “souls, persons “(ZI.MEŠ = 31:7; ZI ša PN = 2: 8, r.1). In text no. 69, which is partly published and therefore not mentioned in the discussion above, a maid and her daughter are dened as: “two persons, Elamite captives whom the king has given to the city of Aššur” = LÚ*.ZI.MEŠ hu-ub-tú ša ELAM.KI ša LUGAL a-na URU.ša.URU i-din-u-[ni ]. The other texts that list slave families but are not mentioned in the discussion above are as follows: (1) ve are not sales of people (nos. 2, 31, 59, 61, 85); (2) in three other texts (nos. 56–58) a master (KakkullÊnu) buys a maid as a wife for his slave; (3) seven texts are partly published, and therefore it is not possible to check their formulation; (4) three texts are broken (nos. 10, 39, 46) and their patterns are not preserved; (5) in one case (no. 20) only the opening formula (PN, EN UN.MEŠ SU[M-ni]) is not lost; (6) in 11 texts scholars reconstructed the broken document as follows: in seven cases they read the terms ARAD or GEMÉ (nos. 30, 43, 51, 53, 77, 79, 84), and in the other four texts they suggested that these terms are missing (nos. 35, 47, 67, 81). These conclusions concerning the texts which list slave families will be now compared with the other sales of people, most of them sales of one single maid or male slave, a grand total of 468 sales of people (of which about 400 are published). A full list of these texts is presented in Appendix A, by their geographical provenance, pointing out three main data: (1) is one of the three terms ARAD, GEMÉ or LÚ.ŠÁM attested in the text? (2) Is a “guarantee clause” mentioned? (3) Is the slave’s profession indicated in the text? The sales of people will be compared with the sales of “Land and People” (a full list of the 50 sales of “Land and People” in the NeoAssyrian period is presented in Appendix B to this chapter, pointing out the same three data as in Appendix A). The following discussion includes sales of families and of singles. 1. The Terminology Used to Dene the People In 221 out of 248 the sales of people (89%), the sold persons are dened by one of the following three terms: ARAD/ARAD.MEŠ,

192

chapter three

GEMÉ/GEMÉ.MEŠ or LÚ.ŠÁM. Only in 27 out of 248 texts (11%), the sold persons are not dened by any of these three terms.10 In 22 other texts the sold people are free persons enslaved by their relatives, and therefore they are not dened as slaves by any of these three terms, but as the seller’s daughter, son, brother, sister or wife.11 In the other sales of people the picture is not clear since the texts are broken.12 In the sales of “Land and People” only in four out of 18 texts (22%) are the people being sold dened by one of these terms.13 In the other 14 texts (78%) the people are not dened by any of these three terms but are called: ZI.MEŠ or UN.MEŠ.14 In the other sales of “Land and People” the picture is not clear since the texts are broken. It is important to note that in the sales of people the data are fairly homogeneous (see below—Table 18). In 89–96% of the texts from Aššur, Nineveh, DÖr-Katlimmu and the “other” sites, the sold persons are dened by the three terms mentioned. Only the texts from Calah are different, and in only 68% of them are the persons dened by these terms. Table 18 presents a comparison of the texts from the mainland of Assyria with the texts from the periphery (DÖr-Katlimmu and the West). In the rst group the sold people are dened by these three terms in 170 texts (87%), which are absent from the other 25 texts (13%). On the periphery, in 51 texts (96%) the sold people are dened by these three terms, which are missing from only two texts (4%). Since most sales of “Land and People” are from Nineveh (as mentioned above), there is no room for comparisons. Still, in the four sales of “Land and People” from Calah, DÖr-Katlimmu and Gezer these three terms are not attested. In 75% of the texts from Nineveh the persons are not dened by these terms; by comparison, note that only in 8% of the sales of people from Nineveh are the sold persons not designated by these terms. 10 See Appendix A, texts nos. 25, 32, 33, 35, 36, 68, 83, 96 (= Aššur); 111, 114, 118, 127, 133, 140, (= Calah); 142, 174, 176 (= DÖr-Katlimmu); 238, 246, 254, 259, 261, 296, 314, 342 (= Nineveh), 420 (= Balawat). 11 See Appendix A, the following texts: daughter (11 texts, nos. 62, 122, 123, 129, 131, 135, 166, 198, 266, 369, 456); son (6 texts, nos. 61, 151, 216, 271, 391, 459); sister (3 texts, nos. 112, 344, 422); brother (one text, no. 121) or wife (one text, no. 91). 12 In 29 texts the scholars reconstructed one of these three terms: see Appendix A, texts nos. 58, 65, 71, 79, 84, 125, 128, 180, 186, 202, 205, 206, 222, 227, 229, 234, 248, 250, 253, 286, 313, 319, 325, 332, 336, 350, 355, 365, 405. 13 See Appendix B, texts nos. 6, 8, 32 and 38. 14 See Appendix B, texts nos. 1, 4, 5, 9, 11, 17, 23, 24, 26, 27, 30, 33, 34 and 47.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

193

Table 18: The Terminology used to Dene the People No

Provenance

ARAD, GEMÉ, LÚ.ŠÁM

Other terms

Total

II

III

IV

63 89% 17 68% 89 92% 1 170 87%

8 11% 8 32% 8 8% 1 25 13%

71

43 96% 8 100% 51 96%

2 4% 0 0% 2 4%

45

Total 1–6 Sales of People

221 89%

27 11%

248

Total Sales of “Land and People”

4 22%

14 78%

18

Sales of “Land and People”— Nineveh

4 25%

12 75%

16

I 1

Aššur

2

Calah

3

Nineveh

4

Balawat Total 1–4

5

DÖr-Katlimmu

6

Other sites Total 5–6

25 97 2 195

8 53

As stated earlier, it is well known that “slave” is “a word which may designate everybody from the lowest slave to the most exalted servant of the king, and even to the king himself in relation to the gods”,15 and that “Understanding of terminology is no key to an absolute understanding of social reality”.16 But if the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” were indeed slaves, why are they not dened in the same way as the persons mentioned in sales of people?

15 16

van Driel, 1970, p. 174. Idem, Ibid.

194

chapter three

2. The Guarantee Clauses The “guarantee clauses” in the Neo-Assyrian period have been discussed extensively in the literature.17 This clause protects the purchaser from the loss of the slave to possible diseases for 100 days, and from “crime” forever. It is usually found after the “litigation clauses” section and before the list of witnesses and the date (in some 80% of the texts). But in about 20% of the texts it is located in other places, as follows: in 15 texts it is located within the “litigation clauses” section and not after it;18 in six texts it is located at the end of the text, after the list of witnesses.19 One would expect the same clauses to be included in all sales of persons as well as in all sales of “Land and People” (if indeed the persons enumerated in the latter sales were also slaves). But the picture is more complicated. Since many sales of people are broken, only in 198 of them is it possible to check if a “guarantee clause” is included. In 108 texts (55%) a “guarantee clause” is attested, and it is not attested in 90 texts (45%). In another 36 texts the nal part of the sale of people is broken (see Appendix A, col. IV, siglum “——?”), and it is not clear if a “guarantee clause” was located at the end of these texts. Assuming that a “guarantee clause” was not included (since only in about 5% is it located at the end of the text), and adding them to the rst 198 texts, we obtain the following: in 108 texts (46%) a “guarantee clause” is attested and in 126 (54%) texts it is not. In the sales of “Land and People” a “guarantee clause” is attested only in three texts (23%),20 and is not attested in the other ten.21 The other texts are broken. In another six texts the end of the sale of “Land and People” is broken, and it is not clear if a “guarantee clause” was located at the end of this text.22 If we assume that a “guarantee clause” was not included in these texts, for the same reason mentioned above, and if we add them to the rst 13 texts, the picture will be as follows: 17

See recently Radner, 1997, pp. 174–188, with earlier literature. See BaM 24 12; BATSH 6 21; BATSH 6 90; CTN II 220; FNALD 8; FNALD 9; SAA VI 174; SAA VI 219; SAA VI 284; SAA VI 342; SAA XIV 65; SAA XIV 195; SAAB 1 1; StAT 2 123; StAT 2 269. 19 ARU 214; ARU 507; Div. 88 = Si 703; Div. 124 = Si 660 SAAB 5 44; OLZ 8, 130–134. 20 See Appendix B, texts nos. 4, 30 and 49. 21 See Appendix B, texts nos. 2, 5, 8, 9, 11, 22, 23, 27, 33 and 38. 22 See Appendix B, texts nos. 6, 18, 19, 26, 41–42. 18

195

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people Table 19: Guarantee Clauses No

Provenance

No Guarantee Clause

Total

III

IV

53 82% 27 63% 25 42% –

12 18% 16 37% 34 58% 2

65

105 62%

64 38%

169

DÖr-Katlimmu and the West

3 10%

26 90%

29

Total 1–5 Sales of People

108 55%

90 45%

198

Total Sales of “Land and People”

3 23%

10 77%

13

Sales of “Land and People”— Nineveh & Calah

2 15%

10 85%

12

I 1

Aššur

2

Calah

3

Nineveh

4

Balawat Total 1–4

5

Guarantee Clause attested II

43 59 2

in three texts (16%) a “guarantee clause” is attested and in the other 16 (84%) it is not. It is important to point out that there are regional differences (see Table 19). In the texts from the mainland of Assyria a “guarantee clause” is attested in 105 texts (62%) and is notably absent from 64 texts (38%). In the texts from the periphery (DÖr-Katlimmu and the West), a “guarantee clause” is attested only in three texts (10%) and is notably absent from 26 texts (90%). In sales of “Land and People” from Nineveh and Calah, only in two texts (17%) is a “guarantee clause” attested, and is clearly absent from 10 texts (83%). If the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” were slaves, how can we explain the presence of a “guarantee clause” in 62% of the sales of people from the mainland of Assyria but in only 17%

196

chapter three

of the sales of “Land and People” from the same area? Is it just an accident? 3. The Profession of the People In the sales of people, mention of the profession of the men being sold can be checked in 187–189 cases (it is not clear if SAA VI 255 is a sale of people or of land and people). The other texts are broken. The profession of only 14–16 male slaves (7–9%) is attested.23 The other 91–93% of the adult male slaves and all the female slaves are “non-professional”. In the sales of “Land and People”, the profession of 23–25 males (61–63%—see Table 20) is attested.24 Note that in the “Harran Census” the profession of 107 adult men (92%) is mentioned, and only nine adult men are “non-professional” (seven of them are riÊqu).25 Here too regional differences exist (see table 20). In the texts from the mainland of Assyria, all 38 adult slaves are “non-professional”, just as in the sale of people from the periphery (22 slaves). In the texts from Calah only three slaves are professional (10%) and the other 28 are “non-professional”. Only in the texts from Nineveh are 11–13 (11–13%) out of 96–98 slaves professional. In sales of “Land and People” from Nineveh, 19–21 adult sold men are professional (58–60%) and the other 14 are “non-professional” (40–42%). In sales of “Land and People” from the periphery four adult “sold” men are professional (80%) and only one is “non-professional” (20%). As mentioned above, only in one sale of people is the slave dened as a “gardener” (LÚ*.NU.GIŠ.SAR = nukaribbu = SAA XIV 49).26 In another text, also mentioned above (SAA VI 255), two men being sold were “farmers” (LÚ*.ENGAR = ikkÊru).27 Yet this last text is broken, and it is not clear if it is a sale of people or of “Land and People”. The other “professional” slaves enumerated in sales of people are as follows: 23 See Appendix A, texts nos. 114, 144, 163, 257, 286, 319, 325, 327, 328, 329, 335, 363, 387, 412, and possibly also 315. 24 See Appendix B, texts nos. 1, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 16, 19, 23, 24, 26, 27, 30, 34, 35, 36, 44. 25 For the “Harran Census” see Introduction, note 19. 26 For the term nukaribbu see Menzel, AST, pp. 261–262. 27 For the term ikkÊru see AHw, p. 368; CAD, I/J, p. 49 ff; Kümmel, 1979, pp. 97–100.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

197

Table 20: The Profession of the People No

Provenance I

Profession attested II

No Profession III

Total IV

0 0% 3 10% 11–13 11–13% 0 0%

36 100% 28 90% 85 87–89% 2 100%

36

14–16 8–9%

151 91–92%

185–187

0 0%

22 100%

22

Total 1–5 Sales of People

14–16 7–9%

173 91–93%

187–189

Total Sales of “Land and People”

23–25 61–63%

15 37–39%

38–40

6

Sales of “Land and People”—Nineveh

19–21 58–60%

14 40–42%

33–35

7

Sales of “Land and People”—Periphery

4 80%

1 20%

5

The “Harran Census”

107 92%

9 8%

116

1

Aššur

2

Calah

3

Nineveh

4

Balawat Total 1–4 Sales of People

5

DÖr-Katlimmu and the West

a baker a weaver

= LÚ*.NINDA = LÚ.UŠ.BAR

a weaver of = LÚ.UŠ.BAR— multicolored trim bir-me a weaver of Éipratu-garments = LÚ*.UŠBAR— TÚG-Éip-rat a tailor = LÚ.ka-Éir; LÚ*.TÚG-KA.KÉŠ a hatter = LÚ.šá— U.SAG.MEŠ-šú

= Êpiu = išpÊru

31 96–98 2

= išpÊru

= SAA VI 305: 4; = SAA VI 294: 1’; = SAA XII 94: 5;

= išpÊru

= SAA VI 301: 4;

= kÊÉiru

= SAA XIV 186: 3; 313: 4; = ša-kubšišu = SAA VI 342: 4’; (continued on next page)

198

chapter three

Table 20 (cont.) a tanner

= LÚ.AŠGAB

= aškÊpu

= SAA XIV 424: 12; a janitor = ND 3425 = Wiesman, 1953, p. 141; an ironsmith = SIMUG AN.BAR = nappÊhu = BaM 24 parzillu 9: 2; a camel driver = [LÚ.UŠ.g]am.mal.MEŠ; = rÊdi = SAA VI LÚ.UŠ.ANŠE.AB.[BA.MEŠ] gammali 138: 4; 300: 5; a donkey driver = LÚ.UŠ.ANŠE.[MEŠ] = rÊdi imÊri = SAA VI 55: 1’.

Other professional slaves are enumerated in a text that documents the present of a house and slaves by BÏl-naxdi to his daughter (SAA XIV 155: 5–10), but this is not a sale of people.28 In sales of “Land and People” many adult men being sold are dened as “farmers” (13–15) or “gardeners” (5–6), as follows: “farmers” = LÚ*. ENGAR = ikkÊru = BATSH 6 180 [3 men]; SAA VI 37 (“ikkÊr šarri”);29 SAA VI 65; SAA VI 253; SAA VI 315; SAA VI 325 [2 men]; SAA VI 334 [2 men]; SAA XIV 2, SAA XIV 254; and see also SAA VI 255, which may be a sale of “Land and People” [2 men]; “gardeners” = nukaribbu = LÚ*.NU.GIŠ. SAR = SAA VI 37; SAA VI 90; SAA VI 123; SAA VI 329/330; SAA XIV 6; and possibly also SAA VI 314. The others are a “plowman” = ša epinni = LÚ*.GIŠ.APIN = SAA VI 149:5; and a fowler = LÚ*.MUŠEN.DÚ = ušandû = BATSH 6 180: 14. The two last are unclear (SAA VI 169; SAA XIV 3). See also SAA VI 266: 1’ = LÚ.šá-[x–x]. The professions of the slaves are clearly “domestic”, and also indicate that slaves were usually not employed in agriculture:30 most slaves are “non-professional” and work at their master’s house, under close supervision, mainly as personal servants. In sum, the term ARAD = urdu actually designates true slaves but also ofcials of various ranks from the lowest state employee to the most

28 The professional slaves in this text are as follows: two bakers (LÚ*.NINDA = Êpiu = SAA XIV 155:5, 10); a fuller (LÚ*.TÚG.UD = ašlÊku = SAA XIV 155:6); and a hatter (LÚ* šá—SAGŠU.MEŠ-šú = ša-kubšišu (SAA XIV 155: 8). 29 For the term “ikkÊr šarri” see Postgate, 1988, p. 141, and see also SAA VII 131 r. 2. 30 On the supposition that slaves were not employed in agriculture see Gelb, 1972, pp. 87–88; Diakonoff, 1974, pp. 58–62; Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 249, 652–653; Baker, 2001, p. 23.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

199

exalted servant of the king, and even to the king himself (in relation to the gods). On the other hand, it is probably not accidental that the terms ARAD or GEMÉ are attested in most sales of people, but are rare in sales of “Land and People” or in the other texts studied in this book.

B. Pledged People Radner recently discussed in detail the pledging and redemption for31 mulas in the Neo-Assyrian period, but she did not study the terms designating the pledged people. This issue is discussed below with a new look at the formulation of the texts that attest pledging of people as security for a debt. Pledges in this period are indicated in 125 documents: most (69) show pledging of people as security for loans, and the rest (56) attest to pledging of other items, mainly elds and houses. Most of these 56 texts are listed by Radner in 1997;32 six additional texts from DÖr-Katlimmu were published in 200233 and one document from MaxallÊnÊte (O 3685) is still unpublished.34 In the 69 texts indicating pledging of people, at least 141 persons are counted, most of them women and children.35 Of these 69 texts, 31

Radner, 1997, pp. 368–383. Radner, 1997, pp. 383–390. 33 Radner, 2002 (= BATSH 6), nos. 41, 108, 114, 117, 129, 157. 34 See PNA, p. 452b. 35 A full list of the 69 texts attesting pledges of people is presented below in a geographical setting: Aššur (33 texts): A 330 = SAAS VI, p. 380; A 1055+1070 = SAAS VI, p. 380; A 1797 = StAT 2 73; A 1825 = SAAS VI, p. 380; A 1906 = SAAS VI, p. 380; A 1912 = StAT 2 45; A 1928 = SAAS VI, p. 380; A 1929 = StAT 2 170; A 2486 = StAT 2 64; A 2509 = SAAS VI, p. 379; A 2514 = SAAS VI, p. 379; A 2686 = SAAS VI, p. 380; A 2806 = SAAS VI, p. 379; Ass. 2000 D-26 (= Maul, 2000, pp. 67–70); Ass. 2001 D-378 (= Frahm, 2002, pp. 48–51); Assur 14 = Rfdn 17 13; Scheil 5 = BaM 15 (1984), p. 247; VAT 5606 = SAAS V, 28 (= text 91); VAT 8653 = SAAS VI, p. 380; VAT 8660 = SAAS VI, p. 380; VAT 8663 = SAAS VI, p. 380; VAT 9319 = SAAS VI, p. 380; VAT 9622 = SAAB 9 69; VAT 9689 = SAAB 9 79; VAT 9694 = SAAB 9 95; VAT 15461 = SAAS VI, p. 367; VAT 15580 = StAT 1 55; VAT 19500 = SAAS VI, p. 369 (= text 93); VAT 20342 = SAAB 5 13; VAT 20377 = SAAB 5 50; VAT 20341 = SAAB 5 31; VAT 20395 = SAAB 5 45;VAT 20786 = StAT 1 36 (= text 92). Calah (9): ND 2078 = Iraq 16 (1954), p. 33; ND 2333 = Iraq 16 (1954), p. 44; ND 3441 = Iraq 15 (1953), pl. xii; ND 3443 = FNALD 49 = SAAS VI, p. 364; ND 5448 = Iraq 19 (1957), pl. xxviii; ND 7004 = CTN III 9; ND 7005 = CTN III 8; ND 7022 = CTN III 59; ND 7094 = CTN III 37 DÖr-Katlimmu (1): BATSH 6 104. 32

200

chapter three

46 are listed by Radner (1997) in chapter XI.2.Ca, which discusses pledging of people;36 and ten additional texts are mentioned in other parts of her book. But 13 documents are not listed by Radner, namely one from Tell Hadid,37 another from DÖr-Katlimmu,38 and another from Tell Shioukh Fawqani;39 seven originated in Aššur (Ass. 2000 D-26; Ass. 2001 D-378; StAT 1 36; StAT 1 55; StAT 2 64, StAT 2 73, StAT 2 170), two in Nineveh (SAA XIV 202; AECT 13), and one in MaxallÊnÊte (O 3701—unpublished).40 Of these 69 texts, 64 originated in the mainland of Assyria, principally the three capital cities: Aššur (33), Nineveh (18), and Calah (9), and from Balawat (4). Only ve documents originated in the periphery, one in each of the following places: DÖr-Katlimmu, HuzÒrÒna, MaxallÊnÊte, Tell Hadid, and Tell Shioukh Fawquani. 16 texts are still unpublished (15 from Aššur and one from MaxallÊnÊte), and a few texts from Calah are only partly published. Which terms designate these pledged people? And do these terms indicate their legal status? Were they slaves or free people? The status of the single people pledged is discussed rst. Clearly, the free singles were indicated by their relation to their family head, who usually was the debtor, e.g., “(his) son”, “(his) daughter”, etc. In 11 cases a son is pledged. He is usually dened by the terms “his son” or “son” (DUMU or DUMU-šú), the terms attested in the pledging formula, and sometimes in the redemption formula (see BT 102, 123, 128, 139;41 ND 2078, ND 2333;42 SAAB 5 50; SAA XIV 108, 159; and

HuzÒrÒna (1): S.U. 51/43 = An St 7 (1957), p. 144. Imgur-Illil (Balawat) (4): BT 102; BT 123; BT 128; BT 139; MaxallÊnÊte (1): O 3710 = PNA, p. 744a. Nineveh (18): ADD 60 = SAA VI 317; ADD 61 = SAA XIV 101; ADD 63 = SAA XIV 93; ADD 65 = SAA VI 307 (= text 90); ADD 67 = SAA XIV 159; ADD 68 = SAA XIV 97; ADD 71 = SAA VI 295; ADD 72 = SAA VI 272; ADD 77 = SAA XIV 202; ADD 78 = SAA XIV 181 (= text 94); ADD 79 = SAA XIV 209 (= text 95); ADD 85 = SAA XIV 216 (= text 96); ADD 1193 = SAA XIV 108; AECT 13; (“Land and People”): ADD 58 = SAA VI 81 (= text 86); ADD 59 = SAA VI 91 (= text 88); ADD 64 = SAA VI 245 (= text 89); ADD 66 = SAA VI 97 (= text 87). Tell Hadid (1): G/1696 = Tel Aviv 27 (2000), pp. 169–176. Tell Shioukh Fawquani (1): TSF F 204 I/3 = Semitica 46 (1996), pp. 89–111. 36 Radner, 1997, pp. 377–383. 37 Naxaman—Zadok, 2000, no. G/1696; see also Galil, 2001a, pp. 68–69. 38 See Radner, 2002 (= BATSH 6), no. 104. 39 See Fales, 1996a. 40 See PNA, p. 744a. 41 For the texts of Balawat see Parker, 1963. 42 Parker, 1954, p. 44.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

201

O 3701). In the risk clauses attested in these ten texts it is stated only twice that if the son dies or runs away, responsibility for compensation rests on “his father” (AD-šú—see BT 139; ND 2078); in a third text (SAA XIV 159) the scribe states that responsibility for compensation rests on PN (= the name of the son’s father). But in two other texts the pattern “on his owner” occurs (SAA XIV 108, and BT 128; the latter is probably a pledge of a son, and it should be reconstructed, as suggested by Wiseman, “Nanî s[on] of UlÖlÊiu”, although the formula “on his owner” is listed).43 In pledges of daughters the scribes also used both patterns: “on her father” and “on her owner” (see below). The other two documents indicating pledging of one son are broken at this place (BT 102, SAAB 5 50); and in other three texts there is no risk clause (SAA VI 295; BT 123; and ND 2333). A pledged daughter is usually dened by the term “his daughter” (DUMU.MÍ-šú—see ND 3441,44 SAAB 5 13; SAAB 5 45; StAT 2 64; A 330). In one case (ND 3441) the scribe used the pattern “on her father” in the risk clause; but in another case (StAT 2 64) the formula “on (the responsibility) of her owner” is given; in the other texts there is no risk clause. The term “his daughter” is also attested in a text indicating a pledge of a maid and a daughter of the debtor (CTN III 59, with no risk clause). Only once is a brother pledged (Assur 14).45 He is dened by the term PAP-šú, and in the risk clause responsibility rests “on his brother”. A pledge of a sister is indicated in a text from Tell Hadid (G/1696), and the two pledged females are dened as “his wife” and “his sister” (MÍ-šú and NIN-su; with no risk clause). In four additional documents the pledged female is dened as “his woman” (MÍ-šú, see ND 3443; SAAB 9 69; StAT 2 73; VAT 9319), and it is reasonable to suppose that it is his wife and not his maid. In the risk clauses of the texts from Aššur (SAAB 9 69; StAT 2 73; VAT 9319) the scribe used the pattern “on her owner”, and in the text from Calah (ND 3443) there is no risk clause. In another document (CTN III 37) three debtors are obliged to pledge probably their wives if they fail to repay their debt. In Posgate’s opinion, here the scribe used the unusual formulation “their wives(?) 43 See also PNA, p. 926a(15). For a different opinion see Radner, 1997, p. 379, no. 7. 44 See Weisman, 1953, pl. xii. 45 See Ahmad, 1996, no. 13.

202

chapter three

(will) belong to NÖr-Šamaš” (the alternative possibility proposed by the editors is “their [wives(?)] shall be [put] into pledge”).46 The risk clause indicates that responsibility for compensation rest “on their owners”. In sum, in 23 out of 69 texts (33.3%) 24 free persons (12 males and 12 females) are put into pledge, as single individuals, or in one case with another family member (for pledged families see below). In most cases the members of the nuclear family are pledged: 11 sons, six daughters, and ve wives; only in two cases is it members of the extended family: in one a brother and in the other a sister.47 In ten documents a risk clause is attested: in four cases the pattern “on his/ her father” (or “on PN” = the father) occurs, referring three times to a son and once to a daughter; in the other six texts the pattern is “on his/her owner”, referring twice to a son, once to a daughter, and three times to a wife, and probably also in CTN III 37. So the pattern “on his owner” does not indicate clearly if the pledged person is free or a slave (see also below). In texts that in Radner’s opinion describe pledging of slaves the picture is less clear: she believes that 11 texts indicate pledging a male slave and ten pledging a maid.48 Two new texts indicating a pledge were recently published by Maul and Frahm: Ass. 2000.D-26 and Ass. 2001 D-378 (see above): in the rst one the pledged person is clearly a maid, and in Frahm’s opinion a maid is probably also attested in the second text. The term “his maid” (GEMÉ-šú) is mentioned in only six of these 12 texts (Ass. 2000.D-26; CTN III 59; ND 5448; SAAB 9 95; VAT 8653; VAT 8663). Two other texts (A 2686 and A 2806) are still unpublished, and therefore it is not clear whether the term “GEMÉ” occurs in these documents; in Ass. 2001 D-378 Frahm restored this term but this restoration is not certain, and in the other three cases the term GEMÉ is not mentioned at all (SAA XIV 101; SAAB 5 31 and SAA VI 272). The claim that a maid is pledged in the last four texts is mainly based on the pattern “on (the responsibility of) her owner” which is attested in all of them except one—SAA VI 272, which does not include a risk formula (the pattern “on her owner” is also attested

46

See Postgate in Dalley—Postgate, 1984, p. 91. A list of the 23 texts attesting 24 pledges of free relatives is presented below: a son (11): BT 102; BT 123; BT 128; BT 139; ND 2078; ND 2333; O 3710; SAA VI 295; SAA XIV 108; SAA XIV 159; SAAB 5 50; a daughter (6): A 330; CTN III 59; ND 3441; SAAB 5 13; SAAB 5 45; StAT 2 64; a wife (5): G/1696 (= Tell Hadid); ND 3433; SAAB 9 69; StAT 2 73; VAT 9319; a brother (1): Rfdn 17 13; and a sister (1): G/1696 (= Tell Hadid). 48 See Radner, 1997, pp. 379–383, no. 2, 9, 11–12, 17–18, 24, 30, 31, 38. 47

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

203

in ve out of the six documents in which the pledge is clearly dened as a “maid”; in CTN III 59 there is no risk clause). It is reasonable to assume that in the rst six texts a maid is indeed pledged, but in the others it is unclear. Yet it is possible, since these pledges were not dened as one of the close relatives of the debtor, but just as a “woman”, or by her personal name, without specifying her relation to the debtor. In two other cases it is also possible that a maid was pledged: StAT 1 55 and StAT 2 45; in the latter case RÏminni, the pledged female, is dened as “her young woman” (MÍ.TUR-šá). In sum, in these 14 documents 15 females are pledged; six are probably maids and the other nine are possibly also maids although this is not certain. Another maid is probably attested in BATSH 6 104 (see below). The term ARAD occurs only in two of the 11 texts that indicate pledging of slaves in Radner’s opinion (SAA VI 317; SAA XIV 97). In A 2509 the pledged person is dened as “a son of a maid (GEMÉ)”. Five other texts are still unpublished so it is unclear if the term ARAD is mentioned in them (A 1055 + 1070; A 1825; A 1906 [3 slaves]; A 2514; VAT 8660). In three other texts the term slave is not mentioned (SAA VI 295; SAA XIV 93; Scheil 5 = BaM 15[1984], p. 247). Another text which mentioned the term ARAD (but does not include a risk clause) is StAT 2 170 (it is not mentioned by Radner). A risk clause (“on their/his owner”) is attested in six texts (A 1906; A 2509; A 2514; SAA XIV 93; SAA XIV 97; Scheil 5 = BaM 15[1984], p. 247); in ve texts a risk clause is missing (A 1055 + 1070; A 1825; SAA VI 295; SAA VI 317; VAT 8660). The pledged persons attested in the rst three texts (A 1055 + 1070; A 1825; SAA VI 295) and in StAT 2 170 were probably true slaves, since the terms slave or “son of a maid” are attested in these four documents (which count ve pledges); in the other eight texts (which mention ten pledges), it is not certain if the persons are slaves; but it is possible, since they are not dened as relatives of the debtor. The pledged (or redeemed) persons attested in the following ten texts might also be slaves: A 1928; AECT 13; BATSH 6 104 (4 men; 1 woman); CTN III 8 (withdrawing); CTN III 9 (withdrawing); SAA XIV 202 (redeeming); SAAB 9 79 (release); SU 51/43 = An St 7 (1957), p. 144; TSF F 204 I/3 (= ’š ); VAT 15461 (withdrawing—3 persons). In all these ten documents (which count 16 persons among them at least one woman) no risk clause is recorded and the terms ARAD or GEMÉ are missing (A 1928 is still unpublished). In these 22 documents at least 30 men are pledged; ve are probably slaves and the other 25 men (and one woman) are possibly also slaves

204

chapter three

but it is not certain. Adding the pledged maids mentioned above will bring the grand total to 46 pledged slaves (30 males and 16 females), of whom 11 are probably true slaves and the other 35 are possibly also slaves, although it is not certain. These people are attested in 36 of 69 texts (52%) that indicate pledging or redemption of single persons. In sum, a few people were evidently slaves before they were pledged, while others were free persons, or pledged people who were re-pledged. The free people were put into pledge by their family head, in most cases their father and in others their husband or brother, and they are dened by their relation to the family head (“his son”, “his wife”, etc.). The risk clause in these cases has the pattern “on (the responsibility of) his/her father” or “on his/her owner”. The slaves that are pledged will be dened sometimes by the terms “(his) slave/maid” or “son of a maid”, and the risk clause will sometimes include the pattern “on his/her owner”. In light of these conclusions the terminology used in the texts indicating pledges of families will be discussed below. The terms that dene the members of the families put in pledge are included in four patterns attested in the documents indicating pledges of families (texts nos. 86–96): (1) In the presentation of the debtor who put these people into pledge; (2) in the pledging formula; (3) in the risk clause; and (4) in the redemption formula. The most usual patterns are as follows (see Appendix C. 2 to this chapter, which presents the formulation of these texts): (1) PN, EN LÚ.UN.MEŠ SUM-ni . . . (2) kÖm X ¤ PN . . . PAB X (LÚ.)ZI.MEŠ ana šaparte (ina IGI PN) šakin/kammus (3) (šumma) . . . ina UGU EN/AD-šú/šá/šúnu (4) (ina) Ömu ša X tadÊnu/erÊbu (Š) . . . LÚ.UN.MEŠ uÉû (Š) The terms ARAD or GEMÉ are very rare in these texts (as they are in the documents that indicate pledging of single persons), although it is reasonable to suppose that a few of them are slave families. The term “ARAD” is attested in these texts only once, in text no. 95, which probably indicates pledging a slave family. A risk pattern is also very rare and is attested only once, in text no. 87: r. 6: “on their owner”. In the redemption formulas the people are always given by the term “people” (LÚ.UN.MEŠ), and in the pledging formulas they are presented by their personal names and by the formula PAB X (LÚ.)ZI. MEŠ. In the texts indicating a pledge of a few single persons the term ARAD is also rare and is attested only once, in SAA VI 317: here the

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

205

pledged people are called “his slaves” (ARAD.MEŠ-šú) but their exact number is not stated. It is clear that at least a few free families were pledged, for example, the two re-pledged families (texts nos. 91 and 96), and the family that was pledged by its head (without himself—no. 94). In all these cases the people are dened by the terms “souls” (ZI.MEŠ) or “people” (UN.MEŠ). In addition to the four people listed in text no. 95 who were probably slaves (one of them is dened by the term “ARAD ša PN”) it is reasonable to suppose that the female and her daughter attested in text no. 93 were maids, being dened as “one woman (and) her daughter” and not as “his wife (and) his/her daughter”. The people attested in texts nos. 90 and 92 might also be slaves (see the discussion on these families in chapter II). Texts nos. 86–89 document “Land and People” put into pledge, and the status of the 49 people listed in them was probably like that of the people attested in sales of “Land and People” (see the discussion below). The presumed free pledged families were larger than the presumed slave pledged families: the average of the former is 4.33 souls per family and of the latter—it is 2.5 souls per family. The 19 pledged families attested in texts nos. 86–96 consist of 72 souls, an average of 3.79 souls per family.

C. “Land and People” The terms that dene people occur in four main patterns attested in sales of “Land and People”: (1) in the opening lines, in the presentation of the seller; (2) in the intermediate summaries of the people; (3) in the summary of the detailed description of the people; (4) in the formula designating the completion of the transaction. The most usual patterns are as follows: (1) (2) (3) (4)

PN, EN A.ŠÀ, GIŠ.SAR, UN.MEŠ, SUM-an . . . PN . . . PAB X ZI . . . PAB X ZI.MEŠ A.ŠÀ, GIŠ.SAR, UN.MEŠ (šuÊtu) zarip laqi . . .

Very rarely a denition of the people is also attested in the penalty clauses, always by the term UN.MEŠ (see text no. 97 and SAA VI 340).

206

chapter three

In other rare cases a redemption clause is attested, and the people are also dened by the same term (UN.MEŠ—see text nos. 98, 102 and SAA VI 65). In texts nos. 104–105 the people are dened as “slaves”. Text no. 104 is unique: (1) in the opening lines, in the presentation of the owners of the property, only the term “people” is attested (and not “the owner of the sold orchard and people”); (2) in most sales of “Land and people” the detailed description of the people is presented after the description of the land (with only a few exceptions: see below); in text no. 104 the people are counted before the land (possibly because 17 people are counted and only one orchard); (3) the term ARAD denes not only the “sold” people but also the owners of the property, who are called: “two men, ARAD.MEŠ of the governor of Barhalza, owners of the people (UN.MEŠ) being sold”. The sellers are clearly not true slaves but ofcials of the governor; the rst is even dened as “the village manager of the queen”. In a few cases the people are just dened by the formula PAB . . . A.ŠÀ . . . adi UN.MEŠ without specication of their names and number. For example, in SAA VI 283 the description of the land is very detailed: the scribe describes all 19 parcels and in the summary he presents the grand total of the hectares of land and refers to the “sold” people simply by the formula “along with the people” (adi UN.MEŠ), without stating even their number (this pattern is usual in grants: see the discussion below). So these people can hardly be presumed slaves, who were valuable property usually specied by name or at least number. In two other cases a whole “village” is sold but its people are dened merely by this same pattern “its people” (SAA XIV 1); or “1 farmer and his people” (SAA XIV 2). In most sales of “Land and People” the land is described before the people, in the detailed description as well as in the summary. But occasionally the people are listed before the land, and at times the scribe presents a mixed description of land and people. The land is described before the people in 18 of the 30 sales of “Land and People” studied in this book (see texts nos. 97, 103–105, 109–112, 115–116, 118–119, 122–123), and in 15 of the other 20 sales of “Land and People” that do not indicate families (SAA VI 65, 129, 149, 153, 280, 283, 320/321, 329/30, 340; SAA XIV 6, 22, 36, 207, 263, 401), that is, in 33 out of 50 texts altogether. Land is also described before people in two out of the four texts that indicate a pledge of “Land and People” (nos. 86–87). Only in ve cases are people listed before land (texts nos. 104,

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

207

106–107, 120–121). A mixed description of land and people appears in nine texts (nos. 108, 113–14, 117, 124–126; and in SAA VI 332, SAA XIV 215) and also in two of the four texts showing a pledge of “Land and People” (nos. 88–89). In sum, the scribes usually set down the land before the people (in 33 out of 47 texts in which the order is clear, or 70%); but in ve cases the people are listed rst (11%) and in nine texts the description is mixed (19%). The other three sales are broken. In the four texts of a pledge of “Land and People”, land is listed before people in two of them, and a mixed description is found in the other two. These variations clearly indicate that the people are an integral part of the transaction, but whether their status is slaves or tenants cannot be ascertained. Two facts are clear: (1) they are not the owners of the land; (2) they dwell on the land and farm it. The terminology per se does not allow us to judge if they are slaves or tenants, or even if they are all of similar status. Still, as demonstrated above, the sales of people and the sales of “Land and People” differ in three important ways, which cannot be accidental: if the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” are slaves, why is a guarantee clause so rare in these texts? Moreover, in a few sales of “Land and People” the price seems very low, even unreasonable, if we suppose that the people sold were slaves. But if we assume that these people were not slaves, the prices make sense.49 Three examples will be presented, as follows: The rst is SAA XIV 399 (= BM 134551). It documents the purchase of a very large property including 60 hectares of land, 2 vineyard, 3 houses and 18 persons. The price is 15 mina of silver. This text was discussed by Postgate in 1970.50 In his opinion: “The price is remarkably low. It is possible, therefore, that the seller and previous owner is in fact Mardduk’-ahu-iddina, and that he was unable to repay the dept of 15 mina of silver, which he owed to the purchaser, in any other way. If this is so, our document might represent

49 The prices in the Neo-Assyrian period were studied, in the last decade, by Fales (1996; 1997a) and by Radner (1997, pp. 230–248). Fales, on the one hand, presented the diversity of the prices of persons and of real estate, but on the other hand, he pointed out the “a man was in the main, valued around a mina, while a woman could be bought most of the time for slightly over half a mina of silver” (Fales, 1996, p. 30). Radner reached same conclusions. In her opinion, the average price of a slave was 53.15 shekels of silver; of a female slave—40.57, and of one person sold within a group or a family—38.16 shekels of silver (Radner, 1997, p. 248). For prices of slaves in the Neo-Assyrian period see also Galil, forthcoming (a). 50 See Postgate, 1970, pp. 145–146, Pl. XXIV.

208

chapter three

the appropriation of a security or guarantee by the purchaser/creditor. Otherwise, we must suppose that the purchaser here pays the original owner by transferring to his name a credit of 15 minas owed to him by a third party, a practice well attested in middle Assyrian times, but not common at this period”.51 Postgate did not considered the possibility that these people, or most of them, were not slaves. Another text is ADD 1205+, a broken, undated sale of “Land and People”.52 It attested a sale of a family of 3 people, a eld of 2–10 hectares (within one hectare of land in cultivation) and a vineyard, for 1 mina of silver by the mina of Carchemish.53 If the people being sold in ADD 1205+ were slaves, a price of 1 mina (by the mina of Carchemis) for 3 persons is a low, even before considering the value of the elds and of the vineyard. On the other hand if the people were not slaves, it is a reasonable price. A third example is SAA VI 50/51. This text also documents the purchase of a very large property including 50 hectares of land, 10,000 vines, a built house and nine persons. The price in this text is even lower then in the previous texts: only 6 mina of silver, that are approximately the average price of nine persons. On the other hand, if we assume that the people were not slaves (or at least most of them) the price looks much more reasonable.54 In most sales of “Land and People” the price is lost (see texts nos. 97, 99–100, 104, 106, 110–114, 117–120, 124–126; and SAA VI 65, 129, 149, 153, 280, 320/1, 340; SAA XIV 1, 2, 22, 207, 263, 401). In six texts the price is not lost, but the size or the value of the property is unclear, since the texts are broken (see texts nos. 107, 109, 115, 123, and SAA VI 283, SAA XIV 36). In the last text, SAA XIV 36, a vineyard and two men change hands for three minas of silver: the price seems low, but since the size of the vineyard is unclear it is not possible to estimate if the men’s value is included in it. In SAA VI 283 the price is ten minas of silver and the size of the land is clear, but the people are dened by the vague pattern “with the people” (see

51

See Postgate, 1970, p. 146. See SAA XIV 355. For a new discussion on this text see Galil, forthcoming (b). 53 For the mina of Carchemish see Vargias, 1998, pp. 303–311 with earlier literature. 54 For prices of real estate in the Neo-Assyrian period see Zaccagnini, 1979, pp. 24–26; Fales, 1984a; Postgate, 1989, p. 151; Fales, 1990a; Fales, 1996, pp. 28–29, 1*–4*; Fales, 1997a; Jas, 2000a, p. 253, and note 37. 52

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

209

the discussion above). In three cases (texts nos. 98, 108, 116) the price seems high and it admits the possibility that the people are slaves. But even in these documents the size and value of the land is unclear, so it cannot be argued that the value of the people (as slaves) is included in the price. The socio-economic status of the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” in the Neo-Assyrian period, has been discussed extensively in the literature. Many scholars are of the opinion that these people were slaves.55 In other studies they were dened as glebae adscripti, “semi-free”, or “laborers”.56 Another scholar supposed that: “the fact that the names of the occupants of a particular parcel of land are enumerated when the land changes hands does not necessarily imply that these individuals are slaves or unfree. The enumeration, on the contrary, might have been intended to safeguard the interests of the tenant’s or subtenant’s contract.”57 The diversity of opinions is also reected in the volumes of PNA, published in the recent years. Five main denitions of the persons enumerated in the sales of “Land and People” were proposed by different scholars in 34 items in PNA, as follows: 1. “Slave”;58 2. “Servant”;59 3. “Dependent Farmer”, “Dependent Gardener”, “Dependent Individual”, etc.;60 4. “Farmer” or “Individual”, without any sociological

55 See Mendelsohn, 1949, pp. 110–111: “they were slaves pure and simple”. For a same opinion see Postgate, 1970, pp. 145–146; Zablocka, 1971, p. 156; Zablocka, 1972, p. 212; Fales, 1996, 1*–2*; Radner, 1997, pp. 219–224, and see below note 5. 56 Johns, ADD, I, p. 172; Kohler—Ungnad, 1913, p. 452; Oded, 1979, pp. 95–96; Renger, 1995, p. 308. B. Parker used the term “laborers”, see Iraq, 16, p. 37 (= ND 2306): “an estate and its laborers”. 57 Ellis, 1976, p. 145. 58 See H. D. Baker, PNA, p. 1128b—SAA XIV 36; M. F. Fales, PNA, p. 6a—SAA VI 100/101; E. Frahm, PNA, p. 493a—SAA XIV 168; M. Jursa, PNA, p. 15b(1)—SAA VI 315/316; B. J. Parker, PNA, 631b(6)—SAA XIV 36; R. Pruzsinsky, PNA, p. 631b—SAA XIV 435 = ADD 1168+; V. Verardi, PNA, p. 379a—SAA VI 50/51. 59 See R. Jas, PNA, p. 464a(2)—SAA VI 50/51. 60 See K. Akerman, PNA, p. 802a(12)—SAA VI 334; PNA, p. 958a(7)—SAA VI 251; H. D. Baker, PNA, p. 789b(31)—SAA VI 90; PNA, p. 742b(2)—SAA VI 94; PNA, p. 820b(4)—SAA VI 173; PNA, p. 849b(8)—SAA VI 253; PNA, p. 666b(1)—SAA VI 326; A. Berlejung, PNA, p. 66b(1)—SAA VI 334; PNA, p. 600a—SAA VI 326; E. Cancik, PNA, p. 1007a-b—SAA XIV 399; S. Cole, PNA, p. 25b(2)—SAA VI 163; H. Hunger, PNA, p. 413b(19)—SAA VI 253; J. R. Novotny, PNA, p. 1110b(1)—SAA VI 334; E. Lipinski, PNA, p. 753a—SAA VI 163; PNA, p. 1007b(2)—SAA VI 315/316; J. Llop, PNA, p. 1011a—SAA VI 37; M. Luukko, PNA, p. 260b(4)—SAA VI 163; D. Schwemer, PNA, p. 987b—SAA VI 315/316; G. van Buylaere, PNA, p. 458b—SAA XIV 399—Iraq 32 11); R. M. Whiting, PNA, p. 173b(8)—SAA VI 37.

210

chapter three

denition;61 5. “Landowner”.62 A few scholars suggested different denitions in different items.63 Moreover, for persons enumerated in same texts, different denitions are at times attested.64 Is it possible that the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” were not slaves? On the one hand, it seams impossible, since they were sold together with the land and it looks like there is no difference between them and the other items presented in the operative sections of these texts: elds, houses, vineyards, vegetable gardens, etc. Moreover, the owner of the property is presented not only as the owner of the land, but also as the owner of the people being sold. On the other hand, this possibility is problematic, since if the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” were also slaves, one would expect that a same terminology will be used to dene the sold people in both sales of people and of “Land and People”, but this is not the case (see discussion above). Moreover, if the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” were indeed slaves, one would expect to nd sales of enslaved farmers without the land, but out of 468 Neo-Assyrian sales of persons, only in one text the sold man is dened as a “gardener” (SAA XIV 49), and even in this case it is not clear whether the seller owned the gardeners land. The issue is indeed very problematic and complicated, and it is even unclear whether the status of all the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” was the same. In my opinion, although a few families listed in these texts might be slaves, most people attested in sales of “Land and People” were probably tenants.

61 For the denition “individual” see H. D. Baker, PNA, p. 1046a(2)—SAA XIV 90; S. Cole, PNA, p. 224b(15)—SAA XIV 265 = ADD 458; For the denition “farmer” or “son of a farmer” see M. F. Fales, PNA, p. 8b(2)—SAA VI 334; R. Mattila, PNA, p. 481b—SAA VI 326; D. R. Brown, PNA, p. 397a(5)—SAA VI 315/316; For the denition “palace farmer” see A. Berlejung, PNA, p. 65b(3)—SAA VI 37. 62 See K. Akerman, PNA, p. 671a—SAA VI 329. It is clearly a mistake since Lusumu was “sold” with the vineyard and the grove (see line 12). In line 3 he is dened as: “LÚ tadani”. Therefore the translation in SAA VI is right: this too is a sale of “Land and People”. 63 Baker dened them as “dependents” or just as “individuals” (relating to the same text: SAA VI 90), and Fales dened them once as “slaves” and in another item as “farmers”. See the previous notes. 64 See the items relating to the following texts: SAA VI 315/316 (slaves, dependent or just individual); SAA VI 50/51 (slaves or servants); SAA VI 90 and 326 (dependent or just individual); see the previous notes.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

211

D. Royal Grants This group of seven documents is divided into two main sub-groups: (1) grants and tax exemptions for ofcials (texts nos. 128–131); (2) royal grants and personal decrees for temples (texts nos. 132–134). In texts nos. 128–130, 133–134 the scribes use mainly the pattern “PN (his profession)—X persons”, for example, Family no. 249: “PN—3 LÚ.ZI.MEŠ”; or in its shorter version “PN—X”, for example, Family no. 194: “PN—4 (persons)”. In text no. 128 this pattern probably features in reverse order: “X persons—PN”. In text no. 131 the same patterns appear, with some exceptions: sometimes all members of the family are counted, for example, text no. 132 (see the discussion below). A comparison of these seven documents indicates that the scribes probably counted families by these patterns and that the total of persons in each probably includes its head. In all texts except one, families and single persons are presented in mixed order; the exception is text no. 132, in which families are clearly distinguished from single persons (DIL-ma-nu = ÏdumÊnu), who appear after the families at the end of the list. Text no. 132 describes all 41 persons (eight families and ve single people) brought from ArbÏla and dedicated by Sennacherib to the newly founded temple of the gods BÊbu and ZabÊba in Aššur. All eight family heads as well as the ve single people are attested by their personal names. In each family the wife is listed before the sons, and all wives, sons and daughters are unnamed, with only one exception, in line 1. The order of the family members is xed: after the family head the scribe records his wife, always by the pattern “his wife”; the adolescent sons are counted after the wife and before the small children (weaned or suckling), and the daughters are listed at the end, with only one exception: in line r. 7 (Family no. 247) a son is mentioned after the two daughters. This is also the only son whose age is not specied. The age of none of the daughters is listed. Only three age/size categories are attested in this text: adolescent, weaned and suckling (Éa-hur-tú; par-su; GA). The professions of these people are not specied in the detailed description of this text, but in the summary (lines r. 12–13) the people are clearly dened as tillers: “a grand total of 41 people from ArbÏla whom I have donated to ZabÊba as tillers” (PAB 41 ZI.MEŠ URU. arba-il-a-a a-na LÚ. qa-tin-ú-te a-na DN ad-din-šú-nu-ti). The scribe chose

212

chapter three

to dene the people by the term qatinnu (“ana LÚ qatinnÖte”),65 and not “ana urdÊnÖti”, so they probably were not temple slaves but temple employees of low rank, or temple tenants. They became part of the permanent temple staff, and there are no indications that the temple administrators were allowed to sell people donated to temples by the king. Their status might be different from that of slaves bought by the temple from private individuals or of day-laborers: they are protégés of the temple, they dwell within it or its surroundings, they cultivate its land, and they are provided with corn rations or share the elds’ corn with it. Text no. 131 lists dozens of families and single persons; most families are described by the pattern “PN (his profession)—X persons”, but in nine cases the scribe enumerates each family member (see Appendix C.3 to this chapter). Three times (in the description of Families nos. 208–209, 223) the scribe counts a woman with her children by the formula: FPN—2 DUMU.MEŠ-šá; in three other cases (Families nos. 198, 215, and probably 212) a couple is recorded by the pattern “PN (and) his wife, a total of two (persons)” (PN, MÍ-šú, PAB 2); or by the pattern “PN1 (and) PN2, his wife” (PN1, FPN2, MÍ-šú). In another case (no. 211) a couple with two children is attested; the wife is listed by her name before the unnamed sons: “PN1, shepherd; PN2, his wife, (and) his two sons, a total of four (persons)” (PN1, rÊ’iu immeru; FPN2, MÍ-šú; 2 DUMU.MEŠ-šú; PAB 4). In two other cases (Families nos. 204–205) a woman and her children is also attested, but here one of the sons is presented as the family head, the woman as his mother and the other children as his brothers: 204 PN1 [PN2,] PN3, [……..…-šú], FPN4, AMA(-šú) 4 ZI.MEŠ 205 [P]N1, LÚ. […] PN2, PN3, PN4, ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú, FPN5, AMA-šú [5 ZI.MEŠ] In this text the people are listed by their professions, all those of the same profession being counted together, for example, gardeners (lines 1–6), shepherds (lines 19–21), camel drivers (lines 21–22), weavers (line 24), farmers (lines 36–37); sometimes a total is also given, for example, “a total of six shepherds” (line 21). One family head is a baker (Family no. 224—line 35). In other texts (nos. 129 and 134) only two professions are attested: a farmer (Families nos. 190, 275) and a shepherd (Family no. 276). 65

For the term qatinnu see chapter 2, note 163.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

213

It is reasonable to suppose that the people enumerated in text no. 131 (= SAA XII 26–28) are not true slaves but probably tenants. It is clearly stated in SAA XII 26 r. 1–8 that the personnel of these elds may not be called up for the corvée. Clearly then, before Assurbanipal exempted these people of Nabû-šarru-uÉur from taxes, they were obliged to perform ilku duties; the question is, were true slaves liable for these services? In Postgate’s opinion this question must be left open for now:66 There are many problems about the exaction of ilku which it is impossible to answer at present: were all those who held no land liable? Were true slaves (rather than serfs) liable to do ilku service, and if so could they do it on behalf of their masters?

Postgate is right since actually there is still no evidence that true slaves were sent to perform these services on behalf of their masters in the Neo-Assyrian period; yet no text indicates the reverse possibility. However, in the Neo-Babylonian period privately owned slaves were not obliged to perform public works. Dandamaev, in his monumental study Slavery in Babylonia refers to this issue in these words:67 The scant materials from the texts examined above permit one to suppose that privately owned slaves were not obliged to pay state taxes or to perform public obligations. In those cases where they did pay taxes or perform duties, this was done as a private arrangement in a contract with a free person for a corresponding fee. Free persons who, because of age or other reasons, found themselves unable to perform the royal duties connected with bow efs sometimes adopted slaves and entrusted to them the performance of these duties.

Moreover, one might claim that sending true slaves to perform public services would be too risky and economically not sensible, since the slaves might run away while the yearly cost of ilku service (per person) was only a few shekels (assuming a cost of one shekel or less per month for one person’s service). Would it be logical to risk a property of 60 shekels or more for an outlay of one or two shekels? More reasonably, the slave-owner would rather pay money than perform these duties or send one of his day-laborers or tenants to do them.

66 Postgate 1974a, p. 91. In his opinion the people listed in SAA XII 26–28 are “serfs” or “semi-free”; see 1974a, p. 82. 67 See Dandamaev, 1984, p. 418. See also Roth, 1989, no. 5.

214

chapter three

In sum, the personnel attested in the royal grants were probably tenants and not slaves.

E. The “Harran Census” E.1. The Formulation of Texts nos. 135–145 In the discussion on the texts of the Harran Census in chapter I these texts were divided into two main groups, each composed by a different scribe, A or B. Scribe A was shown to present a detailed description of the family members, clearly distinguishing wives from daughters; scribe B omits patronymics, sons’ names, children’s ages, and totals, and places all females (wives and daughters) in one category, “Women”. Both scribes list the people rst and then the property, including elds (in contrast to the sales of “Land and People” which usually record land before people). Both scribes record the people by families, separating them from single persons and riÊqu, and both list the people by farms. The usual formula found in scribe A’s texts has four main components arranged as follows: (1) the family head’s personal name and profession (at times patronymics are also presented); (2) the other males of the family (sons, brothers, and grandsons), listed sometimes by name, and usually with an indication of their “size” or age; (3) the females of the family: wife, daughter(s), family head’s mother or sister (usually unnamed); (4) a total of the family members. Scribe B inserts only the rst three components, omitting many details, as noted above (see Appendix C.4 to this chapter). In the following discussion texts nos. 135–145 are separated from the other four texts (nos. 146–149), which indicate only “fathers and sons”; we shall begin with the formulation of the rst group. (a) The Denition of the Family Head The formulas which describe people in these texts (composed by scribe A or B) always open with the family head’s personal name (but never dene him as “head” or “father”; they indicate his relationship to the family members sometimes by means of a possessive sufx: his son, his brother, etc.). In ten out of 45 families (22%) scribe A lists the name of the family head’s father, while scribe B, as noted, omits all patronymics (scribe A also inserts the patronymics of two out of 12 single persons: 17%). Both scribes always record the profession of the family head (there is only one exception out of 102 cases: see Family no. 322).

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

215

On the other hand, only rarely is his previous profession indicated (in the texts of scribe A in six out of 57 cases; in the texts of scribe B only once: see discussion on these people’s professions below). In two cases a woman is presented probably as a family head: in SAA XI 203 I: 14–15 (scribe A) “the wife of PN” (MÍ-šú šá PN LÚ*.[…]) appears in a fragmentary context, and she is probably a widow (with or without children); in SAA XI 213 r. I: 7–9 (scribe B) a female personal name (SÒn-…) likewise appears in a fragmentally preserved passage, with a vineyard of 2,000 vines. (b) The Denition of the Other Males of the Family The other males in the family (sons, brothers, and grandsons) are always listed after the family head. Scribe B omits the son’s names and counts only their number by the formula 1 DUMU or X DUMU.MEŠ. “His brother” is mentioned before a son once (Family no. 348), so scribe B evidently separates sons and brothers. A possessive sufx is attested only twice, once referring to sons of the family head (Family no. 322) and once to his brother (see above). The texts of scribe A exhibit a more complicated picture. In 33 out of 45 families, males are counted after the family head, usually by their size and age: rst the adolescent sons and later the small children and the babies. The adolescents are presented by the pattern PN, A-šú Éa (see e.g. Families nos. 278, 281, 291, 294–295, 297, 314, 317) or PN, A Éa (see e.g. no. 289) or PN1, PN2, 2 A Éa (see e.g. nos. 288, 308). Sometimes the adolescent son is unnamed (see e.g. no. 286 and probably also no. 305). In a few cases one name or more are listed right after the family head without specifying if he is a son or a brother of the family head (see e.g. nos. 303, 315, 318). It is clear that at least one of these “adolescent” sons is actually an adult, married with at least one son (Family no. 288). The terminology for dening children in the Neo-Assyrian period has been discussed extensively in the literature.68 The Assyrians are known to have dened children by their height and their state of dependence on their mother. Adolescent or adult sons are dened by the term Éa = Éahurtu and adolescent daughters by Éa or batÖssu (see below). The younger children are presented by their height: three, four, or ve spans,

68 Radner, 1997, pp. 126–152, with earlier literature; and see also chapter VIII, note 1.

216

chapter three

sometimes with the addition of the term ru¢u, probably about 25 cm.69 In other texts the scribe used two additional numbers, two and six.70 This is very likely only a general estimate. The last two denitions are “weaned” (UD = pir, pirsu) and “suckling” (GA = ša zizibi). Scribes A and B used different signs to dene a son: scribe A used the sign A and scribe B the sign DUMU. The exceptions are the use by scribe A of the sign DUMU three times (Families nos. 294, 300, and SAA 205 II: 3’). A brother of the family head is attested in the texts of scribe A only twice (Families nos. 300, 319); in both cases the brother is listed before the son, but in both the brother is probably older than the son(s): in Family no. 319 the brothers are “adolescent” and the son is 4 spans high; and in Family no. 300 the son is 3 spans high, but the brother’s height is lost. Since brothers are so rare in these texts it is reasonable to suppose that in most cases in which males named right after the family head are not presented as his sons or brothers, they were in fact his sons and not his brothers; but this is not certain (see Families nos. 287, 292–293, 301, 303, 305, 311, 315, 318). (c) The Denition of the Family Females Neither scribes records women by their personal names. Moreover, the terms “woman” or “daughter” are always without possessive sufxes (although three times this sufx is related to a mother or a sister of the family head: see Families nos. 277, 280, 293). Scribe B places all females (wives and daughters) in one category, “Women”, but scribe A clearly records wives, daughters, sisters, and the family head’s mother separately. So the denition “X women” does not include the family head’s daughter, sister, or mother. But the family head’s daughters-in-law were probably put in one category with his wife, as is clearly indicated at least in one case: in the description of Family no. 288 all women are included in one category and dened as “3 women”; since a grandson is clearly listed, one of these three women was probably his daughterin-law. In a few cases more than one daughter is listed, by the following formulas: the rst one is dened as 1 DUMU.MÍ with her height, and the others are just counted by the number 1, and another number 69

For the size of one ru¢u see Fales, 1973, pp. 119–122; Fales, 1975, pp. 342–346; see also CAD, R, pp. 438–439. 70 Fales, 1973, p. 120.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

217

which species her height. Scribe A lists the daughters by their height (with only one exception: Family no. 279), and separates the adolescents from the younger ones; in most cases the former are counted before the latter. The grown-up daughters are dened in three cases as “nubile” (battÖsu—see Families nos. 286, 311–312), and once as “adolescent” (Éa = Éahurtu), in the description of Family no. 312; in this last case the order of the daughters is problematic since the scribe lists rst a battÖsu, then a daughter of 4 spans’ height, and lastly a Éahurtu. Since a Éahurtu and a battÖsu are listed in one text in this unusual order, the difference between these two denitions is unclear. The scribe might have used them as synonyms, but one might still wonder why he has distinguished these two young women and why he has placed the adolescent after the daughter of 4 spans’ height. Might one of these terms in fact refer to an unmarried daughter (battÖsu), and the other (Éahurtu) to a young adult woman who returned to her father’s house after her divorce or after her husband’s death? (d) The Total of Family Members Scribe A usually presents the total of family members by the pattern “a total of X (persons)”. Only twice are the families described by the formula “PN, his profession, (with) X persons, a total of X + 1 (persons)” (see Families nos. 306, 316). In another case (no. 285) the scribe does not give the total of this family but only the grand total of the last two families (284 + 285). Similar grand totals are attested in other cases, but the scribe always presents the total of each family (with only the noted exception). E.2. The Formulation of Texts nos. 146–149 In these four texts of the Harran Census only “fathers and sons” are enumerated. The rst two texts (nos. 146–147 = SAA XI 219–220) were probably composed by scribe A, and the other two by scribe B (nos. 148–149 = SAA XI 210–211). The formulation of these texts and the terminology used by both scribes in these texts are similar to those of the other texts of the Harran Census, with a few exceptions (see below). In all texts the family head is usually presented rst, and his sons are listed afterwards. In a few cases only brothers are recorded: two between Families 359 and 360, one after Family 373, and one after Family 371; in this last case two brothers are presented by the pattern “PN1,

218

chapter three

PN2, a total of two sons (of ) [PN3]”. All these relatives are considered “no-family” since the father of these sons has probably died and it is not clear if they are married (see Introduction). In another case the people are considered a family even though they are recorded by the formula “PN1, ditto; PN2, ditto, two son(s) of PN3”, since two sons of one of these two brothers are also attested (Family no. 362). Scribe B counts only the number of the sons, by the patterns 1 DUMU or X DUMU. MEŠ, and omits their personal names. Only once is “1 [brother]” probably listed (Family no. 377; cf. also no. 348). The two texts related to scribe A must be discussed separately as their formulation and terminology are very different. Moreover, text no. 147 is very fragmentarily preserved and its reconstruction and interpretation are problematic. In both texts all sons (and brothers) are listed by their personal names, but their height/size is mostly not indicated in text no. 147, with only one evident exception (Family no. 373). In text no. 146 the height/size of 12 out of 16 sons and brothers is mentioned. A short summary (“a total of X”) is attested for about half of the families in these texts, but in text no. 146 it occurs only in three out of eight cases (37.5%), and in text no. 147 it probably occurs in eight out of 13 cases (61.5%). In both texts the father’s name is probably always given: but in text no. 146 only once is the text broken off so it is unclear if the family head’s name is listed (Family no. 360). In text no. 147 only in a few cases is the family head’s name attested distinctly and without any doubt (see e.g., Family no. 366), and in the others it is just one possible reconstruction of the text (see the discussion in chapter II). In text no. 146 sometimes the adolescent sons are listed rst and the smaller ones later (see e.g. Families nos. 357, 362), with a separation between the “biological” sons and the attaché (see e.g. Family no. 357, 360); but in the description of Family no. 361 the adolescent son is listed after a son ve spans high. In most cases the sons and brothers are noted by the formula PN A-šú/PAB-šú X with only a few exceptions (see Families nos. 357, 360–362). Since a baby and small children are clearly attested in these texts (see Families nos. 357 360, 373) it is clear that all males of these families are listed and not only the children able to work.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

219

E.3. The People’s Professions and Social Status Some professions of the people who tilled the soil are attested in the texts of the Harran Census. They are discussed below, starting with the professions recorded in texts probably composed by scribe A: Text no. 135: Five professions are attested in this text: (1) gardener (LÚ*. NU.GIŠ. SAR = nukaribbu); (2) farmer (LÚ*.ENGAR = ikkÊru); (3) cowherd (LÚ*.SIPA GUD.MEŠ = rÊ’iu alpu); (4) goatherd (LÚ*.SIPA ÙZ.MEŠ—rÊ’iu enzu); (5) guardian of the grove (LÚ*. ma-Éar (GIŠ) qabli = maÉÉar qabli). The term gardener occurs 13 times, and twice more in the summaries in col. I: 18–20 and in col. II: 47 (“11 gardeners”). Three times their previous profession is mentioned: a tailor, a cook, and an unclear profession (Families no. 283–284, 287). Three out of seven farms cultivated by “farmers” are based on eld crops and vineyards; and the other four are based only on vineyards (in one of them a vegetable garden is attested but its size is unclear). The term farmer occurs only once in the summary, in lines 46–47: “a total of 37 farmers (and) 11 gardeners”. In this text as well as in the others of the Harran Census farmers and gardeners occur in same texts, and one wonders the difference between these two “professions”: are they synonyms or do they signify different specializations? As a working hypothesis we will assume that “gardeners” cultivate orchards and vineyards (as also indicated by the term GIŠ.SAR included in the term NU.GIŠ.SAR), and the term “farmer” is related mainly to eld crops. In farms based on vineyards and on eld crops the scribe sometimes writes gardener and sometimes farmer. Another interesting question relates to the terms of cultivation or of tenancy of these two “professions”: are they similar or different? In Hammurabi’s laws the terms for cultivating elds and orchards are entirely different, and even the tenancy of an already planted orchard or vineyard is subject to different terms from those of an orchard or vineyard still to be planted by the tenant (see the discussion below). Text no. 136: Most men in this text are “farmers” (this profession is recorded probably ten times). All farms cultivated by “farmers” are based on eld crops (with no orchards or vineyards). The term “gardener” occurs only once (I: 20), but the text is broken and it is not clear if this farm has orchards or vineyards. Other professions attested in

220

chapter three

this text are a guardian of the grove, a herder of donkeys (LÚ*.SIPA ANŠE = rÊ’iu imÊru), and a singer (LÚ*.NAR = nuÊru). The previous profession of three persons is attested in this text, but only one of them is preserved: a scarf weaver (LÚ*.UŠ.BAR = išpÊru). Text no. 137: Gardeners, farmers and shepherds are recorded in this text. Six or seven farmers are presented, of whom three cultivated only eld crops and one a mixed farm of a corneld and an orchard; the other cases are unclear. Three gardeners are listed in this text (one cultivated a vineyard and the context in the other two cases is unclear). One of the four shepherds listed in this text was probably missing ( pa-Éu ¤ pa’ÊÉu = dispersed, removed, transferred?). The six “empty people” (ra-qu-ti ) might be day-laborers, without a “xed” job, namely at a farm in tenancy, rather than outlaws. This text also indicates two other important terms, both of which are probably translated “laborers”, “cultivators”, etc.: (1) PAB X ERIM.MEŠ (ÉÊbu) ZI, attested twice in the summaries, and (2) LÚ*.qa-tin.[MEŠ] = qatinnu (see text no. 142, below). In texts nos. 138–139 (probably parts of the same text) the term gardener occurs only once (in relation to a mixed farm), and the three farmers are clearly associated with a corneld. Two shepherds are also listed in this text. Text no. 45, another document probably composed by scribe A mentions a guardian [of the grove] and a shepherd. In these six texts, probably composed by scribe A, various profession are attested, including 18 farmers and 11 gardeners, connected to the following 29 farms:

Farmers Gardeners

Total

eld crops

mixed

unclear

vineyards

18 11

11 0

1 4

6 3

0 4

Farmers do not cultivate farms based only on vineyards, and gardeners do not cultivate farms based just on eld crops. Three out of four mixed farms cultivated by gardeners are based mainly on vineyards and consist of 29,000 or 15,000 or 10,000 vines in each farm, with only six to ten hectares of eld crops.

221

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

Texts nos. 140 + 141, probably composed by scribe B, enumerate farmers and gardeners. The gardeners cultivate four farms: two based just on vineyards and two mixed; at least one of the latter is based mainly on vineyards: 4,000 vines and only one hectare of land. The farmers are connected to ve holdings; two are based on eld crops only, and three are unclear. The people are deportees from Gambulu (PAB hu-ub-te KUR.gam-bu-li—no. 140 r. III: 4’). One of the family heads is dened in this text as “one of the fugitives that were brought/settled by PN” (TA* ŠÀ ZÁH.MEŠ ša PN na-Éa-an-ni—no. 140 r. III: 7’–9e). This person probably tried to run away during his transfer from Gambulu to the Harran area, but was caught and nally resettled in the area of Harran. Text no. 142 numbers many shepherds, probably 26, most of them dened by the ditto sign (see col. II); they are shepherds with one exception: a single person who is dened as a herder of cattle and donkeys (col. III: 4’–8’). The ve gardeners attested in this text cultivate three farms based exclusively on a vineyard, and the fourth clear one has 4,000 vines and only four hectares of land. A farmer occurs only once and he cultivates a eld (without orchards or vineyards). A few other professions are also indicated in this text: a carpenter, a gate-guard, and a whitewasher. An additional term recorded in this text is LÚ*. qa-tin.[MEŠ] = qatinnu = tillers (r. III: 1’–2’), but unfortunately the beginning of this column is broken off. Text no. 143 + 144 lists farmers, gardeners, shepherds, a cowherd, a hatter, a barber, and a camel driver. The seven farmers dwell in four farms based only on eld crops (the other three farms are unclear; the ve gardeners cultivate two farms based just on a vineyard, one is unclear, and two are mixed). In these three texts, probably composed by scribe B, various professions are attested, including 13 farmers and 14 gardeners, as follows:

Farmers Gardeners

Total

eld crops

mixed

unclear

vineyards

13 14

7 0

0 5

6 2

0 7

222

chapter three

This picture is similar to the one reected from the six texts probably composed by scribe A. The following table presents the data in these nine texts, of both scribes:

Farmers Gardeners Grand total

Total

eld crops

mixed

unclear

vineyards

31 25 56

18 0 18

1 9 10

12 5 17

0 11 11

The picture emerging from these 56 cases is clear-cut: farmers do not cultivate farms based only on vineyards, and gardeners do not cultivate farms based just on eld crops, and only once is a farmer connected to a mixed farm (but see below on text 149). On the other hand, most mixed farms cultivated by gardeners are based mainly on vineyards. As mentioned above, in sales of people about 91–93% of the men are “non-professional”. In the texts of the Harran Census the picture is the reverse: 92% of the men are “professional” (107 men), and only 8% are “non professional”: the profession is not attested at all only twice (SAA XI 202 I: 8’; 207 I: 11), and the other seven are presented as riÊqu (SAA XI 203 IV: 11’’; 207 III: 1). In another 20 cases the text is broken, but in all of them a profession has been reconstructed by scholars. The data attested in texts nos. 146–149 are not included in these calculations and conclusions. In these texts the persons are evidently “professional” as is clearly attested in the summaries (see below) although the profession is not recorded in the detailed description. The term farmer is listed in texts nos. 146 II: 25’ and 149: 3 and 6; bronzesmiths appear in texts nos. 146 III: 10’–11’ and no. 147 I: 6; and 22 ironsmiths are listed in text no. 147 r. II: 3. Another term for tenant in this period is probably errÏšu.71 This term is also attested in Hammurabi’s laws (nos. 49, 178, 215–217, 221–223, 253), and in a few Neo-Assyrian texts as follows: SAA XIV 163 || SAA XIV 164 indicates that a eld is put into pledge as security for a debt of 17 shekels of silver (622* B.C.). The creditor receives the right to “cultivate and harvest” the eld and to enjoy its corn until

71 For the term errÏšu see AHw, pp. 243b–244a; CAD, E, pp. 304–307 (errÏšu; errÏšutu); Ellis, 1976, pp. 73–77, 166–168, 172–174; Dandamaev, 1984, pp. 585–589; Jursa, 1995, pp. 14–16, 81–84; Bongenaar, 1997, p. 475.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

223

the debt (with interest?) is settled. He does not become its owner, even temporarily, and he is not allowed to sell it, but just to till it and enjoy its fruits; therefore, no redemption clause is included in this document. The creditor’s status in this period is clearly dened in the text and is equated to that of a tenant: “He will cultivate and harvest the eld as a tenant-farmer” (ina ÊrišÖtu = SAA XIV 163: e. 8–r. 1 || SAA XIV 164: 5–6). The terms errÏšu or ÊrišÖtu are also present in other Neo-Assyrian texts: in SAA X 167 (= ABL 500), a petition submitted to the crown prince by RÊši-il, the petitioner refers to the cultivators of his eld and denes them as tenant-farmers (LÚ.er-re-še-e): “Two horses (and) tenantfarmers cultivate my eld” (lines 8–10); in another letter (SAA V 16 = ABL 201), sent to Sargon II by Liphur-BÏl, governor of ¹midu and eponym of 705 B.C., the sender refers to a eld that is held by Assyrians in tenancy: “(as for) the elds of the Assyrians, held in tenancy” (ana ÊrišÖ[te]—lines 8–10). These texts and others clearly evince the existence of tenancy in the Neo-Assyrian period, but its terms are not clear. It is therefore possible that the people attested in the Harran Census, as well as in other texts discussed above might be tenants. These people may be likened to the helots in Sparta, as suggested by Diakonof and others;72 the helots worked the elds of the upper class in Sparta, but the owners of the elds were not permitted to sell or to free them; they paid the owners a xed share of the produce of the farm, and had the right to accumulate property. As mentioned above a few cultivators own land: two gardeners own ten hectares (text no. 135 I: 1–11); a guardian of a poplar grove owns twelve hectares of land; and two farmers own an ox or two (text no. 136 II: 20–24; III: 1–7; 8–11). Note that the gardeners and the grove guardian own land, and the farmers own only oxen. But in text no. 146 III: 1–24 the scribe notes three times that small parcels of two or four hectares of land have been given to the farmers. So these cultivators, most probably tenants, are allowed to accumulate land and oxen, namely means of production, and are apparently independent peasants; yet they are still tenants who cultivate land owned mainly by the members of

72 Diakonof, 1974, pp. 64–68; see also Postgate, 1979, p. 193. For the Helots see Finley, 1980, pp. 70–72; The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th ed., Chicago 1993, vol. 5, pp. 819a–b.

224

chapter three

the middle and upper strata in the Neo-Assyrian Empire; one might suggest that in their eyes they already see a glimmer of light in the darkness, and they seem to be on the high road to complete economic independence. But it is most important that these two families that managed to accumulate enough land to maintain themselves continued to function as tenants and to cultivate land owned by others. They did so probably not because they were obliged to cultivate these elds or forced to serve their masters, but because tenancy was an important anchor in their life, which provided more economic stability and was insurance against bad times, a shelter from drought and hunger, as well as from powerful wicked neighbors or corrupt ofcials who might take over the land accumulated by these tenants through hard work and diligence. So tenancy in the Assyrian realm is a major economic system, but it also has signicant social and political implications; a system of patronage and dependence that serves the masters, but also the tenants. This is well reected in dozens of documents, mainly petitions to the king, with complaints about corrupt ofcials who plunder lands owned by other ofcials, expel the personnel who have cultivated these ravaged farms, and resettle these holdings with their own tenants.

F. Deportees and Displaced Persons The 18 texts of this group differ greatly, so they will be discussed individually (see Appendix C.5). The terms that usually dene deportees in other Neo-Assyrian texts are rare in these 18 texts.73 Text no. 150 records deported families by the pattern PN—X persons (for families) or PN—1 person (probably for single people). This pattern is clearly attested at the beginning of col. II, as well as in line 7 of this column and in r. II: 1’, 4’, and 13’. Three main terms dene these deportees: (1) ša rÏši (LÚ.SAG) = eunuch; (2) ša ziqni (LÚ ša NUNDUN) = bearded men; (3) napšutu (ZI) = souls, persons (see the discussion in chapter II).

73 For the terminology of the deportees in the Neo-Assyrian Period see Oded, 1979, pp. 79–81.

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

225

Text no. 151 is a letter which documents the transfer of 35 people from Babylonia to Assyria. They are listed in a xed order: the family head is mentioned rst, followed by his brother, sons, women, and daughters, and a total “X (people)”. Most females are unnamed and listed by the patterns “X women” or “X daughters”; the one exception is the daughters of HazÊnu, of whom the rst is named and the other is called her sister. Small children (3 or 4 spans high and a suckling son) are unnamed; but the son of 5 spans high and all the brothers are named. The profession of the people is attested only once (two fowlers), and in the summary the people are dened as: PAB 12 ERIM. KALAG.MEŠ; . . . PAB-ma 35 ERIM.KALAG.MEŠ ZI (see chapter II). Another letter (text no. 153) records another family transferred from Babylonia to the king: a named father with his unnamed sons, daughters, and maids (the wife is missing). In two additional texts (nos. 155–156) deportees from Babylon, Cutha, and Uruk are listed, including a “third man” on the chariot, a cavalryman, and an architect. The people are dened as ERIM ZI (155) or ZI.[MEŠ] (156). In both texts the father is named rst, followed by his sons, wives, daughters, and sisters (all family members are unnamed in no. 155 and named in no. 156). In Family no. 406 the slaves are listed before the women. These people were previously of the middle stratum in Babylonia but now they are deportees in transit, and the position they will be assigned to by the Assyrian administration is not clear. Text no. 154 is a list of Egyptian deportees, mainly single persons and two families: the family heads are named and the wives and daughters are unnamed. In the other texts the women are named and listed before the sons: in no. 152 all family members are named, including the children that are listed by their height/age, in the following order: family head, wife, sons or brothers, daughters, and a maid. A similar order is also attested in Text no. 157 which count four families of farmers: the wife is counted after the family head and the children after her. In the rst family the rst daughter is dened as TUR (young) and the other as a nubile; in the second family sons and daughters are presented in a mixed description by their height/age. In text no. 159 the families include the family head’s mother, brothers, and sister, and again the wife features right after the father (in four out of ve cases; in the fth case the mother is mentioned before the wife

226

chapter three

and the sons). In text no. 158 the order of the family members is not uniform: in one case the wife is listed before the sons (Family 413); in the second the sons are mentioned before the wife (414), as in the third case (412) which indicates two sons and a wife but the family head is excluded (see the discussion in chapter II). In the other eight texts of this group (nos. 160–167) usually the family members are unnamed with only one exception (no. 160). In two cases sons are listed before wives (nos. 160, 163), and totals are attested in three cases (nos. 161, 163, 165). Professions are very rare in these texts: a gardener is mentioned in no. 164; and a shepherd in no. 166.

G. The Order of the Family Members and its Status Does the order in which the family members are recorded indicate its status? And in which cases are wives listed right after the family head and before the other members of the family? The answer to this question might be surprising, since wives appear before the family head’s son(s) or brother(s) mainly in slave families (20 out of 27 cases = 74%), while in the texts of the Harran Census wives are never placed before sons; the latter are listed before wives 44 times (see table below). In the group of pledged families in nine out of ten cases the wife is listed before her children; in the group of deportees and displaced people this is the order in 13 out of 36 cases (36%), and in the group of “Land and People” it is the order in ve out of 12 cases (42%). The location of the wives in the description of the family members does not indicate the status of these people, since wives are listed before sons in most groups, while in the slaves group in 26% of the cases they are counted after the sons; yet it is clear that the scribes inserted

Wife is counted before son(s)/brother(s) Slaves Pledged people “Land and People” The “Haraan Census” Deportees Total

20 9 5 0 13 47

(74%) (90%) (42%) (0%) (36%) (37%)

Wife is counted after son(s)/brother(s) 7 1 7 44 23 80

(26%) (10%) (58%) (100%) (64%) (63%)

Total 27 10 12 44 36 127

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

227

wives before sons mainly in sales of people, and pledges of “Land and People”; they did so less in sales of “Land and People” and in lists of deportees and displaced persons, but never in censuses (of probably, tenants). So there is a correlation between the location of the wife in the description of the family and the family’s status. If the location of the wife indicates her status within her family, or in the eyes of her masters or employer, a fact never denied concerning the location of her husband, one might conclude that the status of the wives in slave families was better than in free families. Sometimes wives are listed by their names in these texts: it is astonishing that names of wives occur only 25 times out of at least 225 cases (less than 11%). This number does not include names of females who function as family heads. Sixteen of these 25 names are of slaves’ wives (64%): a total of 55 slaves’ wives are attested in this book of whom 16 are named (29%) and 39 are unnamed. In the Harran Census no wife is named (out of about 70 wives), and, for example, in the group of deportees and displaced people only two out of 56 wives are named (4%). So the picture seems similar to the one presented above and may also indicate that the status of the wives in slave families was better than in the free families; but the listing of the wives’ names is relatively rare in comparison with cases in which they are listed before sons/brothers (25 cases versus 127 cases = 1:5).

APPENDIX A

SALES OF PEOPLE

Sales of People—(Aššur) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

AoF 24,118–21 AfO 32, 38–42 AfO 42/3,89–90 ARU 180 ARU 181 ARU 205 ARU 206 ARU 209 ARU 214 ARU 463 ARU 504 ARU 505 ARU 506 ARU 507 ARU 508 ARU 539

------Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ----? ---? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ---------Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ?

------? ------------? ------? ------------?

= ARU 70 = BM 103389 = SÉ 72

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

BaM 16, 371 BaM 16, 373 ÉPHÉ 352 OLZ 8, 130–4 Rfdn 17 1 Rfdn 17 2 Rfdn 17 3 Rfdn 17 4 Rfdn 17 5 Rfdn 17 6 Rfdn 17 7 Rfdn 17 8 Rfdn 17 9 Rfdn 17 11 SAAB 3,71–72 SAAB 5 29 SAAB 5 34 SAAB 5 39 SAAB 5 41 SAAB 5 43

GEMÉ ARAD ARAD GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ [G]EMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ ? GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ. MEŠ GEMÉ GEMÉ ? ARAD GEMÉ ARAD ARAD GEMÉ ---GEMÉ GEMÉ ARAD GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ ------GEMÉ -------

? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ------Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl.

---? ? ---------------------------------------2-------------

= 11289a = 11289b = RA 18, no. 32 = LB 851

MÍ

MÍ.TUR

= Ass. 8996b MÍ UN. MEŠ/ ZI.MEŠ MÍ MÍ.TUR (continued on next page)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

229

Sales of People—(Aššur) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59

SAAB 5 44 SAAB 5 53 SAAB 5 55 SAAB 5 58 SAAB 5 61 SAAB 9 76 SAAB 9 77 SAAB 9 78 SAAB 9 85 SAAB 9 103 SAAB 9 109 SAAB 9 119 SAAB 9 124 SAAB 9 126 SAAB 9 127 SAAB 9 132 SAAB 9 134 SAAB 9 139 SAAB 11, 4 SAAB 12, 64 SAAB 12, 66 SAAB 12, 68 SAAB 12, 70

GEMÉ ? ? ? GEMÉ ARAD ARAD ARAD ? ARAD ARAD GEMÉ GEMÉ ? ARAD GEM[É] ? ? ARAD ARAD ARAD [GEMÉ] ?

Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? ? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ---Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? Guarantee Cl. ---Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? ----? ? ? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl.

---? ---? ------------? ------------? ---------? ------------?

60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

StAT 2 16 StAT 2 33 StAT 2 91 StAT 2 99 StAT 2 100 StAT 2 105 StAT 2 107 StAT 2 112 StAT 2 113 StAT 2 117 StAT 2 118 StAT 2 119

? ---? ? ? ----? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? ? ---? ------? ? ---? ---?

72 73

StAT 2 120 StAT 2 121

----? ?

? 8----

74 75 76 77 78 79

StAT 2 122 StAT 2 123 StAT 2 124 StAT 2 125 StAT 2 135 StAT 2 136

[GEM]É [----] ---? ARAD [ARAD] ? ? ---? ? [ARAD. MEŠ] ? A[RAD. MEŠ] ? ? ARAD GEMÉ [GE]MÉ [ARAD]

----? Guarantee Cl. ? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl.

? ? ? ------?

LÚ? ÍM [L]Ú*

UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ

UN.MEŠ = TCL 9 63 = Ass. 11393dd = Div. 318 = Si 686 = Div. 88 = Si 703 = Div. 124 = Si 660 MÍ.TUR DUMU DUMU.MÍ [UN.MEŠ] MÍ MÍ MÍ; Anonymous UN.MEŠ [UN.ME]Š ZI.MEŠ UN.MEŠ Anonymous ZI.MEŠ LÚ

Anonymous (continued on next page)

230

chapter three

Sales of People—(Aššur) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

80 81 82 83 84 85

StAT 2 137 StAT 2 138 StAT 2 139 StAT 2 140 StAT 2 141 StAT 2 142

? ARAD ? ---[GEMÉ] ?

? ? ? ---Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl.

------? ----------

86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96

StAT 2 144 StAT 2 145 StAT 2 146 StAT 2 158 StAT 2 169 StAT 2 178 StAT 2 179 StAT 2 180 StAT 2 181 StAT 2 182 StAT 2 183

ARAD GEMÉ GEMÉ ? GEMÉ GEMÉ ARAD ---GEMÉ [GE]MÉ ----

? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ----? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? ? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl.

? ---------------? -------------

97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

StAT 2 245 StAT 2 266 StAT 2 267 StAT 2 268 StAT 2 269 StAT 2 270 StAT 2 271 StAT 2 272 StAT 2 273 StAT 2 274 StAT 2 275 ZA 73, 11 VAT 9582

? ? ? ? ARAD ARAD ? ? GEMÉ ? ? GEMÉ ARAD. MEŠ

? Guarantee Cl. ? ? Guarantee Cl. ? ? ----? ? ? ? ----? Guarantee Cl.

? ? ? ? ------? ? ? ? ? ---2----

A Family LÚ*.TUR UN.MEŠ Sale of People, see: Radner, 1997, p. 187 É = Household.

MÍ.TUR

MÍ; DAM UN.MEŠ / ZI.MEŠ [MÍ] [LÚ*.T]UR MÍ

MÍ MÍ MÍ Female = BM 103956 Radner (e-mail)

Sales of People—(Calah) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

110 111 112 113

BaM 24 1 BaM 24 3 BaM 24 6 BaM 24 8

? ------GEMÉ

Guarantee Cl. ----------

-------------

M[Í] ZI.MEŠ/UN.MEŠ NIN (continued on next page)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

231

Sales of People—(Calah) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

114

BaM 24 9

----

?

115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140

BaM 24 12 BaM 24 16 BaM 24 17 BaM 24 19 BaM 24 20 CTN II 2 CTN II 3 CTN II 4 CTN II 5 CTN II 6 CTN II 7 CTN II 8 CTN II 9 CTN II 10 CTN II 11 CTN II 12 CTN II 13 CTN II 220 CTN II 248 CTN III 33 CTN III 34 CTN III 48 CTN III 49 CTN III 50 FNALD 8 FNALD 9

ARAD ---? ---GEM[É] AR[AD] ---------ARAD [ARAD] ARAD ---[ARAD?] ---? [----] ? ---GEMÉ ---GEMÉ GEMÉ [AR]AD GEMÉ ----

Guarantee Cl. ------Guarantee Cl. ----? ---? ---------? ? ---? Guarantee Cl. ? ? Guarantee Cl. ----? Guarantee Cl. ------? ----? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl.

SIMUG. AN.BAR ------7---5---------3------------? ---3---? ---? ? ? 6------------? ? -------

141 142 143 144 145

Iraq 15 ND 3420 # ND 3422 # ND 3424 ND 3425 # ND 3427

---GE[MÉ]

Guarantee Cl. ---Guarantee Cl. ---Guarantee Cl.

------a janitor ----

146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154

ND 3428 ND 3429 # ND 3460 ND 3479 Iraq 16 ND 2082 ND 2313 ND 2314 ND 2315 ND 2323

LÚ.ŠÁM ARAD-šú [GEM]É

ZI.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ/UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ/UN.MEŠ Brother DUMU.MÍ DUMU.M[Í]

ZI.MEŠ/UN.MEŠ DUMU.M[Í] ERÍN.MEŠ DU[MU.MÍ] ZI.MEŠ/UN.MEŠ DUMU.MÍ

= ND 3421 ZI.MEŠ/ UN.MEŠ = ND 3426 Female MÍ Female Female and Male

Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ---Guarantee Cl.

Male Male Female Female

Guarantee Cl. ---? ---Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl.

Girl: “3 ru-¢u” Son Female Female Male (continued on next page)

232

chapter three

Sales of People—(Calah) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163

ND 2324 ND 2325 ND 2326 ND 2327 ND 2328 ND 2329 ND 2330 ND 2344 SAA XII 94

LÚ.ŠÁM

164

SAAB 1 1

?

---Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? Guarantee Cl. LÚ.UŠ. BAR-bir-me Guarantee Cl. ?

165

SAAB 1 2

?

Guarantee Cl. ?

166

SAAB 1 9

----

?

LÚ.ŠÁM ARAD

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

?

Male Female Female Male Male Female = Kop. 1 M[Í ] = Kop. 2 M[Í ?] = Kop. 9 DUMU.MÍ

# See also Deller, 1966, pp. 192–193.

Sales of People—(DÖr-Katlimmu) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176

BATSH 6 3 BATSH 6 4 BATSH 6 8 BATSH 6 17 BATSH 6 18 BATSH 6 19 BATSH 6 21 BATSH 6 26 BATSH 6 30 BATSH 6 34

GEMÉ ? ARAD.MEŠ GEMÉ ? ? ? ---ARA[D] ----

? ---? ? ---2---? ---? ? ? ? Guarantee Cl. -------? ---? -------? ----

177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188

BATSH 6 42 BATSH 6 44 BATSH 6 45 BATSH 6 46 BATSH 6 47 BATSH 6 49 BATSH 6 52 BATSH 6 53 BATSH 6 54 BATSH 6 56 BATSH 6 58 BATSH 6 59

ARAD ARAD GEMÉ [GEMÉ.MEŠ?] ARAD ARAD ARAD GEMÉ ARAD [GEMÉ.MEŠ?] ARAD GEMÉ

----? ? ------------------------? ?

------------------------2-------------

[UN.]MEŠ MÍ MÍ MÍ ZI.MEŠ/ UN.MEŠ

UN.MEŠ Family MÍ.MEŠ

(continued on next page)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

233

Sales of People—(DÖr-Katlimmu) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession Notes

189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198

BATSH 6 60 BATSH 6 61 BATSH 6 62 BATSH 6 63 BATSH 6 64 BATSH 6 65 BATSH 6 66 BATSH 6 67 BATSH 6 69 BATSH 6 72

ARAD ? GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ GEMÉ ARAD GEMÉ.MEŠ ----

? ? -------------------------

---? -------------------------

199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220

BATSH 6 75 BATSH 6 76 BATSH 6 78 BATSH 6 79 BATSH 6 85 BATSH 6 86 BATSH 6 89 BATSH 6 90 BATSH 6 91 BATSH 6 92 BATSH 6 95 BATSH 6 96 BATSH 6 97 BATSH 6 99 BATSH 6 100 BATSH 6 105 BATSH 6 119 BATSH 6 124 BATSH 6 126 BATSH 6 136 BATSH 6 141 BATSH 6 142

? -------? -------? ---? ? ? ---------? ? Guarantee Cl. ---------? ? ----? ? ? ? ? ---? ---? ? ----? ---------------------? ---? ---? ----

221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236

BATSH 6 156 BATSH 6 163 BATSH 6 173 BATSH 6 174 BATSH 6 175 BATSH 6 177 BATSH 6 178 BATSH 6 179 BATSH 6 184 BATSH 6 185 BATSH 6 186 BATSH 6 187 BATSH 6 191 BATSH 6 192 BATSH 6 200 BATSH 6 202

ARAD ? GEMÉ [ARAD] GEMÉ GEMÉ [GEMÉ] [GEMÉ] GEMÉ ? ? GEMÉ GEMÉ.MEŠ GEMÉ ? GEMÉ ARA[D] ---ARAD GEMÉ ? [AR]AD GEMÉ.MEŠ GEMÉ [GEMÉ] ARAD GE[MÉ] ? ? [GEMÉ] ? [GEMÉ] ? ARAD GEMÉ.ME ARAD [ARAD] ARAD.ME[Š] GEMÉ

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ----? ----? ? ? ? ----

? ---? ? ? ? ? ? ---------? ---? -------

MÍ

Family DUMU.MÍ-su 3 ru-u-¢u MÍ “3 ru-¢[u]”.

Family MÍ LÚ 2 GEMÉ Family UN.MEŠ DUMU [4 ZI.MEŠ ?]

MÍ UN.ME[Š] M[Í] [UN.]MEŠ Family

234

chapter three

Sales of People—(Nineveh) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession

Notes

237

SAA VI 1

?

?

?

238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247

SAA VI 2 SAA VI 3 SAA VI 4 SAA VI 5 SAA VI 6 SAA VI 7 SAA VI 8 SAA VI 9 SAA VI 34 SAA VI 38

---? ? ? Guarantee Cl. ----? ----? ----? ---?

5 --? ? ---------? ? 2---?

248

SAA VI 39

----

?

249

SAA VI 40

----

3----

250

SAA VI 41

----

?

251 252 253 254 255

SAA VI 45 SAA VI 48 SAA VI 49 SAA VI 52 SAA VI 53

? Guarantee Cl. ? ----? ----

---------5-------

256

SAA VI 54

?

?

257

SAA VI 55

---? ? ARAD ARAD.MEŠ ARAD ? ? ---[ARAD. M]EŠ-ni [ARAD. MEŠ] [AR]AD. MEŠ [ARAD. MEŠ] GEMÉ GEM[É] [GEMÉ] ---ARAD. MEŠ ARAD [.MEŠ] ARAD

LÚ adi UN.MEŠ -šú ú-še-Éa 5 LÚ.ZI.MEŠ [LÚ] [UN.MEŠ]

258 259 260 261

SAA VI 56 SAA VI 57 SAA VI 58 SAA VI 59

[AR]AD ---? ----

262 263

SAA VI 82 SAA VI 85

264

SAA VI 86

?

----

265 266

SAA VI 87 SAA VI 88

? ARAD. MEŠ-ni [ARAD. MEŠ]-ni ? ----

----? ?

? ----

267 268

SAA VI 89 SAA VI 92

ARAD ?

Guarantee Cl. ---? ?

[UN.MEŠ] [UN.MEŠ] UN.MEŠ/ZI.MEŠ

UN.MEŠ/ZI.MEŠ

?

LÚ.UŠANŠE.[MEŠ] ? ---TUR ? ---UN.MEŠ/ZI.MEŠ ? ? ? 3---PN adi UN.M[EŠ-šú] ? ? MÍ Guarantee Cl. ----

UN.MEŠ [DU]MU.MI-sa 5 ru-¢u É = A Family (continued on next page)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

235

Sales of People—(Nineveh) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

269

SAA VI 96

270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286

SAA VI 98 SAA VI 103 SAA VI 106 SAA VI 109 SAA VI 110 SAA VI 111 SAA VI 116 SAA VI 118 SAA VI 121 SAA VI 122 SAA VI 127 SAA VI 128 SAA VI 130 SAA VI 132 SAA VI 134 SAA VI 135 SAA VI 138

ARAD. ---MEŠ-ni [GEMÉ] ------Guarantee Cl. ? ? ARAD.MEŠ ? ARAD.MEŠ ---ARAD.MEŠ ---ARAD.M[EŠ] ? ARAD ? ? ? ? ? ARAD ? ? ? ARAD.MEŠ ---ARAD ---? Guarantee Cl. ? ? [ARAD.MEŠ] ----

287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304

SAA VI 140 SAA VI 144 SAA VI 145 SAA VI 148 SAA VI 151 SAA VI 152 SAA VI 166 SAA VI 172 SAA VI 174 SAA VI 177 SAA VI 179 SAA VI 185 SAA VI 192 SAA VI 193 SAA VI 195 SAA VI 196 SAA VI 197 SAA VI 198

Profession

Notes

----

------? 3---3------------? ? ---? 2----; 2—? ? ? ? LÚ.UŠ. ANŠE.AB. [BA.MEŠ] ? ----? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ----? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ARAD Guarantee Cl. ------------? ? ? ? ----? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ARAD.ME[Š] ? ---ARAD ? ? GEMÉ ------? ? ?

MÍ DUMU UN.MEŠ

LÚ Family

UN.MEŠ

UN.MEŠ LÚ UN.MEŠ LÚ MÍ MÍ UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ [UN.MEŠ] UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ

MÍ (continued on next page)

236

chapter three

Sales of People—(Nineveh) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession

Notes

305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314

SAA VI 199 SAA VI 203 SAA VI 219 SAA VI 227 SAA VI 228 SAA VI 229 SAA VI 239 SAA VI 244 SAA VI 246 SAA VI 250

? ? ARAD ARAD GEMÉ ARAD.MEŠ [GE]MÉ.MEŠ ARAD [ARAD] ----

? ? Guarantee Cl. ? ? ---? ? ? ----

? ? ------------------? ----

[U]N.MEŠ UN.MEŠ

315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322

SAA VI 255* SAA VI 256 SAA VI 257 SAA VI 261 SAA VI 266 SAA VI 267 SAA VI 274 SAA VI 284

? ? ARAD ? [ARAD.MEŠ] ARAD ARAD ARAD.MEŠ

? ? ---? Guarantee Cl. ? ? Guarantee Cl.

323 324 325 326 327

SAA VI 286 SAA VI 289/90 SAA VI 294 SAA VI 297/98 SAA VI 300

GEMÉ ARAD [ARAD.MEŠ] ARAD.MEŠ ARAD

? Guarantee Cl. ? ---?

328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335

SAA VI 301 ARAD SAA VI 305/306 ARAD SAA VI 309 ARAD SAA VI 310 ? SAA VI 312/13 [ARAD.M]EŠ SAA VI 319 ARAD.MEŠ SAA VI 341 ARAD.MEŠ SAA VI 342 ?

Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? ? ? ---? Guarantee Cl.

336 337 338 339 340 341 342

SAA VI 343/344 [ARAD.MEŠ] SAA VI 345 ARAD SAA VI 346 ? SAA VI 347 ARAD SAA VI 348 ? SAA XIV 3 ? SAA XIV 4 ----

? ? ? -------? ? ?

343 344 345

SAA XIV 5 SAA XIV 8 SAA XIV 9

? Guarantee Cl. ?

2 LÚ.ENGAR ? [UN.MEŠ] ---? UN.MEŠ LÚ.šá-[x-x] ---------GEMÉ + DUMU ------LÚ.UŠ.BAR Family 3---Family [LÚ.UŠ.g]am. mal.MEŠ išpÊr ÉiprÊti LÚ*.NINDA ¤ LÚ*.SAG ? LÚ LÚ.ka-Éir ---? LÚ.šá-U.SAG. UN.MEŠ MEŠ-šú ? ? ? LÚ ---? UN.M[EŠ] ? ZI.MEŠ 4---UN.MEŠ/ ZI.MEŠ ------NIN ----

ARAD.MEŠ ---ARAD

TUR

UN.MEŠ/ ZI.MEŠ

(continued on next page)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

237

Sales of People—(Nineveh) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession

346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354

SAA XIV 10 SAA XIV 12 SAA XIV 13 SAA XIV 14 SAA XIV 16 SAA XIV 17 SAA XIV 18 SAA XIV 19 SAA XIV 20

GEMÉ ? ARAD GEMÉ [ARAD.ME]Š GEMÉ LÚ.ŠÁM ARAD ARAD.MEŠ GEMÉ

? ? ------? ? ? ----? ----?

---------------------2-------

355 356 357 358 359 360 361

SAA XIV 21 SAA XIV 24 SAA XIV 29 SAA XIV 34 SAA XIV 37 SAA XIV 38 SAA XIV 39

[ARAD.MEŠ] GE[MÉ] GEMÉ GEMÉ ? GEMÉ ARAD

----? ---------? ? ----

? ---------? -------

362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382

SAA XIV 48 SAA XIV 49 SAA XIV 50 SAA XIV 64 SAA XIV 65 SAA XIV 67 SAA XIV 78 SAA XIV 85 SAA XIV 90 SAA XIV 91 SAA XIV 100 SAA XIV 105 SAA XIV 115 SAA XIV 128 SAA XIV 129 SAA XIV 146 SAA XIV 147 SAA XIV 150 SAA XIV 153 SAA XIV 154 SAA XIV 161

G[EMÉ] ARAD.MEŠ GEMÉ [ARAD.MEŠ] ? ARAD ARAD ---? LÚ.ši-me ARAD ARAD ARAD GEMÉ ? ARAD ? GEMÉ ? ? GEMÉ ----

Guarantee Cl. ---Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ------? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ---Guarantee Cl. (See r. 13).

---LÚ.GIŠ.SAR ------? ---------? ------------? ---? ? ? ? -------

383 384 385 386

SAA XIV 162 SAA XIV 165 SAA XIV 174 SAA XIV 179

GEMÉ GEMÉ ? ARAD. MEŠ

---? ? ?

------? ?

Notes

MÍ.[MEŠ]

+2 DUMU. MEŠ

MÍ Excgange for a—GEMÉ Family

DUMU.MÍ [MÍ]

LÚ ZI.MEŠ MÍ [M]Í.TUR —For his son— DUMU.MÍ MÍ

(continued on next page)

238

chapter three

Sales of People—(Nineveh) (cont.) No.

Text

387

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession

SAA XIV 186 ARAD.MEŠ

?

388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412

SAA XIV 189 SAA XIV 195 SAA XIV 196 SAA XIV 212 SAA XIV 213 SAA XIV 240 SAA XIV 241 SAA XIV 242 SAA XIV 243 SAA XIV 244 SAA XIV 245 SAA XIV 246 SAA XIV 247 SAA XIV 264 SAA XIV 301 SAA XIV 326 SAA XIV 333 SAA XIV 337 SAA XIV 339 SAA XIV 347 SAA XIV 364 SAA XIV 400 SAA XIV 402 SAA XIV 414 SAA XIV 424

? ? ARAD.[M]EŠ ---? ARAD GEMÉ GEMÉ ? ? ? ? AR[AD.MEŠ] ? ? ARAD.MEŠ ? [ARAD.]MEŠ ? ARAD ARAD ? ? ? ARAD.MEŠ

? Guarantee Cl. ? ---? ? ? ? Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. ? ? ? ? ----? ? Guarantee Cl. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ----?

413 414 415 416

SAA XIV 435 SAA XIV 469 SAA XIV 472 SAA XIV 475

GEMÉ ? ? ARAD.MEŠ

Guarantee Cl. ? ----? ----

LÚ*.TÚGKA.KÉŠ 4---? ---2------? ? ? ---? ? ? ? ---? ? ? ? ? ? ------? ? ? LÚ*.AŠGAB 3------? ? ----

* Sale of People or of “Land and People”?

Notes

LÚ* Male DUMU UN.MEŠ

[UN.MEŠ] Male UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ M[Í]

MÍ UN.MEŠ LÚ U[N.MEŠ]

UN.MEŠ MÍ

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people

239

Sales of People—(Other Sites) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession

Provenance and Notes

417

GEM[É]

?

----

ARAD (!)

----

----

GEMÉ ---GEMÉ

------?

------?

----

?

?

? (Female) GEMÉ ARAD ARAD ?

?

?

424 425 426 427

AfO 42/43, pp. 100–102 An St 7, pp. 138–141 BT 125 BT 126 SAAB 2, pp. 14–15 SAAB 2, pp. 15–16 PSBA 30, pp. 137–141 TB 8 TB 9 TB 13 TB 22

---? ---?

---------?

MaxallÊnÊte = LBAF C 42 HuzÒrÒna = S.U. 51/36 Balawat MÍ Nabula = GIR 78/294 NIN-su = GIR 75/157–2 Provenance unknown Til Barsib

428 429

TH 103 TH 109

ARAD GEMÉ

----? ---Guarantee Cl. ----

418 419 420 421 422 423

Gozan

Sales of People—unpublished (Aššur; MaxallÊnÊte)* No.

Text

430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440

MAss. 62 VAT 8232 VAT 8274 VAT 8280 VAT 8641 VAT 8653 VAT 8660 VAT 8663 VAT 8676 VAT 9137 VAT 9755

441 442 443 444 445 446

VAT 9778 VAT 9832a VAT 9832b VAT 9832c VAT 9844 VAT 15506

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

Profession

Notes

Guarantee Cl. LÚ.ŠÁM Guarantee Cl.

Guarantee Cl. Radner, 1997, p. 226, note 1253 Guarantee Cl. Guarantee Cl. (continued on next page)

240

chapter three

Sales of People—unpublished (Aššur; MaxallÊnÊte) (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD/ GEMÉ

Guarantee Clause

447

VAT 15538

448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457

VAT 19495 VAT 19497 VAT 19500 VAT 19508 VAT 19530 VAT 19872 ARAD.MEŠ VAT 20351 Guarantee Cl. VAT 20366 VAT 20688 Guarantee Cl. VAT 20761

458 459

VAT 21049 VAT 21538 = Ass. 2282n

460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468

O 3660 O 3680 O 3681 O 3683 O 3687 O 3695 O 3703 O 3706 O 3709

* See Radner, 1997, pp. 181–188, 232–247.

Profession

Notes Radner, 1997, p. 136

Radner, 1997, p. 146 DUMU.MÍ Radner, 1997, p. 146 Son = DUMU PNA, p. 452

APPENDIX B

SALES OF “LAND AND PEOPLE”*

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Text

ARAD

Guarantee Profession Clause

BATSH 6 180 [= 126] CTN III 35 Iraq 16, 37 = ND 2306 GEZER 1 [= 117] SAA VI 37 [= 98]

----

?

? ?

---?

----

SAA VI 50/ 51 [= 105] SAA VI 65 SAA VI 90 [= 104] SAA VI 100 /101 [= 97] SAA VI 112 [= 106] SAA VI 123 SAA VI 129 SAA VI 149 [= 99] SAA VI 155 [= 100] SAA VI 163 [= 102] SAA VI 169 [= 101] SAA VI 173 [= 103] SAA VI 251 [= 109] SAA VI 253 [= 108]

ARAD. MEŠ

Guarantee 1 ---Clause ---1 ---1 nukaribbu 1 ikkÊr šarri ----? 1 ----

? ARAD. MEŠ

? ----

----

----

SAA VI 269 [= 107] SAA VI 280 SAA VI 283

----

Notes

3 ikkÊru 1 ušandû ? ?

1 ikkÊru 4 ---1 nukaribbu 1 ----

[ARAD. MEŠ] ?

?

---? ?

---? ?

1 nukaribbu = anonymous ? 1 ša epinni

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

1 LÚ.x [xxx]

----

?

1 ----

?

----?

?

?

----?

?

?

1-? 1 ikkÊru 1 ---?

? ?

? ----

? ?

adi UN.MEŠ (continued on next page)

242

chapter three

Table (cont.) No.

Text

ARAD

Guarantee Profession Clause

Notes

23

SAA VI 314 [= 113] SAA VI 315/ 316 [= 112] SAA VI 320/321 SAA VI 326 [= 116] SAA VI 329/330 SAA VI 332 SAA VI 333 SAA VI 334 [= 114] SAA VI 340 SAA VI 341 [= 115] SAA XIV 1 SAA XIV 2 SAA XIV 3 [= 111] SAA XIV 6 [= 110] SAA XIV 22 SAA XIV 36 SAA XIV 168 [= 118] SAA XIV 198 [= 123] SAA XIV 207 SAA XIV 215 SAA XIV 229 [=119] SAA XIV 254 [= 125] SAA XIV 263 SAA XIV 265 [= 124] SAA XIV 345 [= 120] SAA XIV 355 [= 121] SAA XIV 399 [= 122] SAA XIV 401

----

----

RÏmanni-Adad

----

?

1 L[Ú]. [nukaribbu] 1 ikkÊru

?

?

?

RÏmanni-Adad

----

----?

2 ikkÊru

RÏmanni-Adad

----

----

1 nukaribbu

RÏmanni-Adad

? ? ----

? ? 2 ikkÊru

RÏmanni-Adad RÏmanni-Adad RÏmanni-Adad

? ARAD. MEŠ

? ? Guarantee Clause ? ?

? ?

RÏmanni-Adad RÏmanni-Adad

------?

---? ?

---1 ikkÊru 1 LÚ*. [xx]

[adi UN.] MEŠ-šú adi UN. MEŠ-šú

?

?

1 nukaribbu

? ARAD. MEŠ ?

? ---?

? 2 ---?

?

?

?

? ? ?

----? ----? ?

? ? ?

?

?

1 ikkÊru

? ?

? ?

? ?

----

?

1 ----

?

?

?

?

Guarantee ? Clause ? ?

24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

?

RÏmanni-Adad

* In four texts documenting pledging of Land and People (SAA VI 81, 91, 97, 245), there is no guarantee clause; the profession of all 11 men is not mentioned, and the term ARAD is not attested. A risk clause occurs in SAA VI 97.

----------[ . . . . . .] UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ [MÍ.MEŠ] [UN].MEŠ UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ [UN.MEŠ] UN.MEŠ PN ARAD-[šú] . . . É PAB X UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ LÚ.UN.MEŠ [. . . . . .] ARAD.MEŠ-šú [. . . . . .] UN.MEŠ [AR]AD.MEŠ UN.MEŠ ---------PN GEMÉ[-šú] . . . UN.MEŠ

ZI.MEŠ --------------ša PN UN.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ LÚ*.ARAD.MEŠ ša PN U[N.ME]Š ZI.MEŠ ------------------UN.MEŠ ---------[LÚ*].ARAD.MEŠ ša PN [UN.MEŠ] ZI.MEŠ ARAD.ME[Š-šú] [... . . .] LÚ*.ZI.[M]EŠ ARAD.MEŠ ša PN UN.MEŠ Z[I.MEŠ] LÚ*.ARAD.MEŠ-ni ša PN UN.MEŠ [ZI.MEŠ AR]AD.MEŠ ša PN UN.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ [ARAD.MEŠ ša PN] [UN.MEŠ] ZI.MEŠ É [ ] UN.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ [. . . ] [ . . .] ------------------------ ----UN.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ ša PN UN.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ LÚ*.ARAD.ME[Š-ni ša] PN [UN.MEŠ] ZI.MEŠ [U]N.MEŠ ša PN [U]N.MEŠ LÚ*.Z[I.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ]-ni ša PN [. . . . . .] ZI.MEŠ LÚ*.ARAD.MEŠ ša PN ---------ZI.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ-šú ša PN [UN.MEŠ] Z[I.MEŠ] LÚ.ARAD.MEŠ ša LÚ.[MEŠ-e an-nu-ti] [. . .] ZI.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ ša [PN] UN.M[EŠ] ZI.[MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ š ]a [PN] UN.MEŠ

5, 12 2’–3’, 8’ 5, 9, 12 2, 4, 10 2, 5 2, 7, 11 2, 3–4, 8 2, 6, 12 2, 7, 13 2, 5, 10 2, 4 2, 9 2, 5–6, 11 2, 4–5 2’, 4’, 5’, 10’ 5’-6’ 2, 7–8 2, 5–6, 10 5, 7–8 2–3, 9 2, 6, 11, 13 (continued on next page)

1: 4: 5: 6: 7: 9: 11: 12: 13: 15: 16: 17: 18: 19: 21: 22: 23: 24: 25: 26: 28:

(1) PN EN LÚ.UN.MEŠ SUM-ni . . . (2) PN ARAD/GEMÉ-šú . . . (3) PAB X LÚ.ZI.MEŠ LÚ.ARAD.MEŠ ša PN . . . (4) LÚ.UN.MEŠ (šuÊtu) zarip laqi

1. SLAVES

THE TERMINOLOGY AND THE FORMULATION OF THE TEXTS

APPENDIX C

M[Í].MEŠ [. . . . . .] UN.MEŠ [. . . . . .] UN.MEŠ UN.[ME]Š [. . . . . .] [U]N.MEŠ UN.MEŠ MÍ.[MEŠ] PN UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ UN.MEŠ PN [M]Í.MEŠ UN.MEŠ MÍ.MEŠ PN UN.MEŠ PN [. . . . . .] PN GEMÉ . . . PN GEMÉ.MEŠ UN.MEŠ UN.ME ---------UN.M[EŠ] UN.MEŠ [. . . . . .] UN.MEŠ [. . . . . .]

GEMÉ-šú . . . GEMÉ-šú . . . GEMÉ-šú . . . GEMÉ-šú

ZI.MEŠ ----------------[ZI].MEŠ ----------------ZI.MEŠ ZI.[ME]Š ZI.MEŠ [Z]I.MEŠ [Z]I.MEŠ [ZI.MEŠ] [Z]I.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ

ZI.MEŠ Z[I.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ ZI.MEŠ [Z]I.MEŠ ZI ZI.MEŠ ZI GE[MÉ-šú-n]u . . . ina UGU É [xx] ZI.MEŠ --------GE[MÉ] . . . ---------

Appendix C (cont.) --------------ša PN UN.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ] ša [PN] [. . . . . .] ---------------------[. . . . . .] ARAD.MEŠ-ni [ša] PN [. . . . . .] [ARAD.MEŠ ša L]Ú.MEŠ-e an-nu-te [. . .] -----------------[UN.MEŠ] -----------------LÚ.UN.MEŠ [ARAD.M]EŠ ša [PN] [UN.MEŠ] LÚ.ARAD.MEŠ ša PN UN.MEŠ -------------------MÍ.MEŠ --------------ša LÚ.MEŠ an-nu-ti UN.MEŠ -------------------UN.MEŠ GEMÉ-šú ša PN GEMÉ-šú [GEMÉ.MEŠ-šú] -----MÍ.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ ša PN UN.MEŠ -------------------MÍ.MEŠ -------------------LÚ.MEŠ -------------------MÍ DUMU --------------------GEMÉ -------------------[MÍ.MEŠ] ARAD.MEŠ-ni ša PN UN.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ-ni ša PN UN.M[EŠ] ------------------UN.MEŠ ARAD.MEŠ ša PN [. . . ] AR[AD.MEŠ ... ] [. . . ] ARAD.MEŠ ša [PN] [. . . . . .] ARAD.MEŠ-ni [ša LÚ.ME]Š an-nu-ti [UN.MEŠ] ARAD.ME[Š ša] PN [. . . . . .]

29: 32: 33: 34: 36: 37: 38: 40: 41: 42: 44: 48: 49: 50: 52: 54: 60: 62: 65: 66: 68: 71: 72: 73: 74: 76: 78: 82:

(continued on next page)

2, 5–6, 12 3’–4’ 2, 5 4’–5’ 4, 7–8 2, 6, 11 2’, 5’ 3, 5–6, 12 2, 4, 7 4–6, 11 3, 5, 12 2, 7 2, 4, 8 4, 6, 10 3, 12–13, 17 2–3, 7 3–4, 10 1’–2’, 6’ 3–4, 10 2, 7 2, 4–5, 8, r. 7 3, 5–6, 11 5, 10 2, 6 1, 3 7’–8’ 4, 7–8, 13 3’–4’

244 chapter three

ina UGU EN-šúnu (ina) Ömu ša X tadÊnu /erÊbu (Š) . . . LÚ.UN.MEŠ uÉû (Š)

Text 129 (SAA XII 16) 190 PN ikkÊru—4 [ZI.MEŠ]; 191 PN—4 ZI.[MEŠ];

Text 128 (SAA XII 7) 188 7 ZI—PN 189 [3 ZI]—PN

3. ROYAL GRANTS

192 PN—2 ZI.[MEŠ];

193 PN—7 ZI.[MEŠ]

91: 13–21: de-e-nu . . . ina kÖm X . . . ni-pa-làh-ka. PN . . . PAB 5 ZI.MEŠ ana PN i-pal-lu-hu. man-nu ša X tadÊnu ZÁH ina UGU ra-me-ni-šú-nu 92: 1–11: PN [DUMU-šá] kÖm X ana P[N] i-pal-l[u-hu]. [ . . . ] ina UGU-hi [. . .] 93: 1–4: de-e-nu . . . ------------------ ana ma-aš-ka-nu-tú 1 MÍ DUMU.MÍ-šá ina É-ka ta-sa-kan

(continued on next page)

UN.MEŠ uÉû (Š).

86: 5–r. 1: kÖm X ¤ PN… PAB 7 ZI.MEŠ ana šaparte ina IGI PN šakin -----------------------ina Ömu ša X tadÊnu UN.MEŠ……uÉû (Š) 87: 7–r. 8: PN… --------------------- ana šaparte šakin me-tu hal-qu ina UGU EN-šú-nu ina Ömu ša X erÊbu (Š) . . . UN.MEŠ uÉû (Š) 88: 1–3: PN EN . . . UN.MEŠ ta-da-ni 4–13: PAB 27 ZI.MEŠ… kÖm X ana šaparte šakin [………………………………………..………………………………..….….] 89: 1–3: PN [EN] UN.MEŠ… ta-da-an 14–r. 6: PN . . . ---------ina kÖm X ana šaparte šakin ---------------man-nu š[a X] erÊbu (Š) [UN.MEŠ…] uÉû (Š) 90: 6–10: PN . . . --------------- ana šaparte ša[kin] ---------------Ömu ša X [tadÊnu] UN.MEŠ u[Éû] (Š) 94: 5–8: PN . . . [PAB 5 ZI.MEŠ ku]-um X kam-mu-su [. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] 95:1–8: [PN]ARAD-šá PN . . . PAB 4 LÚ.ZI.M[EŠ] . . . [ana šaparte ša]kin kÖm X ina IGI PN . . . [šum-m]a X la id-din P[N ù UN.MEŠ-šu zar]ip laqi . . . 96: 1–r. 2: X ha-bu-li-š[u P]N . . . tadÊnu. PN . . . PAB 3 ZI.MEŠ TA* IGI . . . ip-ta-¢ar. [k]Öm ru-bé-e šá X ana PN i-p[al-lu-hu. lu-u . . . [lu-u . . . ]-šu ša [X ana ] PN [tadÊnu UN.MEŠ u]Éû (Š)

PN EN LÚ.UN.MEŠ SUM-ni . . . kÖm X ¤ PN… PAB X (LÚ.)ZI.MEŠ ana šaparte šakin/kammus

2. PLEDGED PEOPLE

Appendix C (cont.)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people 245

250 255 260 265 269 273

--- PN

Text 133 (SAA XII 86) 249 PN—3 LÚ.ZI.MEŠ; 254 PN—2 [ZI.MEŠ]; 259 PN—3 ZI.MEŠ; 264 PN—10 ZI.[MEŠ]; 268 PN—2 ZI.MEŠ; 272 PN—14 ZI.MEŠ;

Text 134 (SAA XII 98) 275 PN ikkÊru—3 ZI --- PN

251 PN—4 Z[I.MEŠ]; 256 PN—3 [ZI.MEŠ]; 261 PN—4 ZI.[MEŠ]; 266 PN—5 Z[I.MEŠ]; --- PN—ÏdÏnû 274 PN—2 ZI.MEŠ;

196 PN—5

Text 131 (SAA XII 27) --- [PN] nu[karibbu]—[… ZI.MEŠ]; --- [P]N nukaribbu—[… ZI.MEŠ];

--- [PN] nu[karibbu] --- [P]N nukaribbu

—[… ZI.MEŠ]; —[… ZI.MEŠ];

--- [P]N nukaribbu 197 [P]N nukaribbu

(continued on next page)

—[… ZI.MEŠ]; —2 [ZI.MEŠ];

PAB 5 ZI.MEŠ PAB 7 ZI.MEŠ PAB 3 PAB 3 PAB 3 PAB 6 1 DUMU PAB 5 PAB 4 --- PN—ÏdÏnû

276 PN rÊxiu—3 ZI a-di UDU.MEŠ-šú

252 PN—3 LÚ.ZI.MEŠ; 253 PN—4 LÚ.ZI.MEŠ; 257 PN—3 ZI.MEŠ; 258 PN—7 ZI.[MEŠ]; 262 PN—4 ZI.MEŠ; 263 PN—4 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN—ÏdÏnû 267 PN—2 ZI.MEŠ; 270 PN—4 ZI.MEŠ; 271 PN—4 ZI.MEŠ; [PAB XX L]Ú.ZI.MEŠ

Text 132 (SAA XII 87) 241 P[N1] [MÍ-šú]; PN2, DUMU-šú Éa-hur-tú; 2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ 242 PN1 MÍ-[šú; 1 DUMU] Éa-hur-tú; 1 DUMU par-su 3 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ 243 PN1 MÍ-šú; 1 DUMU par-su 244 PN1 1 DUMU Éa-hur-tú; 1 DUMU par-(su) 245 PN1 MÍ-šú; 1 DUMU par-(su) 246 PN1 MÍ-šú; 3 DUMU.MEŠ Éa-hur-ti; 1 GA 247 PN1 MÍ-šú; 2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ 248 PN1 MÍ-šú; 2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ-šú --- PN—ÏdÏnû --- PN—ÏdÏnû --- PN—ÏdÏnû --- PN—ÏdÏnû PAB 45 ZI.MEŠ URU.arba-il-a-a a-na LÚ.qa-tin-ú-te a-na DN ad-din-šú-nu-ti

PN—15 LÚ.ZI.MEŠ; PN—5 ZI.MEŠ; PN—5 ZI.MEŠ; PN—3 ZI.MEŠ; PN—7 ZI.[MEŠ]; PN—2 ZI.MEŠ;

195 PN—5;

Text 130 (SAA XII 17) 194 PN—4;

Appendix C (cont.)

246 chapter three

PN MÍ-šú PAB 2; PN —2 Z[I.MEŠ]; [PN —… ZI.]MEŠ; PN —ÏdÏnû; PN1 [PN2,] PN3, [……..…-šú], [P]N1, LÚ. […] PN2, PN3, PN4, ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú, fPN; PN —2 ZI.MEŠ; PN —[……………..]; PN; fPN —2 DUMU.MEŠ-šá; PN rÊ’iu immeru—3 ZI.MEŠ;

--- PN —[… ZI.MEŠ] 201 [P]N —2 ZI.MEŠ; 203 PN —2 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN —[……….…]; fPN4, AMA(-šú) 4 ZI.MEŠ; fPN5, AMA-šú [5 ZI.MEŠ]; --- fPN; --- fPN —[…………..]; --- PN —ÏdÏnû; --- PN; --- fPN [. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .]; --- P[N] […….];

(continued on next page)

199 P[N] —4 ZI.MEŠ; 202 PN —2 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN —[ . . . . . . . . .]; --- PN —ÏdÏnû; --- PN […………]; --- fPN; --- fPN; 207 PN —2 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN —ÏdÏnû; --- PN; 209 fPN —3 DUMU.MEŠ-šá; 211 PN1 rÊ’iu immeru, fPN2, MÍ-šú; 2 DUMU. MEŠ-šú PAB 4; 212 PN1, fPN2 [MÍ-šú; PAB 2]; --- [PN]—[X] ZI[.MEŠ]; [PN……….] PAB 6 rÊ’iu immerÒ 213 PN rÊdi gammalÖ—2 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN rÊdi gammal[Ö—x ZI.MEŠ]; --- PN rÊdi [gammalÖ]—x ZI.MEŠ]; 214 PN rÊdi gammalÖ—2 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN rÊdi gammalÖ—ÏdÏ[nû]; --- [PN] rÊdi gammalÖ—ÏdÏ[nû]; 215 PN1, fPN2, MÍ-šú PAB 2; 216 PN—2 ZI.MEŠ; 217 PN—2 ZI.[MEŠ]; --- P[N išpÊru burrumu]; 218 PN išpÊru burrumu—2 ZI.MEŠ; 219 PN išpÊru burrumu—2 ZI.MEŠ; 220 [PN ]—3 ZI.MEŠ; --- [PN]; 221 PN —2 ZI.MEŠ; 222 PN —2 ZI.MEŠ; --- P[N —x ZI.MEŠ]; --- [P]N —ÏdÏnû; --- fPN; --- PN —ÏdÏnû; --- PN —ÏdÏnû; 223 fPN —[x] DUMU.MEŠ-šá; --- P[N]; --- P[N]; --- PN —ÏdÏnû; --- fPN; --- fPN; ---- fPN; --- fPN; --- fPN; --- fPN; --- fPN; --- PN LÚ. qa-[tin xx]; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------224 PN Êpiu —4 Z[I.MEŠ]; 225 PN ikkÊru —6 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN ikkÊru —[x ZI.MEŠ]; 226 P[N] ikkÊru —2 ZI.MEŠ; 227 [PN] ikkÊru —4 ZI.[MEŠ]; 228 PN ikkÊru —6 ZI.MEŠ; --- PN ikk[Êru] —[x ZI.MEŠ]; 229 [P]N ikkÊru —12 ZI.[MEŠ]; --- PN rÊ’iu —[… ]; 230 P[N] —4 ZI.MEŠ; 231 PN —2 Z[I.MEŠ]; --- PN —[x Z]I.MEŠ; --- PN —[…………]; 232 PN—5 ZI.MEŠ; --- P[N —… ZI.MEŠ]; 233 [PN]—2 Z[I.MEŠ]; 234 [PN—x+]2 ZI.MEŠ; 235 [PN] 4 ZI.MEŠ; 236 [PN—x+]2 ZI.MEŠ; 237 [PN—x+]2 ZI.MEŠ; 238 [PN—x+]3 ZI.MEŠ; 239 [PN—x+]2 ZI.MEŠ; 240 [PN—x+]2 ZI.MEŠ; --- [PN—x] ZI[.MEŠ]

198 200 ----204 205 --206 ----208 210

Appendix C (cont.)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people 247

Text 135 (SAA XI 201) 277 PN1 A PN2 nukaribbu 278 PN1 nukaribbu PN2 A-šú Éa ---- PN1 nukaribbu 279 PN1 ditto 280 PN1 nukaribbu 281 PN1 nukaribbu PN2 A-šú Éa 282 PN1 nukaribbu 283 PN1 TA* ŠÀ karkadinnu; nukaribbu 284 PN1 TA* ŠÀ nuhatummÖ; nukaribbu 285 PN1 nukaribbu 286 PN1 nukaribbu A-šú Éa

4. “HARRAN CENSUS”—Scribe A

223 fPN

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 A GA 1A4 1A4

1 MÍ

PN2 A-šú 4 MÍ MÍ MÍ MÍ MÍ MÍ

2 MÍ.MEŠ

PN3 A-šú 4

[x] DUMU.MEŠ-šá

2 DUMU.MEŠ-šú

211 PN1 rÊ’iu immeru, 212 PN1, 215 PN1,

[PN2,] PN3, [……..…-šú], PN2, PN3, PN4, ŠEŠ.MEŠ-šú, 2 DUMU.MEŠ-šá 3 DUMU.MEŠ-šá

fPN2, MÍ-šú; fPN2 [MÍ-šú;] fPN2, MÍ-šú

MÍ-šú

208 fPN 209 fPN

204 PN1 205 [P]N1, LÚ. […]

Text 131 (SAA XII 27) 198 PN

Appendix C (cont.)

1 DUMU.MÍ 5 1 4 1 DUMU.MÍ ba-tu-su

1 DUMU.MÍ 4 1 3

2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ

fPN4, AMA(-šú) fPN5, AMA-šú

AMA-šú

AMA-šú

PAB 4; [PAB 2];

PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB

5 2 6 3 2 3 7 4

PAB 2 PAB 5

(continued on next page)

4 ZI.MEŠ [5 ZI.MEŠ];

PAB 2

248 chapter three

P[N1] P[N1] PN1 PN1 PN1

TA* ŠÀ […] nu[karibbu] P[N2 xxx] rÊ’iu al[pu] PN2, PN3 2 A Éa PN3 A PN4 3 rÊ’iu enzu PN2 A Éa nukaribbu 1A3 maÉÉar qabli PN2 A-šú Éa PN3 A-šú 4

Text 137 (SAA XI 203) ---- PN1 ikkÊru 302 PN1 [… ] ---- MÍ-šú šá PN1 [… ] 303 PN1 ikkÊ[ru] 304 P[N1] ikkÊru ---- 1 rÊxiu immeru pa-Éu 305 PN1 A PN2 ikkÊru 306 PN1 ikkÊru 307 PN1 rÊ’iu

[PN2? . . . ] 1 A-šú Éa

PN2

MÍ MÍ.MEŠ MÍ MÍ

[x] MÍ [x]

[1 DUMU].MÍ 4

1 MÍ […………………………………….]

2 MÍ.MEŠ

1] DUMU.MÍ 3

2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ 3 1 DUMU.MÍ UD 1 DUMU.MÍ 3

1 1 1 2 2 1

MÍ MÍ MÍ MÍ.MEŠ MÍ.[MEŠ MÍ

1 DUMU.MÍ 4

1 [DUMU.MÍ x] 1 DUMU.MÍ UD 1 DUMU.MÍ 3 1 DUMU.MÍ UD

1 MÍ

1 MÍ

1 3 1 1

[…………..…..……]

[PN2] A 4

Text 136 (SAA XI 202) 292 P[N1] [ikkÊru] PN2 [xxx] PN3 [xxx] ---- PN1 A PN2 293 PN1 A PN2 [ikkÊru] P[N2 xxx] 294 [PN1] [ikkÊ]ru [PN] A-šú Éa 1 DUMU GA 295 PN1 nukaribbu [PN2 xx] Éa—rest broken away 296 PN1 ikkÊru 297 PN1 ikkÊru PN2 A-šú Éa PN3 A-šú Éa PN4 A-šú 4 298 PN1 A PN2 TA* ŠÀ išpÊru; ikkÊru PN2 A-šú 4 299 PN1 TA* ŠÀ […]; maÉÉar [qabli] PN2 A-[šú x] 300 PN1 A PN2 rÊ’iu imÊru PN2 PAB-šú [x] 1 DUMU 3 301 PN1 A [PN2] ikkÊru; TA* ŠÀ […] PN2 […] ---- PN1 ikkÊru ---- PN1 nuÊru

287 288 289 290 291

Appendix C (cont.)

[PAB x] PAB 4 PAB [x]

PAB 3 [PAB x]

P[AB 3]

[PAB] 4 PAB 6 PAB 4 PAB [4] PAB [6] PAB 3

[PAB x] PAB 5

(continued on next page)

3 ZI

1 NIN-su [1 x]

PAB [?]

[PAB 4?] PAB 8 PAB 4 PAB 4 PAB 3

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people 249

Text 140+141 (SAA XI 207+208) 320 PN nu[karibbu] 3 DUMU.MEŠ 2 MÍ.MEŠ 321 PN ditto […………………………] MÍ.MEŠ 322 PN [? DUMU].MEŠ-šú 1 MÍ

“HARRAN CENSUS”—Scribe B Text 143+144 (SAA XI 213+214) 344 [PN …….] 345 [PN] ikkÊru [………] 346 PN ikkÊru [………]

(continued on next page)

1 MÍ 1 MÍ 1 MÍ

PAB 10 PAB [6]

5 3 2 8 6 [2] 3 3

PAB 5

PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB PAB

Text 145 (SAA XI 218) 355 [PN1………………………………………………………………………………………………………] 1 3 [x X.]MEŠ 356 PN1 maÉÉar [qabli] PN2 A-šú 4 PN3 A-[šú x] PN4 A-šú [x] 1 MÍ 1 DUMU.MÍ 4

4 ZI.MEŠ

2 MÍ.MEŠ 1 MÍ 1 MÍ 1 MÍ 1 DUMU.MÍ ba-tu-su 1 4 1 MÍ 1 DUMU.MÍ ba-tu-su 1 4 1 Éa? 1 MÍ 1 MÍ 1 MÍ

PAB 6 PAB 6

PN1 [ikkÊru] PN2, PN3, 2 A Éa PN1 A PN2 nukaribbu PN2 A 3 PN1 A PN2 ditto [PN1] A PN2 [nu]karibbu PN3 [xx] PN4 1 A Éa PN5 3 PN6 UD PN1 ikkÊru PN2 A 3 PN1 [… ] PN1 [… ] PN2 A-šú É[a] PN1 rÊ’iu immeru PN2 PAB 1 rÊ’iu immeru 6 LÚ* ra-qu-ti PAB 7

Text 138–139 (SAA XI 205+206) 316 PN1 ikkÊru 317 PN1 nukaribbu PN2 A-šú Éa PAB 2 --- PN[1 ……………………] --- PN1 DUMU [PN2] rÊ’iu immeru 318 P[N1] A PN2 rÊ’iu immeru PN2, PN3 [1] A GA 2 MÍ.MEŠ 319 PN1 ikkÊru PN2, PN3, 2 PAB.MEŠ-šú Éa PN4 4 2 MÍ.MEŠ

308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 -----

Appendix C (cont.)

250 chapter three

1 DUMU PN na-Éa-an-ni

1 DUMU 2 DUMU.MEŠ

Text 142 (SAA XI 209) 329 PN ditto PAB 8 LÚ*.qa-tin.[MEŠ] 330 PN atû 331 PN rÊ’iu immeru [1 DU]MU 332 PN ditto 5 DUMU.MEŠ 333 PN nuka[ribbu] 1 DUMU 334 P[N nukaribbu] 1 DUMU 335 PN ditto 336 PN ditto 2 DUMU.[ME]Š 337 PN naggÊru 1 DUMU 338 PN pÖÉÊiu [x DUMU.MEŠ 339 PN nuka[ribbu] 340 PN ikkÊru 2 DUMU.MEŠ 341 PN nukaribbu 1 DUMU 342 PN rÊ’iu immeru 1 DUMU 343 PN […] 1 DUMU

PN ikkÊru PN [ikkÊru] PN ditto PN ditto PN ditto PN [ditto] PN ra-qu PN LÚ* ? TA* ŠÀ ZÁH.MEŠ ša --- PN nukaribbu 328 PN ditto

323 --324 325 --326 --327

Appendix C (cont.)

1 MÍ 1 MÍ 1 MÍ 2 MÍ.MEŠ 1 [MÍ] [2 M]Í.MEŠ 1 MÍ 1 MÍ 1] MÍ 1 MÍ 2 MÍ.MEŠ 3 MÍ.MEŠ 3 MÍ.MEŠ [….]

1 [MÍ?]

1 MÍ

1 MÍ

2 MÍ.[MEŠ]

1 MÍ 2 MÍ.MEŠ

[? MÍ.M]EŠ

----347 348 349 --350 ------------------351 352 353 354 1 2 5 2

MÍ MÍ.MEŠ MÍ.MEŠ MÍ.MEŠ

3 MÍ.MEŠ

MÍ.MEŠ 3 MÍ.MEŠ 1 MÍ

(continued on next page)

[PN] ikkÊ[ru] P[N] LÚ* ša U.SAG[.MEŠ-šú] PN […………………………………………] PN ikkÊru PAB-šú 1 DUMU PN ikkÊru 1 DUMU PN rÊ’iu alpu PN nukari[bbu] 1 DUMU PN [rÊ’iu] immeru PN rÊ’iu […] PN LÚ* UŠ–A.A[B.BA] PN LÚ* ŠU. I PN LÚ* šá–[…] PN LÚ* … PN LÚ* SI[PA] fPN, fPN, fPN, fPN fPN […] PN […] 1 DUMU PN ditto (= nukaribbu) PN [ikkÊru] 2 DUMU.MEŠ PN nukaribbu

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people 251

Text 148 (SAA XI 210 = “HARRAN CENSUS”—Scribe B) 374 PN LÚ*. ditto 1 DUMU 375 PN LÚ*. ditto 2 [DUMU.MEŠ]

4 [A.MEŠ-šú] PAB 2 A.MEŠ-[(šá) PN3] [A-šú] [……] 2 A.MEŠ PN3

PAB[2] […]

[PAB] 2

PAB 4 […] PAB 2 […] PAB 4 [PAB 2] [PAB 3?]

PAB 3 PAB 4

P[Nx+2] […] PNx+3 GA-šú [x] šá PNx+4 PN4 Éa PN5 5 2 A.[MEŠ-šú] [3 A.MEŠ-šú] [A-šú x?] 3 A.MEŠ-šú A-šú [2? A].MEŠ-šú

PAB 4

PN4 4 PN5 Éa A PN6

(continued on next page)

Text 149 (SAA XI 211 = “HARRAN CENSUS”—Scribe B) 376 PN ikkÊru 2 D[UMU.MEŠ] 377 PN [ikkÊru] 1 DUMU 1 [PAB?]

Text 147 (SAA XI 220 = “HARRAN CENSUS”—Scribe A) 363 PN1 [PN2], PN[3] 364 PN1 P[N2], P[N3], P[N3], 365 PN1 PN[2], 366 P[N1] A P[N2] PN3, P[N4], PN5 367 [PN1] [P]N2, 368 [PN1] [P]N2, [PN3], 369 [PN1] PN2, [PN3], [2?] A.MEŠ-šú [PAB 3?] 370 [PN1] PN2, 371 [P]N1 P[N2, P]N3 [PN4], PN5 --PN1, [PN2], 372 P[N1] [P]N2, 373 [PN1] [PN2] ………PNx 3, --PN1, PN2,

Text 146 (SAA XI 219 = “HARRAN CENSUS”—Scribe A) 357 PN1 A PN2 PN3 A-šú Éa 358 PN1 A PN2, ditto PN3 A-šú 5 359 PN1 A PN2, ditto PN3 A-šú Éa --- PN1 A PN2 PN3, PN4 PAB.MEŠ-šú 5 --- PN1 PN2 PAB-šú Éa 360 […………………………………P[Nx+1] [……..] 361 PN1 A PN2 PN3 A-šú 5 362 PN1 ditto, PN2 ditto, 2A PN3 PN4 A-šú Éa

“HARRAN CENSUS”—“FATHERS AND SONS”

Appendix C (cont.)

252 chapter three

(continued on next page)

Text 151 (SAA XV 181) 390 PN1 PN2 PAB-šú 1 DUMU GA 2 MÍ PAB 5 391 PN1 PN2 PAB-šú 1 DUMU 4 2 MÍ PAB 5 392 PN1 1 DUMU 4 1 MÍ 2 DUMU.MÍ PAB 5 393 PN1 PN2 DUMU 5 3 MÍ PAB 5 394 PN1 PN2 PAB-šú 3 MÍ PAB 5 395 PN1 PN2 PAB-šú 1 MÍ PAB 3 396 PN1 PN2 ušandû 1 DUMU 3 2 MÍ PAB 5 397 fPN NIN-sa PAB 2 DUMU.MÍ PN PAB 12 ERIM.KALAG.MEŠ; 1 DUMU 5; 2 DUMU 4; 1 DUMU 3; 1 DUMU GA; 15 MÍ.MEŠ; 2 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ; PAB-ma 35 ERIM. KALAG.MEŠ ZI

Text 150 (ND 2443+) 378 PN—X ZI.[MEŠ] 379 PN—X ZI.[MEŠ] 380 PN—X ditto 381 PN—X ditto 382 PN—X ditto 383 PN—X ditto 384 PN—X ditto 385 PN—X ditto 386 PN—X ditto 387 PN—X ditto 388 PN—X ditto 389 PN—X ditto

5. DEPORTEES AND DISPLACED PERSONS

Appendix C (cont.)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people 253

1 3 [ru]

Text 154 (SAA XI 169) 402 PN1 1 MÍ 403 PN1 1 MÍ

1 L[Ú……] PAB 5

PAB 8

PN3 DUM[U-šú] fPN4 (MÍ-šú?), fPN5, fPN6, fPN7, fPN8—PAB 4 DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ-šú PAB 7 qi-in-nu

1 DUMU-NIN

2-ta GEMÉ.MEŠ-š[ú]

(continued on next page)

Text 157 (SAA XI 173) 408 P[N1 ikkÊru] [1?] MÍ-šú 1-en DUMU-[šú x] šá-ni-ú DUMU-šú [x] 1-et DUMU.MÍ-su TUR-[xxx] 2-ta MÍ.ba-tu-la-[te PAB 7 ZI.MEŠ 409 P[N1] ikkÊru MÍ-šú; 2 DUMU.M[EŠ-šú]; [1?] Éa-hu-ur-t[i]; DUMU.MÍ-su 4 ru-ú-¢[u]; DUMU-šú 3 ru-ú-¢u; [DUMU]-šú šá-ni-ú pir-su [PAB 8] ZI.MEŠ 410 P[N1] ikkÊru [1? MÍ]-šú DUMU-šú Éa-hu-ur-t[ú ]; [……. x] ru-ú-¢[u]; [……. x] ru-ú-¢[u]; […………………………………………….]

Text 156 (SAA XI 154) 407 PN1 LÚ.še-lap-pa-a-a A PN2 É PN9 . . . PAB 14 ZI.[MEŠ]

[1 DU]MU.MÍ

2-ta DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ-šú

Text 155 (SAA XI 174) 404 PN1 LÚ*.3–šú 3 DUMU.MEŠ 2 MÍ.[MEŠ] 405 PN1 L[Ú……] 1 MÍ 406 PN1 ša—BAD-HAL 2 LÚ*.ARAD.MEŠ 2 MÍ.[MEŠ] PAB 16 ERIM (adi) ZI.MEŠ-šú-nu; …… PAB 20 ERIM (adi) ZI

2 DUMU.MEŠ-šú

Text 153 (SAA XVII 114) 401 PN1

Text 152 (CTN II 113) 398 [PN1] [PN]2 MÍ-šú PN3 D[UMU] 5 ru PN4 DUMU 4 PN5 DUMU 4 PN6 DUMU ša GAB PN7 DUMU. MÍ 4 ru PN8 GEMÉ-šú x PAB 8 399 [PN1] [PN]2 MÍ-xxx [PN3, PN4, PAB? ME]Š-šú [PN5 DUMU] 5 ru [PN6 DUMU.MÍ ba]-tú-su [PN7 DUMU. M]Í 4 ru [PAB 7?] 400 [PN1] [P]N2 MÍ-šú [……….]

Appendix C (cont.)

254 chapter three

MÍ-šú ša PN1

AMA-[šú]

[…]

AMA-šú ŠEŠ-šú NIN-su

DUMU.MÍ-su D[UMU.MÍ-su]

2 DUMU.MEŠ-šú

DUMU-šú DUMU-šú

3 DUMU.MÍ.M[EŠ-šú [DUMU.MÍ]-su

GEMÉ-šú GEMÉ-šú

(continued on next page)

PN[2]; [PN3]; PN4. PAB 3 [DUMU.MEŠ? X?] [PN5, D]UMU GA; 2 [MÍ.MEŠ/DUMU.MÍ.MEŠ]

MÍ-šú MÍ-šú MÍ-šú MÍ-šú

[MÍ]-šú

MÍ-šú 3 DUMU.MEŠ-šú MÍ-šú

2 DUMU—PN1

[DUMU/ DUMU.MÍ-šú/su] pir-su [DUMU/ DUMU.MÍ-šú/su] GA

Text 161 (SAA XV 309) 423 [PN1] [……………] [Éa]-hur-[tu]; [………] 4 ru-¢[u]; D[…….] PAB 7 ZI.M[EŠ]

Text 160 (SAA XI 200) 422 [PN1]

Text 159 (SAA XI 146) 415 PN1 416 PN1 AMA-šú ŠEŠ-šú 417 [P]N1 418 PN1 419 PN1 AMA-šú 420 PN1 421 PN1 AMA-šú --- [PN1]

Text 158 (SAA XI 172) 412 --- PN --- PN 413 PN 414 PN karkadinnu PAB 17 ZI.MEŠ

411 [P]N1 [PAB 3 ZI.MEŠ] PAB-ma 1 LAL-¢i a-na 30 ZI.MEŠ

Appendix C (cont.)

terminology, formulation of texts and status of the people 255

Text 167 (SAA XI 196) 434 P[N1] ša-rÏši

Text 166 (SAA XI 195) 432 [P]N1 rÊ’iu […] 1 DUMU pir 433 [PN1] [1 DUMU] 4

Text 165 (SAA XI 194) 429 PN1 1 DUMU 430 fPN1 3 DUMU.MEŠ 431 fPN1 1 DUMU

Text 164 (SAA XI 181) 427 [PN1] MÍ-šú 428 PN1 nukaribbu MÍ-šú

1 DUMU 3

Text 163 (SAA XI 199) 425 [P]N1 [2 DUMU.MEŠ ?] 426 [PN1] 2 DUMU.MEŠ-šú

Text 162 (SAA XV 303) --- [P]N 424 [fPN] [D]UMU.MÍ-sa

Appendix C (cont.)

AMA-šú

2 DU[MU/DUMU.MÍ GA]

1 MÍ[-šú

1 MÍ [1 DUMU?]MÍ

UN.MEŠ-šú

1 GEMÉ

PAB 2

PAB 3] PAB [4] PAB 2

PAB 5 [….] PAB 4 [….]

256 chapter three

PART TWO

CHAPTER FOUR

FAMILY TYPES

The families of the lower stratum in the Neo-Assyrian Period are divided into three main types:1 (1) Nuclear/Simple Family (2) Extended Family (3) Multiple-Family Kinship Group. In each type the family may include attachés who have no blood ties to the family members and who are not married to any of them, such as slaves, apprentices and others.2 Single brothers (and sisters) that lived together in the same house are not dened in this book as a family except in the case of a married man whose single brother lives with him (see Introduction). A single person (including eunuchs) with a maid that he owns who lives with him in the same house are also not dened here as a family; but a son, including a eunuch, who lives with his mother are dened as a nuclear family of type A5. Type A: Nuclear/Simple Family A nuclear/simple family consists of a father, a mother (or more wives), with or without unmarried children. A few nuclear families are singleparent ones, and include a father (widower or divorced) with his child/ children; or a woman (divorced, unmarried, or a widow) with her child/ children. In a few cases the family consists of only two persons, a mother and a son; sometimes she is presented as the family head and sometimes it is her son. Five main types of nuclear families are found: A1: A childless married couple; or a childless man married to several women. A2: A married couple with unmarried child/children; or a man married to several women with unmarried child/children. A3: A male (divorced or widower) with his child or children. A4: A female (unmarried, divorced, or a widow) with her child or children. 1 For family types in pre-industrial societies see Laslett, 1972, pp. 28–32, with earlier bibliography; Wall, 1983, pp. 6–13. 2 For family types in the Ancient Near East see Gelb, 1972, pp. 41–42, 49; Gelb, 1979, pp. 56–60, 75–79; Diakonof, 1985; Roth, 1987, p. 718, note 10.

260

chapter four

A5: A childless male (unmarried, divorced, or widower) with his mother; or with his mother and unmarried brother(s) and sister(s). Type B: Extended Family An extended family consists of a nuclear family (types A1–A4) with additional members, such as a parent, a brother, or a sister of the family head. There are three main types of extended families: B1: Extended upwards: A nuclear family (types A1–A4) with at least one parent of the family head. B2: Extended laterally: A nuclear family (types A1–A4) with at least one unmarried brother or sister of the family head. B3: Extended upwards and laterally: A nuclear family (types A1–A4) with at least one parent and one unmarried brother or sister of the family head. Type C: Multiple-Family Kinship Group A multiple-family kinship group consists of at least two nuclear families that live in the same house and are dened by themselves or by others as one family. There are two main types of multiple-family kinship group: C1: Secondary units up/down: A kinship group that consists of a nuclear family (types A2 or A3) with the family head’s married son (with or without his children). C2: Units all on one level (or: frérèches): A kinship group that consists of a nuclear family (types A1–A3) with the family head’s married brother (with or without his children), or with his divorced/widower brother, with his child/children. A. Families whose type is clear The types of 192 families (43%) of the 447 discussed in this book are clear (see Table 21); the types of another 114 (25%) can be only estimated in general lines (see Table 23), and the types of the remaining 141 (32%) are unclear.3

3

The types of the following 141 families are unclear: Slaves (18): families nos. 14,

family types

261

Of the 192 families whose types are clear, 180 (94%) are nuclear (types A1–A5) and only 12 (6%) are clearly extended families or multiple-family kinship groups. A full list of the families whose type is clear is given below, by their types and working groups. Type A: Nuclear/Simple Family A1: Slaves: families nos. 7–8, 22, 28–29, 36, 48, 50, 55–56, 62, 68, 69, 82–86, 101, 108, 110. Pledged people: families nos. 118, 128. “Land and People”: families nos. 148, 176, 187. Royal grants: families nos. 198, 215. “Harran Census”: families nos. 283, 310, 313, 328, 330, 339. Deportees and displaced people: families nos. 402, 420, 428. A2: Slaves: families nos. 1, 3–6, 27, 42, 49, 58, 67, 77, 96, 100, 114. Pledged people: families nos. 117, 119, 121–123, 127, 135. “Land and People”: families nos. 147, 149, 164–166, 169, 184–186. Royal grants: families nos. 211, 241–243, 245–248. “Harran Census”: families nos. 279, 281–282, 284–286, 289–290, 294, 296–298, 309, 312, 314, 324, 327, 331–332, 334, 336–337, 349, 351, 356. Deportees and displaced people: families nos. 392, 403, 407–409, 412–413, 417, 429. Rations recipients: families nos. 444, 446. A3: Slaves: families nos. 38, 51–52, 70–71. Pledged people: family no. 120. “Land and People”: family no. 146. Royal grants: family no. 244. “Harrran Census”: families nos. 291, 317. Deportees and displaced people: families nos. 397, 411.

16, 18–21, 23–24, 39, 60, 95, 103–107, 111, 116; “Land and People” (19): families nos. 137–140, 151–153, 156–158, 160, 167, 174–175, 177–180, 182; Royal grants (49): families nos. 188–191, 193–196, 199, 210, 212, 220, 224–225, 227–230, 232, 234–240, 249–253, 255–266, 269–272, 275–276; “Harran Census” (37): families nos. 295, 304–307, 316, 321–323, 335, 338, 343–347, 355, 357–361, 363–377; Deportees and displaced people (18): families nos. 378–389, 400, 410, 422–424, 427.

262

chapter four

A4: Slaves: families nos. 10–11, 31, 40–41, 43, 46–47, 63–66, 72–75, 80–81, 88, 90–94, 97, 99. Pledged people: families nos. 130–132. “Land and People”: families nos. 150, 168. Royal grants: family nos. 208–209, 223. Deportees and displaced people: families nos. 430–431. Rations recipients: families nos. 435–443, 445, 447. A5: Slaves: families nos. 2, 9, 57, 59, 76. “Land and People”: family no. 145. “Harrran Census”: families nos. 277, 280. Deportees and displaced people: families nos. 421, 434. Type B: Extended Family B1: Deportees and displaced people: family no. 419. B2: Slaves: families nos. 17, 78. Deportees and displaced people: family no. 395. B3: Slaves: family no. 26. Pledged people: families nos. 124–126. “Land and People”: family no. 159. Deportees and displaced people: family no. 418. Type C: Multiple-Family Kinship Group C1: “Harrran Census”: family no. 288. C2: Slaves: family no. 25. The Nuclear Families (Type A) Clearly attested families of type A are 180 in number: 111 (58%) are of type A1 or A2, and 69 (36%) are of types A3–A5 (see Table 21). In the group of the slave families 47% of the A-type families are of types A1–A2 (35) and 48% are of types A3–A5 (36). But only four of the 35 A-type families attested in the Harran Census are of types A3–A5 (11%), while the others are of types A1–A2 (86%). In most of the other groups the families of types A3–A5 account for 23%–33% of the type-A families (Pledged persons, 4 out of 13 = 31%; “Land and People”, 4 out of 16 = 25%; Royal grants, 4 out of 14 = 29%; Deportees, 6 out of 18 = 33%); the sole exception is the Rations recipients, 11 out of 13 = 85%.

263

family types Table 21: Family Types Fam. Type

Slaves

Pledged People

Land and People

Royal Grants

Harran Census

Deportees and Displaced

RA.

T

A1

21

2

3

2

6

3

–

A2

14

7

9

8

25

9

2

TA 1–2 A3

35 47% 5

9 56% 1

12 70.5% 1

10 71% 1

31 86% 2

12 57% 2

2 15% –

A4

26

3

2

3

–

2

11

A5

5

–

1

–

2

2

–

TA 3–5 TA 1–5 B1 B2 B3 TB 1–3 C1 C2 TC 1–3 GT

36 48% 71 95% – 2 1 3 4% – 1 1 1% 75

4 25% 13 81% – – 3 3 19% – – –

4 23.5% 16 94% – – 1 1 6% – – –

4 29% 14 100% – – – –

4 11% 35 97% – – – –

11 85% 13 100% – – – –

– – –

16

17

14

1 – 1 3% 36

6 29% 18 86% 1 1 1 3 14% – – – 21

13

37 19% 74 39% 111 58% 12 6% 47 25% 10 5% 69 36% 180 94% 1 3 6 10 5% 1 1 2 1% 192 100%

– – –

The percentage of families of types A1–A2 out of the total families whose type is clear ranges from 47% (the slaves group, except for the group of rations recipients—17%) to 86% (the Harran Census). The groups in between show the percentages from 56% to 71% (Pledged persons, 56%; Deportees, 57%; “Land and People”, 70.5%; Royal grants, 71%). The great differences in the percentages of families of types A3–A5 (single-parent families) among these various groups, especially between the slaves and the Harran Census, are probably not accidental but indicate the different status of the families of these groups (see also the discussion in chapter IX below). Families of Type A1: 19% of the families whose type is clear are of type A1 (37 out of 192 families). Most of these families (57%) are of slaves

264

chapter four

(21) and only 16% are listed in the Harran Census (6); the other ten families occur in the other groups: deportees and “Land and People”, three in each group; pledged persons and royal grants, two in each group. All these families are childless married couples, and there is not a single clear case of a childless polygamous family (see chapter VI). It is reasonable to suppose that most families of this type are young couples still without children, and only a few are old childless couples. About 28% of the slave families whose type is clear are of this type (21 out of 75); in the other groups the percentage of type-A1 families is only 13%–18% (see Table 21). Families of Type A2: About 39% of the families whose type is clear are of type A2 (74 out 192 families). Many A2-type families (25 out of 74, or 34%) occur in the Harran census and only 14 (19%) are found in the group of slave families; the other 35 are listed in the other groups as follows: deportees and “Land and People”, nine in each (12%); royal grants, eight; pledged persons, seven; and rations recipients, two. All these families are married couples with at least one unmarried child (on the possibility of A2-type families consisting of a man married to several women with unmarried child/children, see the discussion below). Only 19% of the 75 slave families whose type is clear are type A24—a relatively low gure compared with the data of the Harran Census which indicate that about 25 of the 36 families whose type is clear are type A2 (69%). In the other groups the percentage is 57%–43%: royal grants, 57%; “Land and People”, 53%; pledged persons, 44%; and deportees, 43%. Families of Type A3: 12 families of this type are clearly attested (6% out of 192). In all these families the mother is missing, but it is not clear if she has died or was divorced. In slave families it is also possible that the family was sold without the mother, who remained in the seller’s possession (as a concubine?). The percentage of the A3 families is low in all groups (6%–10%), as follows: in three groups the percentage is 6% (“Land and People”, the Harran Census and pledged persons); slaves and royal grants, both 7%; and deportees, 10%.

4

For a similar percentage (17%) see the families of the rations recipients.

family types

265

Families of Type A4: A quarter of the families whose type is clear are type A4 (47 out of 192, or 25%). This is the second largest group, right after the type-A2 families (39%). In all these families the father is missing, but it is not clear if he is divorced or deceased. In slave families it is also possible that the family was sold without its head who remained in the seller’s possession; in other cases it is possible that the seller himself was the father. Most type-A4 families (55%) are slaves (26 out of 47); not a single typeA4 family is attested in the Harran Census. The other 21 type-A4 families are mainly rations recipients (11 out of 47, or 23%); three families each in the groups of pledged persons and royal grants; and two families each in the groups of deportees and “Land and People”. The percentage of the type-A4 slave families is the highest: 35% (26 out of 75 slave families; with only the exception of the rations recipients—85%). The percentages of the type-A4 families in the other groups are as follows: royal grants, 21%; pledged persons, 19%; “Land and People”, 12%; deportees, 10%; and the Harran Census, 0%. Most of these families consist of only two persons: a female and her son or daughter, generally a maid with her child. As mentioned above, these maids might not be widows or divorcees but were their masters’ concubines who gave birth to bastards, and perhaps were sold at the instigation of the seller’s wife. In the other groups at least in a few texts the head of a type-A4 pledged family is clearly a free widow (see family no. 130), but in other cases type-A4 pledged families are denitely slaves (families nos. 131–132). Families of Type A5: Ten families of this type are clearly evident (5% out of 192). Five of these families are slaves; the other ve are attested in a sale of “Land and People” (one), in the Harran Census (two), and in the group of deportees (two). The percentage of the type-A5 families is low in all groups: Harran Census and “Land and People”, each 6%; slaves, 7%; deportees, 10% (most of these percentages are similar to those of type A3, above). Seven out of these ten families consist of only two persons: an unmarried son with his mother. One family includes a maid (in addition to the son and the mother: deportees, family no. 421); another consists of three people: two brothers with their mother (slaves, family no. 57), and yet another consists ve people: four sons with their mother (“Land and People”, family no. 145).

266

chapter four

The Extended Families (Type B) Only 5% of the families whose type is clear are extended (ten out of 192): one family is of type B1, three are of type B2, and six are of type B3. However, about 30 more families might be extended, but it is unclear (see the discussion below). A Type-B1 Family: The only clear type-B1 family is no. 419: a deported family of ve: a couple with their two sons and the family head’s mother. This is one of the very rare families of three generations (see chapter XI). Type-B2 Families: Three B2 families are attested: nos. 17 and 78 (slaves) and no. 395 (deportees). The last family consists of three people, a couple with the family head’s brother; the rst two are of four people: a couple with the family head’s brother and a son (no. 17) or a daughter (no. 78). Type-B3 Families: Six B3 families are clearly attested: no. 26 (slaves), nos. 124–126 (pledged), no. 159 (“Land and People”), and no. 418 (deportees). Most families consist of four or ve people, with one exception, namely seven people (no. 26: a couple with the family head’s mother, two brothers, and two sisters). Two families (nos. 125 and 159) include one son (see Table 22). Table 22: Families of Type B3

Slaves Pledged persons

Land & People Deportees

Family no.

F

W

S

D

M

BR

Si

T

26 124

+ +

+ +

– –

– –

+ +

2 +

2 –

7 4

125 126 159

+ + +

+ + –

+ – +

– – –

+ + +

+ + +

– – –

5 4 4

418

+

+

–

–

+

+

+

5

family types

267

All families include the family head’s mother and at least one brother, but no daughters. The total of these six families is 29 persons, an average of 4.83. Most of these families probably include a young couple recently married (therefore still childless), probably quite soon after the family head’s father died having “bequeathed” the leadership of the family to one of his sons. The family head’s brothers and sisters are all still young and unmarried. The percentage of the sons out of these 29 persons is very low, namely 7%, while the usual percentage of the sons is about 30%–40% (see chapters V and X). Multiple-Family Kinship Group (Type C) Multiple-family kinship groups are very rare: only two such families are clearly attested (1% out of 192): one is of type C1 and the other of type C2. Even supposing that all 19 families whose type is unclear but that might be a C type family (see Table 23), and also the three largest families of 12, 14 and 15 people (nos. 229, 250 and 272), are all indeed multiple-family kinship groups—type-C families would be only account for about 5% of the 447 families discussed in this book. The C1 Family: The only clear C1 family is no. 288, attested in the Harran Census; it is a family of eight: a cowherd with his two adult sons, three women, and two small children. One of the small children is evidently a grandson, the son of one of the two adult family head’s sons (see the discussion in chapter II, above). The C2 Family: This is clearly a frérèche: two married brothers living in the same place with their wives and children (family no. 25). It is a slave family, most probably a free family enslaved for an unknown reason (probably an economic one). It is a ten-person family: a couple with three sons and two daughters, with the family head’s brother and his two sons (his wife is missing). Family no. 404 is probably also a type-C2 family: it is a deported family of eight: RÏmÏtu, his three sons, a daughter, his sister’s son, and two women; these two might be his wife and sister, since his sister’s son is clearly attested in the text. But since the other woman might be his second wife or even his daughter-in-law, the denition of this family type is not clear (see the discussion below).

268

chapter four Table 23: The Unclear Type Families

Family Type

Slaves

Pledged persons

A AB B ABC BC T

11 11 1 – – 23

1 2 – – – 3

Land Royal Harran and Grants Census People 14 2 – – – 16

25 1 – – – 26

1 12 – 11 4 28

Deportees and Displaced

T

7 5 2 1 3 18

59 33 3 12 7 114

B. Families whose type is unclear The type of 114 families is unclear but can be estimated in general lines (26% out of 447 families). These are divided below into ve main groups: (1) 59 families of type A; (2) 33 families of type A or B; (3) three families of type B; (4) 12 families of types A or B or C; (5) seven families of types B or C (see Table 23). Type-A Families 59 families are probably of type A but there is no possibility of knowing the specic type (A1–A5; see also chapter II, especially Tables 2, 4, 6–10, 12 and 16). Most of these families consist of only two persons, and with such a number the family is bound to be nuclear (the smallest extended family has to have at least three people). 25 families (about 42%), are attested in royal grants;5 11 are recorded in sales of People;6 14 in sales of “Land and People”,7 one is a pledged family (no. 129), one is mentioned in the Harran Census (no. 329), and seven in the group of deportees.8 A few of these families are probably A2-type families, but it is not clear (see, for example, Families nos. 112, 115, 141–144, 155, 170, 183, 398, 432). In other cases it is not clear if the family is of A2-type or A3-type (for example, families nos. 12, 89 and 426).

5 See families nos. 192, 197, 200–203, 205–207, 213–214, 216–219, 221–222, 226, 231, 233, 254, 267–268, 273–274. 6 See families nos. 12, 34–35, 44–45, 87, 89, 98, 112–113, 115. 7 See families nos. 141–144, 154–155, 161–162, 170–173, 181, 183. 8 See families nos. 398, 401, 405, 414, 426, 432–433.

family types

269

Families of Type A or Type B 33 families might be of type A or type B.9 In most of these families it is not clear if one of the family members is the family head’s son or brother (see the discussion below). Four of the families attested in the Harran Census consist of three people: a male with two females (nos. 302, 326, 352, 354). The rst one is attributed to Scribe A, and three others to Scribe B. In the rst case it is reasonable to suppose that the second woman is the second wife of the family head, but she may also be his mother or sister. In the three other cases the possibilities are larger, since Scribe B counts all females in one category. It is unclear if the additional males in Families nos. 37, 53–54, 109 and more are the family head’s sons or brothers, so it is not clear if these families are nuclear or extended. Families nos. 32–33 (which are two of three largest slave families attested in Neo-Assyrian texts), are of ten persons each, and both include slaves, probably acquired before they themselves were enslaved. Family no. 32 includes ten persons: a couple with a suckling son, two slaves, and ve additional members (brothers or daughters); the rst possibility (ve brothers) is the more likely but the other is still possible so the type of this family is unclear. Family no. 33 is also of ten people: the head of the family, his two wives, and three sons. As suggested in chapter II, this family most probably includes three slaves, and the tenth member of the family is its head’s mother or sister or daughter. This uncertainty about the tenth member prevents determination of this family type: it may be nuclear or extended. Family no. 15 consists of a couple with or without a family head’s brother; and in family no. 13 it is not clear if the additional member is the family head’s wife, son or brother. In other families it is also unclear if the additional males are the family head’s sons or brothers, for example, Families nos. 287, 292–293, 301, 303, 311, 315, 318 (The Harran Census); 393, 396, 399, 406, 425 (Deportees). The type of two additional deported families might be A or B: nos. 393 and 406. Both are deported families, and both consist of ve persons: a male with three females and a son (no. 393), or a male with two females and two slaves (no. 406). The identity of the extra females

9 Slaves (11): families nos. 13, 15, 30, 32–33, 37, 53–54, 79, 102, 109; Pledged people (2): families nos. 133–134; “Land and People” (2): families nos. 136, 163; Royal grants (1): family no. 204; “Harran Census” (12): families nos. 287, 292–293, 301–303, 311, 315, 318, 326, 352, 354; Deportees and displaced people (5): families nos. 393, 396, 399, 406, 425.

270

chapter four

in each family is unclear: in no. 393 they might be the family head’s second wife, sister, or mother, but probably not his daughters since in this text the scribe separates the daughters from the women (see family no. 392). It is reasonable that this is an extended family even if this male has two wives. The two women in family no. 406 might be the family head’s wives, but since polygamy is rare, the second female may be his mother or sister (it is also possible that the family head is unmarried and the women are his mother and sister). So again, it is not clear if this family is nuclear or extended. Families of Type B Three families are extended families, nos. 61, 415 and 416: in the former, it is not clear if the additional person is the family head’s brother or mother; nos. 415–416 are clearly extended but their size and structure are unclear (see chapter II). Families of Types A or B or C In 12 cases it is not clear if the family type is A, B, or C: eleven are attested in the Harran Census and only one in the group of deportees. Three of the 11 families attested in the Harran Census are attributed to Scribe A (nos. 278, 299, 308), and the other eight to Scribe B. The rst three families include a male with two “women” and one or two sons: the extra “woman” is clearly not a daughter, but she might be the male’s second wife or his sister, mother, or daughter-in-law. Each of the other eight families has two to ve women and at least one son: No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.

320: 325: 333: 340: 341: 342: 350: 353:

7 5 4 5 5 5 5 8

persons persons persons persons persons persons persons persons

= = = = = = = =

Father Father Father Father Father Father Father Father

+ + + + + + + +

3 2 2 2 3 3 3 5

women women women women women women women women

+ + + + + + + +

3 2 1 2 1 1 1 2

sons sons son sons son son son sons

In all these families the relation of the extra women to the family head is unclear: she might be his second wife, daughter, mother, sister, or daughter-in-law. In the last family, which has ve women and two sons, one of the “women” may even be a granddaughter of the family

family types

271

head, but even so this could still be a nuclear family (a couple with four daughters and two sons, or three daughters and two wives). Family no. 394 (deportees) consists of ve persons: a male, three females, and a brother: it is unclear if it is a type-A5 family (a male with his mother, brother, and two sisters), or a type-B family (a couple with a brother and two sisters or a sister and a mother), or a type-C family (two married brothers with their wives and a sister or a mother). Families of Types B or C Seven families are of type B or C, but denitely not type A: four are attested in the Harran Census (nos. 300, 319, 348, 362) and the other three in the texts indicating deportees and displaced families (nos. 390–391, 404; this last family was already discussed in this chapter: see “The C2 family”, above). Family no. 300 is an extended family of six: the family head, his brother, two young children, and two “women”, who might be his two wives; also possible is that the extra woman is his brother’s wife. Accordingly, the young son and daughter might be his own children or his brother’s; so this family is an extended one, or frérèche. Family no. 319 is probably a multiple-family kinship group (units all on one level), since two brothers of the family head are attested, and it is reasonable to suppose that the second woman is the wife of one of these brothers; but the extra woman could be the family head’s sister or mother, so the type of this family is unclear. Family no. 348 consists of six people: the family head, his brother, and “three women”. It might be a multiple-family kinship group since one of these three women may be the brother’s wife, but there are other possibilities. For example, the extra women might be the family head’s daughters, sisters, or related in other ways, so the type of this family is unclear. Family no. 362 is described in an unusual way: two brothers (Nabûušallim and InÖrta-uÉalli) are presented as the sons of Qunî without the family head being specied. The total (four) indicates that Qunî is not included, and is not the family head, and he might have died. One may conclude that in the view of the Assyrian administration the two brothers lead this family. Two other sons are included in it: IlÊxÒ-abÒ, an adolescent, and Il-dalâ, of ve spans’ height; but it is not clear who is their father, Nabû-ušallim or InÖrta-uÉalli, so it is not clear if it is an extended family or a frérèche.

272

chapter four

Families nos. 390 and 391 are attested in a letter probably sent to Sargon II by AššÖr-bÏlu-taqqin concerning a group of people transferred from Babylonia; both families consist of ve persons: a family head, his son, his brother, and two women. Polygamy, as noted, was extremely rare in this period, but each of these families might be polygamous, although other possibilities are more likely: the extra woman is clearly not the family head’s daughter (since the scribe separates the daughters from the “women”) or daughter-in-law (the sons are small), but she might be his mother, his sister, or his brother’s wife.

CHAPTER FIVE

FAMILY SIZE

Of the 447 families discussed in this book, the size of 327 (73%) is clear; the size of most of the other families (84, or 19%) is unclear but can be estimated; and the size of only 15 families (3%) is wholly uncertain (in most of these cases it is not clear if one family is counted or more). In the other 21 families (5%) only the father and the sons are attested (see discussion below). In this chapter the clear and the unclear data are arranged according to the seven working groups (see Introduction). In each group the clear data are discussed rst and then the unclear, with a perusal of the differences between data dated before and after 681/680 B.C.

A. Slave Families The discussion on the size of the slave families is divided into two main parts: 88 families which size is clear (76% out of 116), and 25 families (21.5%) whose size is unclear but can be estimated (the size of three families—2.5%—cannot be estimated). The determinate data are discussed rst, with data dated before 681/680 B.C. being distinguished from data after that time or whose date is uncertain, and with an indication of the text’s provenance. Accordingly Table 24 presents exclusively the 88 families whose size is clear; and the 28 families dated before 681 B.C. are separated from the 55 families dated after 680 B.C. and from the ve families whose date is uncertain. The extreme left column in this table displays the number of persons in each family; in the next column are the numbers of the families of each size; the third shows the total number of families of each size (= T); and the fourth presents the total of persons included in these families (= P). Columns V–VII present data later than 680 B.C., and the undated data are set out in the next three columns. In the last three columns the grand total of the families of all periods is listed (= GT), the total number of persons in these families (= GP), and the percentage of these families.

274

chapter five Table 24: Family Size: Slaves

10 9 8 7 6 T 5 4

800–681

T

25, 32, 33 – – 4*, 13, 26, 1*, 19, 27

3 – – 3 3 9 2 3

6, 18 17, 20, 35

T 3 3, 5, 11#, 14

2

T GT AV

2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 22#, 28, 29, 31, 36

5 4

10

14 28

P

After 680

T

P

?

T

P

GT

GP

30 – – – – – 21 37 18 – 69 10 61, 77 12 49, 52, 53, 54, 78, 81 22 12 38, 42, 46, 57, 58, 67, 70, 96, 100 20 40, 41#, 43, 47, 48, 50, 51, 55, 56, 59, 62, 63, 64, 65*, 66, 68, 69, 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91#, 92, 93, 94, 97, 99 32 123 4.39

– – – 1 – 1 2 6

– – – 7 – 7 10 24

– – – – – – 111 115

– – – – – – 1 1

– – – – – – 5 4

3 – – 4 3 10 5 10

30 – – 28 18 76 25 40

8 9

34 27

–

2 –

9 –

15 13

65 39

17 15

37

74

3

6

50

100

57

46 55

101 142 2.58

3 5

6 15 3

63 88

139 280 3.18

72 100

101, 108, 110

Provenance of Texts: 3 = Aššur; 4* = Calah; 94 = DÖr-Katlimmu; 26 = Nineveh; 11# = MaxallÊnÊte T = Total of Families; P = Total of persons; AV = Average; GT = Grand total of Families; GP = Grand total of persons

%

11

family size A.1

275

Slave Families of Known Size

The 88 slave families whose size is known are divided into three subgroups according to their size: large (10–6 persons), medium (5–4 persons), and small (3–2 persons: see Table 24). Large Families (10–6 persons): Ten out of the 88 slave families consist of 10–6 persons (11%). The three largest families are of ten members: all three were bought before 681. Seven families consist of seven or six persons: they were also bought before 681 or in 680 (no. 37). Three of these large slave families have a few members dened as “slave”: two maids in family no. 13 (a family of seven persons); and two or three slaves in families nos. 32–33 (each of ten persons). Most families occur in texts from Nineveh; the exceptions are nos. 1 and 4 (from Calah). Medium Families (5–4 persons): Fifteen out of 88 slave families (17%) consist of four or ve persons. Only ve consist of ve souls and the other ten are of four persons each. Most texts in which these families are attested originate in Nineveh. The exceptions are two families of four persons from Aššur, which are the largest slave families from this city. Small Families (3–2 persons): The great majority of slave families in the Neo-Assyrian period (studied in this book), 63 out of 88 (72%), are very small, only two or three persons. Most families of this group, 50 out of 88 (57%), consist of only two persons, and the other 13 have three members. In the period before 681 B.C. 14 out of 28 families (50%) consist of two or three persons, but after 680 small families of two or three persons account for 84% (46 out of 55). All slave families from DÖr-Katlimmu consist of three persons (two cases) or two persons (ve cases); a similar picture emerges from the texts from Aššur and MaxallÊnÊte: eight out of the 10 slave families originating in Aššur are of two or three persons, as are the two families from MaxallÊnÊte. Family Size Before and After 681/680 B.C.: A Comparison Signicant differences exist between data dated before and after 681/680 B.C. Twenty-eight families dated to the earlier period consist of 123 persons, an average of 4.39: nine are of 10–6 persons (32%), ve of

276

chapter five

5–4 persons (18%), and 14 of 3–2 persons (50%). In the later period (after 680 B.C.) there is a drastic decline in the size of the slave families: 55 families consist of only 142 persons, an average of 2.58: about two thirds of the slave families in this period consist of only two persons, and additional 16% of three persons; only three out of these 55 families consist of ve or more persons. The great differences between the earlier and the later groups of families cannot be accidental. They probably reect a decline in the size of the average slave family in the seventh century, and especially the second half: a comparison of the data dated to 680–649 B.C. with those dated after 648 B.C. indicates that the average slave family in the period between 680–649 was 2.81 persons (27 families with 76 people), and after 648 B.C. the average was only 2.36 (28 families with 66 people). A.2

Slave Families of Indeterminate Size

The size of 28 slave families is unclear: in 25 cases it can be estimated and in the other three (nos. 16, 21, 24) it is not clear if one family is attested or more. Five out of the 23 families are dated before 681 B.C. (nos. 12, 15, 23, 30 and 34): one consists of two or three persons (no. 15), one of probably three (no. 23), one of three or four (no. 30), and two of four or ve persons (nos. 12 and 34). So these ve families amount to 16–20 persons, an average of 3.2–4.0. These families are relatively smaller than the 28 whose size is known and which are dated to the same period (their average size is 4.39 people). If the unclear data are added to the known, the change will be negligible: the average will be 4.21–4.33 (139–143: 33) instead of 4.39. Nine out of the 25 families are dated after 680 B.C. (nos. 39, 44–45, 60, 72, 79, 89, 95 and 98): one consists of at least two persons (no. 72), two consist of two-three persons (nos. 89, 98), three are probably of three persons (nos. 44–45, 79), two consist of more than three (nos. 39, 60), and one of more than four persons (no. 95): a total of over 25 or over 27 persons, an average of over 2.78 or over 3. These families are relatively larger than the families of known size in this period (average of 2.58). Addition of the indeterminate to the determinate data again results in an insignicant change: the average will be over 2.61 or over 2.64 (over 167 or over 169: 64) instead of 2.58. The date of 11 of these 25 families are unclear: four consist of at least two people (nos. 105–107 and 113); one of three or four persons (no. 112), two at least of four (nos. 114, 116); one of at least ve (no. 109); two of ve or six (nos. 102 and 104), and one of four to six people

family size

277

(no. 103): a total of at least 38 or 43 persons, an average of 3.45 or 3.91 members per family. Adding the uncertain gures to the known gures of the ve families alters the average of 3 for the clear data to 3.31–over 3.63 (53–over 58: 16). In sum, these 25 families consist of 79–over 90 persons, an average of over 3.16 or over 3.60; this average is higher than the average of the families of known size (3.18). If the indeterminate and the determinate data are added, the average of all data is over 3.18–over 3.27 members per family.

B. Pledged Families The 19 pledged families consist of 72 persons, an average of 3.79 (see Table 25). The size of the pledged families differs greatly before and after 681/680 B.C., as with the slave families. In the earlier period ten pledged families are attested, and they consist of 43 persons, an average of 4.3; in the later period (after 680) the six pledged families consist of only 17 persons, an average of 2.83. The date of the other three pledged families is unclear; together they consist of 12 persons, an average of 4. Only 11% of the pledged families consist of six or more persons (as in the group of slave families); 47% consist of four or ve persons and 42% of the pledged families are of two or three persons. Again, as with the slave families the pledged families attested in texts originating in Nineveh are larger than the families from Aššur: there the three families consist of nine people, an average of 3, while the 16 families attested in texts originating in Nineveh consist of 63 persons, an average of 3.94.

C. “Land and People” The discussion on the size of the families attested in sales of “Land and People” (and in a schedule of “Land and People”: text no. 127) is divided into two main parts: rst concerning 28 families of known size out of the total of 52 families (54%; see Table 26) and then concerning 20 families (38%) whose size is unclear but can be estimated. The size of the other four families (8%) is impossible to determine (families nos. 101, 137, 151, 158). Of the 28 families of known size, eight dated before 681/680 B.C. are separated from six dated after 680 and 14 whose date is uncertain.

278

chapter five Table 25: Family Size: Pledged People Before 681

7 119, 121 6 – T 5 117, 125 4 122, 124, 126 T 3 123 2 118, 120 T GT AV

T

P

After 680

T

P

?

T

P

GT

GP

%

2 – 2 2 3

14 – 14 10 12

– – – 130 127

– – – 1 1

– – – 5 4

– – – 133 134

– – – 1 1

– – – 5 4

2 – 2 4 5

14 – 14 20 20

11

5 1 2

22 3 – 4 128, 129 131, 132 7 43 4.3

2 – 4

9 – 8

2 1 –

9 3 –

9 2 6

40 6 12

47

135 –

4 6

8 17 2.83

1 3

3 12 4

8 19

18 72 3.79

42 100

3 10

Provenance of Texts: 130 = Aššur; 117 = Nineveh T = Total of Families; P = Total of persons; AV = Average; GT = Grand total of Families; GP = Grand total of persons

C.1

Families of Known Size

The 28 families of known size consist of 92 persons, an average of 3.29. This is a relatively low gure close to the average of the slave families (3.16) and even lower than that of the pledged families (3.79). The size of these families in the earlier period (before 681: in this case all families are dated to the reign of Sennacherib) is a slightly largely than that of the families dated to the later period, but the differences in this case are relatively narrower: the average in the earlier period is 3.88 and in the later it is 3.67. The average of the families whose date is uncertain is 2.79. Only 7% of these 28 families consist of six or more person; 29% are of ve or four persons, and most (64%) are minimal families of three or two persons. The families originating in DÖr-Katlimmu are clearly smaller than the others (most of them from Nineveh, with only one exception, from Gezer). C.2

Families of Indeterminate Size

The 20 families whose size is unclear but can be estimated number at least 62 people in all, an average of 3.1; a higher possibility is 68 persons, an average of 3.4. The ve families dated to the earlier period (before

279

family size Table 26: Family Size: Land and People Before 681

T

P

After 680

T

P

?

T

S

GT

GP

–

– 6 6 10

– 161

– 1 1 –

–

138, 145

– 1 1 2

– – – 2

– – – 10

– 2 2 4

– 12 12 20

4

136, 147

2

8

159, 166#

– – – 184, 186 –

–

–

4

16

T 3

150

4 1

18 3

2 5

10 15

8 8

36 24

2

146, 148

2

4

7

14

10

20

3 8

7 31 3.88

12 14

29 39 2.79

18 28

44 92 3.29

7 6 T 5

T GT AV

149

–

164, 165

162

6 6 –

2

8

2 2

8 6

1

2

3 6

8 22 3.67

169, 170, 179, 180, 185 168, 171, 172, 173, 176, 181, 187

%

7

29

64 100

Provenance of Texts: 181 = DÖr-Katlimmu; 166# = Gezer; 116 = Nineve T = Total of Families; P = Total of persons; AV = Average; GT = Grand total of Families; GP = Grand total of persons

681 B.C.; nos. 139, 141–144) consist at least 16 people, an average of at least 3.2. The nine families dated to the later period (after 680 B.C.; nos. 152–157, 160, 163, 167) consist of at least 26 persons altogether, an average of 2.89 (a higher possibility is at least 32 people, an average of 3.56). The six families attested in texts of uncertain date (nos. 174–175, 177–178, 182–183) consist of at least 20 persons, an average of 3.33. All these data are close to those of the families of known size. If the data of the families which size is clear is added to the data of the families which size is unclear the picture is as follows: the average is 3.21 or about 3.4 (according to a higher estimate), while the average of the clear families is 3.33, so the differences are not signicant. The data attested in the schedule of “Land and People” (text no. 127) are included in these calculations (as mentioned above). These four families consist of 15 persons, an average of 3.75 (or about 3.6 counting the fth family, whose size is unclear but can be estimated).

280

chapter five

If the data of this text are not included in the calculations of the size of the families attested in sales of “Land and People” their average will be 3.2 instead of 3.29. So again the differences are not signicant.

D. Royal Grants The size of 80 out of 89 families attested in these texts is known (90%; see Table 27). These families consist of 317 persons, an average of 3.96. As in the other groups, the families dated before 681 B.C. are evidently larger than those dated after 680: the average of the earlier period is 4.67 while that of the later is only 3.14. Only four out of these 80 families (5%) consist of ten persons or more; eight consist of seven or six (10%), 27 of ve or four (34%), and again, most families are small with only three or two people (41 out of 80: 51%). The size of the 36 families donated to temples is clearly larger than the size of the others: the average of these families is 4.71 (or 4.62 if private donation is not considered) while the average of the 44 families attested in tax exemptions for ofcials is only 3.43. One possible explanation of this feature might be the fact that the royal donations to temples are dated to the reign of Sennacherib, whereas most families attested in tax exemptions for ofcials are dated after 680 B.C.: note that the average size of the nine families attested in tax exemptions dated to the 8th century is 4.56 (see Table 8, families nos. 188–196), while the average of the 35 families dated to the reign of Assurbanipal is only 3.14 (Tables 8–9, families nos. 197–204, 206–211, 213–222, 224–233, 235). The differences in the size of the families originating in various places (but dated to the 8th century) are not signicant: the average for the 27 families from RaÉappa is 4.77; for the eight families from Arbail it is 4.5; and for the nine families from Nineveh it is 4.43 (but note that the average for the 35 families from Nineveh, dated to the period of Assurbanipal, is 3.14 ).

E. The Harran Census The discussion on the size of the families in the Harran Census is divided into two main parts: families attested in texts 135–145, and “fathers and sons” listed in texts 146–149.

281

family size Table 27: Family Size: Royal Grants Before 681 15 14 12 10 7

250 272 – 264 188 193, 242* 258; 269 246*

6 T 5 195, 196 241*, 247* 255; 260 266 4 190, 191 194, 248* 251, 253, 261, 262 263, 270 271 T 3 189 243*, 244* 245*, 249 252; 256 257; 259 265 2 192; 254 267, 268 273, 274

T GT AV

T

P

1 1 – 1 5

T

P

?

T

P

GT

GP

15 – 14 – – 229 10 – 35 –

– – 1 – –

– – 12 – –

– – – – –

– – – – –

– – – – –

1 1 1 1 5

15 14 12 10 35

1 9 7

6 225, 228 80 35 232

2 3 1

12 24 5

– – –

– – –

– – –

3 12 8

18 104 40

11

44 199, 204 209, 211 224, 227 230, 235

8

32

–

–

–

19

76

18 10

79 30 208, 210 220

9 3

37 9

– 275 276

– 2

– 6

27 15

116 45

6

12 197, 198 200, 201 202, 203 206, 207 213, 214 215, 216 217, 218 219, 221 222, 226 231, 233 42 201 4.67

20

40

–

–

–

26

52

23 35

49 110 3.14

2 2

6 6 3

41 80

97 317 3.96

16 43

After 680

Provenance of Texts: 374* = Nineveh (ArbÏla) = Av: 4.5; 382 = Nineveh (RaÉappa) = Av: 4.77 367 = Nineveh (AN III, TP III?) = Av: 4.56; 408 = Nineveh (Ass) = Av: 3.14 T = Total of Families; P = Total of persons; AV = Average; GT = Grand total of Families; GP = Grand total of persons

%

15

34

51 100

282 E.1

chapter five Size of the Families in texts Nos. 135–145

E.1.1 Families of Known Size The 63 families of known size consist of 257 persons, an average of 4.08 (see Table 28 showing data attributed to Scribe “A” or to Scribe “B” separately; the three families attested twice—in a text of scribe A and in a text of Scribe B—are counted with the data of Scribe A). The differences in the sizes of the families attested in the texts attributed to these two scribes are not signicant: the average size of the families attested in the texts of Scribe A is 4.16 and that in the texts of Scribe B is 3.96. These small differences probably do not indicate a different date for these two groups. In both groups the largest families consist of eight persons: only three families (5%); ten families consist of seven or six persons (16%), 21 are of ve or four persons (33%), and about a half of the families consist of only two or three persons (29 families, or 46%, compared with 72.5% in the slave families). E.1.2 Families of Indeterminate Size The 16 families whose size is unclear but can be estimated consist of at least 47 persons in all, an average of at least 2.94; a higher possibility is at least 50 persons, an average of at least 3.13. These data are clearly lower than those of the families of known size. Adding the uncertain gures to the known ones alters the average of 4.08 for the clear data to about 3.85 or over 3.89 (257+47/50 = 304/307: 79). E.2

“Fathers and Sons” in Texts Nos. 146–149

The number of sons included in 18 of the 21 families attested in texts nos. 146–149 is known; in the other three families the number of sons is uncertain (see Table 29). It is reasonable to suppose that these were all the sons belonging to these families, as may be borne out by a comparison of their number with the number of sons in other families attested in the Harran Census or in other groups (see the discussion below). The average number of sons per family in texts nos. 146–149 is 1.94: most families have one or two sons (13, or 72%), four have three sons (22%) and only one has four sons (6%). The average number of sons per family in texts nos. 135–145 is only 1.53 (these data relate to 45 families that include sons, recorded in these texts).

283

family size Table 28: Family Size: Harran Census Scribe A

T

P

Scribe B

T

P

GT

GP

8 288, 311 7 – 6 281, 297, 300, 312, 318, 319, 356 T

2 – 7

16 – 42

353 320, 332 348

1 2 1

8 14 6

3 2 8

24 14 48

9 23% 5

58

4 16% 5

28

86

25

13 21% 10

50

9

36

2

8

11

44

14 37% 9

61

7 28% 10

33

94

30

21 33% 19

57

6

12

4

8

10

20

15 40% 38 100%

39

14 56% 25 100%

38

29 46% 63 100%

77

5 278, 279, 294, 308, 316 4 285, 286, 287, 289, 290, 296, 298, 299, 306 T 3 282, 284, 291, 301, 302, 303, 309, 314, 315 2 277, 280, 283, 310, 313, 317 T GT AV

25

27

158 4.16

325, 340, 341, 342, 350 333, 336

324, 326, 327, 331, 334, 337, 349, 351, 352, 354 328, 329, 330, 339

99 3.96

257 4.08

Assuming that the proportions of family members in texts nos. 135– 145 and nos. 146–149 are similar, then the average size of these 18 families attested in texts 146–149 is about ve persons (4.99), since the size of the 40 families with sons attested in texts nos. 135–145 is 4.58 (1.94–1.53 = 0.41+4.58 = 4.99). So if the data of these 18 families are added to those of the 63 families attested in the Harran Census of known size, then the size of the average family in the Harran Census will be 4.28 (257+90 = 347: 81 = 63+18). If the data of the families

284

chapter five Table 29: Family Size: Harran Census—Father and Sons Total of “Haran Sons Census” 4 3 2 1

T AV

371 357, 362, 364, 366 361, 363, 368, 369, 375, 376 358, 359, 365, 367, 370, 372, 374

T

P

%

1 4

4 12

6 22

6

12

33

7

7

39

18

35 1.94

100

T = Total of Families; P = Total of persons; AV = Average

of indeterminate size but which may be estimated are added to the data of the families of known size and to the data of the “Fathers and sons”, the average family size will be about 4.05 or over 4.08 persons (303/306+90 = 393/6: 97 = 81+16), a gure very close to the average size of the known families in texts nos. 135–145 (4.08). E.3 Number of Sons in Texts Nos. 146–149 Compared with Number of Sons in Other Texts Here are compared the numbers of sons in the following groups: (1) Slaves; (2) Pledged people; (3) “Land and People”; (4) Harran Census (texts nos. 135–145); (5) Deportees (see Table 30: clear data only). In each group the number of sons is ascertained, as well as the ratio of this number to the size of the families, and to the average family size in each group, including the childless families. Thirty families with sons are attested in the Slave families; the number of sons per family is 1.7. The average family size (in this group of 30 families) is 3.9, so the sons make up 44% of the family members (1.7: 3.9); since the average slave family is 3.18 persons, the sons constitute 53% of the members of the average family (1.7: 3.18). Nine pledged families with sons are attested: each has an average of 1.89 sons. The average family size is 4.78, so the sons are 40% of the family members; since the average pledged family is of 3.79 persons,

285

family size Table 30: The Number of Sons TS

5 4 T 3 2 1 T GT AV1 AV2 AV3 % (1) % (2)

Slaves T 1 1 2 3 8 17 28 30

Pledged People P

5 4 9 9 16 17 42 51 1.7 3.18 3.9 44 53

T – – – 3 2 4 9 9

P – – – 9 4 4 17 17 1.89 3.79 4.78 40 50

Land and People T – 2 2 2 1 8 11 13

P – 8 8 6 2 8 16 24 1.85 3.29 3.92 47 56

Harran Census T 1 – 1 4 9 26 39 40

P 5 – 5 12 18 26 56 61 1.53 4.08 4.58 33 38

Deportees T – 2 2 2 5 8 15 17

P – 8 8 6 10 8 24 32 1.88 4.56 5.59 34 43

TS = Total of Sons; T = Total of Families; P = Total of persons; AV1= Average of sons; AV2 = Average of persons in all the families; AV3 = Average of persons in the families with sons; GT = Grand total of Sons; GP = Grand total of persons; % (1) = Percentage of sons out of family members in families with sons. % (2) = Percentage of sons out of family members in families with and without sons.

the sons constitute 50% of the members of this average family (3.79: 1.89). 13 families with sons are attested in sales of “Land and People”, each having an average of 1.85 sons. Average family size (in this group of 13 families) is 3.92, so the sons make up 47% of the family members (1.85: 3.92); since the average pledged family is 3.29 persons, the sons constitute 56% of the members of this average family (1.85: 3.29). Forty families with sons are attested in the Harran Census (texts nos. 135–145); the average family has 1.53 sons (as noted above). Average family size (in this group of 40 families) is 4.58, so the sons are 33% of the family members (1.53: 4.58); since the average family listed in the Harran Census is 4.08 persons, the sons are 38% of the members of this average family (1.53: 4.08). Seventeen families with sons are attested in the Deportees group, each with an average of 1.88 sons. The size of the average family (in this group of 17 families) is 5.59, so the sons are 34% of the family

286

chapter five

members (5.59: 1.88); since the average family in this group is of 4.56 persons, the sons make up 43% of the members of this average family (1.88: 4.33). In Sum, sons usually constitute at least a third of the members of families with children (33%–47%). Therefore, the 18 families of “Fathers and Sons” attested in the Harran Census (texts nos. 146–149) probably consist of 4.13–5.88 persons (1.94: 33–47%; compare with the estimate offered above—4.99).

G. Deportees and Displaced Persons The discussion on the size of the deported or displaced families is divided into two main parts. Out of the 57 families in this group, rst the data of 36 families of known size (63%) are considered (see Table 31), then those of 20 families whose size is unclear but can be estimated (35%). The size of one family (2%) cannot be estimated. Regarding the families of known size, ten dated before 681 B.C. are considered separately from the other 26 families, for most of which the date is uncertain, with only two exceptions dated to the reigns of Esarhaddon or Assurbanipal (families nos. 402–403). Fourteen of the 20 families of indeterminate size are dated to the 8th century and the date of the other six is uncertain. G.1

Families of Known Size

The size of 36 of the 57 families attested in these texts is known: these families consist of 164 persons, an average of 4.56. As in the other groups, the families dated before 681 B.C. are larger than those dated after 680: the ten families dated before 681 B.C. consist of 51 persons, an average of 5.1. The 26 families dated after 680 B.C. consist of 113 persons, an average of 4.35. Twenty-two percent of these families consist of more than six persons, 42% are of ve or four persons, and 36% of two or three persons. G.2

Families of Indeterminate Size

The 20 families whose size is unclear consist of 74 to 87 people, an average of 3.70 to 4.35: one family is probably of seven persons;

287

family size

two of ve or six; two of ve or more, seven are of four or ve, two are of three or four persons, one of at least of three, two of two or three, and three are probably of two persons or of at least two persons each. The families of unclear size seem therefore smaller than the known ones. Adding the data of the families of indeterminate size to those of the families of known size yields an average family size in this group of about 4.25–4.48.

H. Summary The 327 families of known size consist of 1212 persons, an average of 3.71 (see Table 32). The two largest families were of 15 and 14 persons; 11 others consist of eight persons or more. But these 13 large families Table 31: Family Size: Deportees and Displaced People Before 681

T

P

After 680 or ?

T

P

GT

GP

1 1

8 7

2 3

16 21

3 4

24 28

– 2 6

– 15 30

404, 409 407, 408, 423 414

1 6 6

6 43 30

1 8 12

6 58 60

–

–

3

12

3

12

6 2

30 6

9 6

42 18

15 8

72 24

2

–

–

5

10

5

10

T GT AV

2 10

6 51 5.1

11 26

28 113 4.35

13 36

34 164 4.56

8 7 6 T 5

398* 401

390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 396

4 T 3

395, 397

406, 413, 416, 418, 419, 425 412, 426, 430 403, 405, 411, 417, 421, 429 402, 420, 428, 431, 434

Provenance of Texts: 398* = Calah; 116 = Nineveh T = Total of Families; P = Total of persons; AV = Average; GT = Grand total of Families; GP = Grand total of persons

%

22

42

36

288

chapter five

account for only 4% of these 327 families of known size. About 10% consisted of six or seven persons (34 families); another 95 families are of four or ve persons (29%). The remaining 185 families (57%) are minimal families of only two or three persons. The average family size of recipients of rations is the smallest (2.31). The average slave family size is 3.18 persons, the average pledged family size is 3.79, and the average size of families attested mainly in sales of “Land and People” is 3.29. The highest average family size is attested in the group of deportees and displaced people, namely 4.56; the average family size in the Harran Census is 4.08 and in the group of Royal grants it is 3.96. The average size of the deported families is even larger than the families of the Harran Census and the royal grants. This gure clearly lies between the family size of the lower stratum, being about four people in the 8th century and the beginning of the 7th century, and even less than three in the 7th century (after 680 B.C.: see below), and the families of the middle and upper strata, which number ve to six people (on average; see my forthcoming study on the middle and upper strata in the Neo-Assyrian period). The reason might be that at least a few families of deportees discussed in this book evidently belonged to the middle stratum in their homelands before their deportation; these families are now in transit and therefore are dened as deportees, but they could be incorporated into the same stratum in their new place in Assyria. One of the main conclusions of this chapter is the manifest reduction in the size of the families after 680 B.C. compared with the size before 681 B.C. (see Tables 33–34). The size of the average family in the earlier period is 4.36, and in the later it is 2.79. These differences, apparent in most working groups, cannot be accidental. They probably indicate the weakening and reduction in size of the families of the lower stratum on the one hand, and the strengthening of the middle and upper strata at the expense of the lower stratum at the zenith of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, mainly in the reigns of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. These differences in most working groups are as follows: slaves, 4.39 before 681 B.C. and 2.58 after 680 B.C.; Pledged Families, 4.30 before and 2.83 after; “Land and People”, 3.88 before and 3.67 after; royal grants, 4.67 before 681 B.C. and 3.14 after 680. Another important nding is the homogeneity of data relating to these two periods, especially in the early period: the differences between

289

family size Table 32: Family Size: Summary Slaves Pledged People 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 T

– – – – – 3 – – 3

7 6 T

4 3 7

5 4 T

– – – – – – – – –

Land and People – – – – – – – – –

– 1 – 1 – – 4

– – – – – – –

– – – – – – – 3 3

3 3

2

5 3 8

2 8 10

4 1 5

5 10 15

4 5 9

4 4 8

8 19 27

10 11 21

12 3 15

3 2 T

13 50 63

2 6 8

8 10 18

15 26 41

19 10 29

8 5 13

GT

88 280 3.18

19 72 3.79

28 92 3.29

80 317 3.96

63 257 4.08

36 164 4.56

–

–

1 1

2 2

AV

2

Royal Haran Deportees RA. Grants Census – – – – – – – – –

GT

1 1 – 1 – 4 – 6 13 4% – 17 – 17 – 34 10% – 43 – 52 – 95 29% 4 69 9 116 13 185 57% 13 327 30 100% 2.31

GP

15 14 – 12 – 40 – 48 129 119 102 221 215 208 423 207 232 439 1212 3.71

the sizes of the average family in the six groups attested in this early period are very modest: the average family size is 4.36 people, exactly the size of the average slave family in this period; for the slaves the number is 4.39; for the pledged families it is 4.3 persons, for “Land and People” families it is 3.88, and for the Harran Census families it is 4.08. The highest averages are those of the royal grants—4.67—and of the Deportees—5.1. So the lowest datum (3.88) is about 89% of the average (4.36) and the highest (5.1) is 117% of this average. In the data dated after 680 the differences between the groups are more signicant, but still moderate compared with the differences between the two main periods: the average family size is of 2.79 people, approximately the size of the average pledged family in this period

290

chapter five

(2.83); the average family size of recipients of rations is 2.31 people; that of slaves is 2.58; that of royal grants is 3.14; and that of “Land and People” is 3.67. So the lowest data (for ration recipients and slaves) are about 83%–92% of the average (2.79), and the highest (for “Land and People” and royal grants) are 113%–132% of this average. Table 33: Family Size: Summary (Before 681 B.C.) Slaves

Pledged People

Land and People

Royal Grants

Haran Deportees Census

15 14 13 12 11 10 8 T

– – – – – 3 – 3

– – – – – – – –

– – – – – – – –

1 1 – – – 1 – 3

– – – – – – 3 3

– – – – – – 1 1

7 6 T

3 3 6

2 – 2

– 1 1

5 1 6

2 8 10

1 – 1

5 4 T

2 3 5

2 3 5

2 2 4

7 11 18

10 11 21

6 – 6

3 2 T

4 10 14

1 2 3

1 2 3

10 6 16

19 10 29

2 – 2

GT GP AV

28 123 4.39

10 43 4.30

8 31 3.88

43 201 4.67

63 257 4.08

10 51 5.1

GT

GP

1 1 – – – 4 4 10 6% 13 13 26 16% 29 30 59 36% 37 30 67 42% 162

15 14 – – – 40 32 101 91 78 169 145 120 265 114 60 174

706 4.36

291

family size Table 34: Family Size: Summary (After 680 B.C.) Slaves

Pledged People

Land and People

Royal Grants

RA.

GT

GP

15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 T

– – – – – – – – –

– – – – – – – – –

– – – – – – – – –

– – – 1 – – – – 1

– – – – – – – – –

– – – 12 – – – 12 12

7 6 T

1 – 1

– – –

– 1 1

– 2 2

– – –

5 4 T

2 6 8

1 1 2

– 2 2

1 8 9

– – –

3 2 T

9 37 46

– 4 4

2 1 3

3 20 23

4 9 13

GT GP AV

55 142 2.58

6 17 2.83

6 22 3.67

35 110 3.14

13 30 2.31

– – – 1 – – – 1 1 1% 1 3 4 3% 4 17 21 18% 18 71 89 78% 115

7 18 25 20 68 88 54 142 196

321 2.79

CHAPTER SIX

MARRIAGE PATTERNS

Most families discussed in this book are patriarchal and monogamous; however, a few families are clearly polygamous.1 Their exact percentage is vague mainly because the scribes do not always separate the family head’s wife from the other females in the family: at times the scribe counts wives and daughters in a same category (e.g., Scribe B in the texts of the Harran Census); in other cases the scribe lists wives and daughters in distinct categories, but still does not separate the family head’s wife from his daughter-in-law, for example. The Neo-Assyrian marriage agreements2 as well as other Ancient Near Eastern marriage contracts clearly indicate the monogamous nature of the marriage in the Ancient Near East: the male is usually forbidden to marry a second woman unless his rst wife is childless;3 1 For marriage patterns in the Neo-Assyrian Period see Roth, 1987, pp. 720–722, with earlier literature; cf. also Fales, 1975, p. 338; Postgate, 1979a; Kuhrt, 1989, pp. 225– 226; Stol, 1995, p. 125; Friedl, 2000; Gelb, 1979, p. 75. Note that in Gelb’s study only one out of 112 families is polygamous. For polygamy in the Old-Assyrian period see Larsen, 2002, pp. xxv–xxvi, 233–234, with earlier literature. 2 For Neo-Assyrian marriage agreements see Postgate, 1976, pp. 101–107; Postgate, 1979a; Roth, 1987; Radner, 1997, pp. 157–164, 207–219. Marriage or dissolutions of marriages are attested in 22 Neo-Assyrian texts, all originating in the three capital cities of Assyria (Aššur [9 texts], Calah [7 texts], and Nineveh [6 texts]). Two texts are dated to the rst half of the 7th century B.C., and 11 to the post-canonical period (the date of the other texts is unclear), as follows: Aššur: A 310 (= StAT 2 184); A 334 (= StAT 2 313); A 1857 (= StAT 2 8); A 2527 (= StAT 2 164–675 B.C.); A 2648 (= StAT 2 94); A 9745 (= Radner, 1997, pp. 160–161; PNA, pp. 201b(6), 580b–PC); VAT 3216 (= StAT 2 6–PC); VAT 20761 (= Pedersen, 1986, p. 127 [N 31 (3)]; Radner, 1997, pp. 146[m], 167, note 881; PNA, p. 390a[5]–PC); VAT 20834 (= PNA, pp. 282a[2], 282a[8], 869a[10]–676 B.C.); Calah: ND 267 (= CTN II 1); ND 407 (= CTN II 219–PC); ND 815 (= CTN II 247); ND 7011 (= CTN III 47); ND 7028 (= CTN III 51 (PC?); ND 2307 (= FNALT 14–PC) ND 2316 (= Parker, 1954, p. 40–PC). Nineveh: ADD 307 (= SAA XIV 161–PC); ADD 308 (= SAA XIV 34–PC); ADD 309 (= SAA XIV 37–PC); ADD 509 (= SAA XIV 218); ADD 711 (= SAA XIV 38–PC); TIM XI 14 (= SAA XIV 443). See also SAA XVIII 56 (= ABL 336), and SAA XVIII 161 (= ABL 969). 3 See Roth, 1989, with earlier literature. See also van Seters, 1968, pp. 408–409; Grayson—van Seters, 1972, 485–486; Roth, 1987, pp. 720–722; Stol, 1995, pp. 125, 129.

marriage patterns

293

not having children (especially sons) was apparently the main reason for marrying a second wife, in the few texts were polygamy is clearly attested.

A. The Slave Families Polygamous slave families are very rare, only two known ones being found: nos. 33 and 37; in both cases the scribe signies that the family head has two wives by the pattern “his two wives”. Both texts originate in Nineveh; one is dated to 680 B.C. and the other was probably also from the reign of Sennacherib. Both families are large: the rst consists of ten persons and the second of seven; the rst (no. 33) also includes three sons and probably also three slaves and an additional female, probably its head’s mother or sister or daughter. The second family (no. 37), the famous Israelite family headed by ÇsÏax, consists, in addition, of his two wives, Mexsâ and BÊdia, his two unnamed weaned daughters, and two other males, SÏx-gabâ and BÏl-HarrÊn-taklÊk, probably his sons but possibly his brothers. The size and structure of these families, as well as their having slaves, may indicate that they had been free and wealthy before their enslavement, which was possibly for economic reasons. Out of the 116 slave families there are no other known polygamous families; but in only 83 cases can this issue be checked precisely, since in the other 33 cases the texts are broken and the number of wives cannot be determined. All these 83 families are listed in Tables 1–2 in chapter II (all families in Table 1 and the following families in Table 2: nos. 32–33, 35, 37, 53–54, 61, 72, 79). In ten of these families there is no wife (ve families of type A3: nos. 38, 51–52, 70–71, and ve families of type A5: nos. 2, 9, 57, 59, 76); in 26 of these 83 families there is no man (all families of type A4: nos. 10–11, 31, 40–41, 43, 46–47, 63–66, 72–75, 80–81, 88, 90–94, 97, 99). So only 45 slave families are clearly monogamous, as follows: 21 type A1 families (nos. 7–8, 22, 28–29, 36, 48, 50, 55–56, 62, 68, 69, 82–86, 101, 108, 110); 14 type A2 families (nos. 1, 3–6, 27, 42, 49, 58, 67, 77, 96, 100, 114); four families of types B and C (nos. 17, 25–26, 78); and eight families of unclear type (nos. 32, 35, 53–54, 61, 79). In sum, the relation between monogamous and polygamous slave families is 1:22.5, namely about 4% of the slave families studied in this book were polygamous.

294

chapter six B. Pledged Families

Thirteen of the 19 pledged families are clearly monogamous and there is not even one polygamous family. The 13 monogamous families are as follows: two type A1 families (nos. 118, 128); seven type A2 families (nos. 117, 119, 121–123, 127, 135); three type B3 families (nos. 124–126), and one family of unclear type (no. 134). Four of the remaining six pledged families are single-parent families of type A3 (no. 120) or A4 (nos. 130–132); the type of the last two (nos. 129, 133) is unclear.

C. “Land and People” Only one among the 52 families of this group is clearly polygamous: it is family no. 166 which is a nuclear family of four persons, a male “his two wives” and a son (Gezer, 651 B.C.). But in 23 cases the text is broken and no conclusions about polygamy in them can be drawn (families nos. 137–140, 151–154, 158, 160, 162, 170–175, 177–180, 182–183). Only 23 families are clearly monogamous: three type A1 families (nos. 148, 176, 187); nine type A2 families (nos. 147, 149, 164–166, 169, 184–186); one type B3 family (no. 159), and ten families of indeterminate type (nos. 136, 141–144, 155–157, 163, 167). In two of the other ve families there is no woman (one type A3 family, no. 146; and one type A5 family, no. 145). In the other three there is no male (family no. 181, and two type A4 families, nos. 150, 168). In sum, the relation between monogamous and polygamous families in this group is 1:23, namely about 4% of the families mainly attested in sales of “Land and People” studied in this book were polygamous, an identical percentage as in the slave families.

D. Royal Grants Most families in this group are listed by the pattern PN—x people, so it is not clear if they are monogamous or polygamous. Only ten families are clearly monogamous: two are of type A1 (nos. 198 and 215); and eight are of type A2 (nos. 211, 241–243, 245–248). Three other families are single-parent (one of type A3: no. 244, and three of type A4: nos. 208–209, 223).

marriage patterns

295

E. The Harran Census E.1

The Monogamous Families (42 families)

The Harran Census covers 101 families: 62 in texts attributed to Scribe A and 39 in texts attributed to Scribe B. Of these 101 families 42 are clearly monogamous (25 in Scribe A’s texts and 17 in Scibe B’s texts). All 31 type A1 and type A2 families are clearly monogamous: six are A1 families, three of them attested in Scribe A’s texts (nos. 283, 310, 313), and three in Scribe B’s texts (nos. 328, 330, 339); 25 are type A2 families, 16 attested in Scribe A’s texts (nos. 279, 281–282, 284–286, 289–290, 294, 296–298, 309, 312, 314, 356), and nine in Scribe B’s texts (nos. 324, 327, 331–332, 334, 336–337, 349 and 351). The type of the other 11 monogamous families is unclear: six are attested in Scribe A’s texts (nos. 287, 292, 301, 303, 311, 315), and ve in Scribe B’s texts (nos. 322, 338, 344–346). E.2 Single-parent Families and Families in which the Number of Wives is Indeterminate (36 families) Four families had no women: two type A5 families (nos. 277, 280), and two type A3 families (nos. 291, 317). In the other 32 families the number of wives is unclear: 24 of these are in texts attributed to Scribe A (nos. 293, 295, 304–307, 316, 357–373); and eight in texts attributed to Scribe B (nos. 323, 329, 343, 355, 374–377). E.3

Possible Evidence of Polygamy in the Harran Census (23 Families)

Possible evidence of polygamy in the Harran Census is found in 23 families, all listed in eight texts. Four are attributed to Scribe A: text no. 135 with families nos. 278 and 288; text no. 136 with families nos. 299–300; text no. 137 with families nos. 302 and 308; and text no. 139 with families nos. 318–319. The other four texts are attributed to Scribe B: text no. 140 with families nos. 320–321, 325–326; text no. 142 with families nos. 333, 335, 340–342; text no. 143 with families nos. 347–348, 350 and 352; and text no. 144 with families nos. 353–354. In the texts related to Scribe A the family head’s wife is distinct from the other females included in the family (the family head’s mother, daughters or sisters), but at least in one case it is reasonable to suppose that the family head’s daughter-in-law is included in the same category

296

chapter six

with his wife; therefore, in the eight families attested in Scribe A’s texts that list more than one woman, the additional women were presumably not the family head’s mother, daughters, or sisters, but his second wife or his daughter-in-law (if he had adult sons: see below). Scribe B’s texts with 15 families do not distinguish wives and daughters, and the family head’s mother, sisters, or daughters-in-law are not mentioned separately. The probability that these families are polygamous is low. Only in one of the eight families attested in Scribe A’s texts are three women listed in one category (family no. 288), and in the other cases two women are mentioned. In the 15 families listed probably by Scribe B the picture is more complicated: one family has ve women (no. 353); ve families have three women (nos. 320, 341–342, 348, 350); six families have two women (nos. 325–326, 333, 340, 352, 354), and three families have at least two women (nos. 321, 335, 347). The best point of departure for the discussion on possible evidence for polygamy in Scribe A’s texts is family no. 288: this is a multiplefamily kinship group of eight people, consisting of at least two nuclear families: a father with his two sons and his grandson. In addition to the four named males, four females are listed: three “women” and one weaned daughter who might be a daughter or a granddaughter of the family head. One of the three women is probably his wife; another is probably his daughter-in-law, wife of his son KankÊnu and mother of his grandson Lubâ-Našhu. The third woman might be another daughter-in-law of the family head rather than his second wife, but still it is not impossible that she is his second wife; but in this case one may suppose that the married sons are the sons of the second wife, and that the rst wife is childless. In families nos. 278 and 308 the picture is similar. Family no. 278 has ve persons: the family head, his two sons, one of them an adolescent or an adult and one a small child, and two “women”. The additional woman might be the family head’s second wife or his daughter-in-law, the wife of his adult son. Family no. 308 also consists of ve persons: a father, his two sons, and “two women”; here too, since the two sons are adults the additional woman may be the family head’s daughter-in-law, yet she may also be his second wife. These two cases constitute possible evidence of polygamy, but are not denite examples. Family no. 299 consists of four persons: a father, his son and “two women”. The son’s age is unclear; had the scribe written that this son is a teenager or a small child, this would be hard evidence of polygamy.

marriage patterns

297

But his age is not specied and he may be an adult, so the question if this family is polygamous or not should be left open. Family no. 302 is a childless family of three persons: a male with “two women”. It is probably polygamous: the additional woman might be a second wife whom the male married since his rst wife was childless. Although the scribe did not present these two women as “his wives”, this might be the preferred interpretation here. Family no. 300 consists of six persons: a family head, his brother, two small children (a son and a daughter, each of three spans’ height) and “two women”. The additional woman is probably the wife of the family head’s brother, but since the latter’s age is not specied the additional woman may be the family head’s second wife, the mother of his children. Family no. 319 also consists of six persons: the family head, his two adult/adolescent brothers, a son of four spans’ height, and “two women”. This is probably a multiple-family kinship group (units all on one level), since both brothers of the family head are probably adults and not teenagers, so the additional woman may well be the wife of one of them. Yet they may be teenagers, and the extra woman might be the family head’s second wife. Family no. 318 also consists of six persons: the family head, a suckling son, “two women”, and two additional sons or brothers, whose age is not specied. The extra woman may be the family head’s second wife, but there are other possibilities too, for example, she might be the wife of one of the two brothers/sons, so this case is unclear. In sum, only in one case (out of these eight) is the likelihood of polygamy very high (family no. 302); in most other cases polygamy is possible but not certain. The likelihood of polygamy in the 15 families attested in Scribe B’s texts is low. One might divide these cases into four sub-groups, as follows: (1) Childless families consisting of one male and two women (families nos. 326, 352, 354). The probability of polygamy here is low since the additional woman might be one of the following four possibilities: the family head’s daughter, mother, sister, or second wife. (2) Families with one or more sons consisting of one male and two to ve women (families nos. 320, 325, 333, 340–342, 350, 353). The probability of polygamy here is very low since the additional women might be one of the following ve possibilities: the family head’s daughter(s), mother, sister(s), daughter-in-law (or daughters-in-law where two sons are attested), or second wife.

298

chapter six

(3) One family consisting of one male, three women, one son, and one brother. The probability for polygamy in these cases is even lower than in the foregoing cases since the additional women might be one of the following six possibilities: the family head’s daughter(s), mother, sister(s), daughter-in-law, brother’s wife, or second wife. (4) Families consisting of one male and two or more women but whose size and structure are unclear, so the probability for polygamy in these cases is likewise unclear (see families nos. 321, 335, 347). In sum, the texts of the Harran Census display not even one clearcut piece of evidence of polygamy; however, in one case the likelihood of polygamy is very high (family no. 302), and in another seven cases polygamy is possible but not certain (all these cases relate to Scribe A’s texts). The likelihood of polygamy in the 15 cases attested in Scribe B’s texts is low in some cases and very low in most. So the precise percentage of polygamy in these texts cannot be determined; it is probably not more than a few percent.

F. Deportees and Displaced Persons Fifty-seven deported/displaced families are attested but none is clearly polygamous; in seven families more than one woman is attested, and these cases might serve as possible evidence of polygamy. 22 families are clearly monogamous: three type A1 families (nos. 402, 420, 428); nine type A2 families (nos. 392, 403, 407–409, 412–413, 417, 429); three types B1–3 families (395, 418–419); and seven families of uncertain type (398–400, 405, 414, 425, 427). The other 28 of the 57 families of this group are divided into two sub-groups: 21 cases where the text is broken so the number of women is uncertain (families nos. 378–389, 401, 410, 415, 422–423, 424 [possibly a type A4 family?], 426, 432–433); and the remaining seven families that are single-parent: two of type A3 (nos. 397, 411); two of type A4 (nos. 430–431); two of type A5 (nos. 421, 434); and one extended family (no. 416). In seven cases polygamy is possible but not evident (families nos. 390–391, 393–394, 396, 404, 406). In ve cases two women are listed in each family, and in the other two cases (nos. 393–394) three women are recorded. All these data are preserved in two texts, nos. 151 and 155 (the rst dated to the reign of Sargon II, and the second to the

marriage patterns

299

7th century). In both texts daughters are counted separately from the other women, so the extra woman/women is/are not the family head’s daughter(s). Five of these seven cases are attested in text no. 151 (= SAA XV 181 = ABL 212): family no. 393, which consists of ve persons: a male, three women, and a son of ve spans’ height. The two additional women might be the family head’s mother and sister (or his two sisters), but one of them might be his second wife. Family no. 394 also includes three women, with two males: the family head and his brother; again, the extra women might be the family head mother and sister, or his brother’s wife; but there is a possibility that one of them is his second wife. Polygamy is also possible in two other cases attested in this letter: families nos. 390–391: both families consist of ve persons, and each has a family head, his brother, a small son, and two women; the additional woman might be his brother’s wife, or the family head’s mother or sister, but also his second wife. Family no. 396 might be of a similar structure as families 390 and 391; it also consists of ve persons: the family head with a small son and two women, and an additional male who may be a brother or a son. The last two cases are attested in text no. 127 (= SAA XI 174). Family no. 406 consists of ve persons: the family head, two slaves, and two women. The additional woman may be the family head’s mother or sister, or his second wife; since this family is childless, the last possibility, might be preferable. Family no. 404 is probably not polygamous, even though it has two women, since it also includes the son of the family head’s sister; the additional woman may well be his sister. In that case this family of eight persons contains two nuclear families: the family head with his wife, three sons, and one daughter; and his sister with her son. In sum, in one case out of the seven, the likelihood of polygamy is very low since the additional woman is probably the family head’s sister (family no. 404); in three cases the additional woman is probably the wife of the family head’s brother (nos. 390–391, 396). In the other two or three cases the probability for polygamy is higher, albeit not certain, and the additional woman may be a second wife of the family head (families nos. 393, 406, possibly also 394). So in these texts, as in other groups, there is no clear-cut evidence of polygamy; since monogamy is distinctly attested in 22 cases, and polygamy is likely in only a few cases, the percentage of polygamy in these texts is probably also low, not more than a few percent.

300

chapter six G. Recipients of Rations

11 of the 13 families in this group are singe-parent ones (of type A4). The other two families (nos. 444 and 446) are monogamous. No polygamy is attested here.

H. Summary Of 190 families discussed in this chapter, 157 (83%) are clearly monogamous: 45 slave families; 13 pledged families; 23 attested in sales of “Land and People”; ten in royal grants; 42 listed in the Harran Census, 22 enumerated in lists of deportees and displaced persons, and two in the lists of ration recipients. Only three families are denitely polygamous (1.5%): two slave families (nos. 33 and 37) and one attested in a sale of “Land and People” (no. 160). Polygamy in the groups of slaves and “Land and People” exists in about 4% of the families. Each of the other 30 families (15.5%) has two or more women, included, and theoretically it is possible that they are polygamous: all these families are attested in the texts of the Harran Census (23) or in the group of the Deportees and Displaced persons (7). Only in three cases is the likelihood of polygamy high (families no. 302 [The Harran Census] and 393 and 406 [Deportees]); in another eight cases the likelihood is medium (seven cases in the Harran Census—Scribe A: families nos. 278, 288, 299–300, 308, 318–319; and one in the Deportees group—family no. 394); and in the other 19 cases the likelihood is low or even very low. Polygamy in the families of the lower stratum in the Neo-Assyrian period is thus very rare: even adding the three cases of high likelihood of polygamy to the denitely polygamous families only makes the percentage of these families 3%; further addition of four out of the eight cases of medium likelihood of polygamy to the foregoing six families still leaves the percentage of these families only about 5% (and about 10% in each of two groups, the Deportees and the Harran Census). This conclusion fully accords with other sources, principally the NeoAssyrian marriage agreements which indicate the monogamous nature of the marriage in this period: the male is usually forbidden to marry a second woman unless his rst wife is childless; if the husband annuls this stipulation, the wife may cancel the marriage: see, for example,

marriage patterns

301

CTN II 247: “[If ] Atara[. . .] takes a woman in addition to her, she may take away whatever has been acquired, (and) may go and leave”.4 Only if the rst wife is childless is the husband permitted to marry another woman, and under very specic terms: see, for example, ND 2307 = FNALT 14: “If ÂubÏtu does not conceive and bear (children), she shall buy a slave girl in her stead and set her in her place and (so) bring sons into existence. The sons (will be) her sons. If she loves the slave-girl she shall keep (her), if she hates her, she shall sell her”.5 Similar terms are also attested in Neo-Babylonian marriage contracts: “If Dagal-il takes a woman in addition to her, he will pay LÊ-tubÊšinni (his wife) one mina of silver, and she may go wherever she likes”;6 and in another case the parties agree that “If Šamaš-Uballi¢ takes a woman in addition to her, he will pay Rimini (his wife) . . . and (she) will go back to her father’s house”.7 The various sources on this issue in these periods are thus wholly in agreement.

4 5 6 7

See also Deller, 1991, pp. 73–74; in his opinion the woman was a princess. Postgate, 1976, pp. 104–107, esp. p. 106. See Roth, 1989, no. 4. See Roth, 1989, no. 30.

CHAPTER SEVEN

CHILDLESS FAMILIES

The issue of childless families in the Ancient Near East has been discussed by scholars.1 It is a very central issue, with implications for various concerns, including infertility and adoption.2 In 285 of the 447 families discussed in this book (64%) it is clear whether the family is childless or not. Childless families are attested in all groups except one, the recipients of rations: all 13 families of this group have children. The ten type-A5 families are regarded in the discussion below as childless since the family head clearly has no children (he is probably unmarried, although he might be divorced or a widower). The 89 families in the royal grants group are problematic since the type of only 13 is known for certain, and many other families consist of only two people; yet one should not conclude from this number that these are childless couples; it is possible that at least a few of these minimal families are single-parent, consisting of a father and his one child. Adoptive families attested in this period should be added to the list of the childless families.3 Most of those who adopt children are probably members of the middle or upper strata, since money is usually paid to

1 For childless families in the Ancient Near East see van Seters, 1968, pp. 401–408; Grayson—van Seters, 1972, pp. 485–486; Stol, 2000, pp. 33–37, with earlier literature. 2 For adoption in the Neo-Assyrian Period see Radner, 1997, pp. 137–143, with earlier literature. See also Danndamaev, 1984, pp. 438–446; Knobloch, 1992, pp. 76–79. 3 Adoption of children is attested in twelve Neo-Assyrian texts. Adoption of a son is listed in seven texts, all originating in the three capital cities of Assyria: Aššur—four texts: A 2221 (= TCL 9 57 = FNALT 17–658 B.C.); A 2644 (= StAT 2 95–650 B.C.?); Aššur 12 (= Ahmad, 1996, no. 30–638*); VAT 19550 (= SAAB 5, 51–620*); Calah—one text: ND 5480 (unpublished. See Radner, 1997, p. 140, and note 708, date unknown); Nineveh—two texts: TIM XI 15 (= SAA XIV 442–634*); TIM XI 24 (= SAAS V 23 = SAA XIV 450—date lost, probably post-canonical). Adoption of a girl is mentioned in ve texts, all dated to the post-canonical period, three originating in Aššur: A 77 (= StAT 2 81–625*); A 2494 (= StAT 2 79–641*); VAT 9930 (unpublished. See Radner, 1997, p. 142, and note 719–629*); and two in Calah: ND 3423 (= Wiseman, 1953, p. 140–644*); ND 7091 (= CTN III 36–622*).

childless families

303

the parents or relatives of the adopted son or daughter by the childless couple. It is reasonable to suppose that they are fairly wealthy. 4 Adoption does not necessarily indicate infertility as a couple may decide to adopt a son even though they already have a daughter (or several daughters); even in cases where the scribe clearly notes that the adaptive parent has no sons (DUMU.MEŠ-šú la-áš-šú), he might have a daughter.5 In any event, in most cases it is clear that adoption was preferred by the couple to the other option, namely marrying a second wife (or begetting children by a maid). In other cases the child might have been adopted by a single person. An example is the known case of adoption of a daughter by a eunuch.6

A. Slaves 29 slave families are childless (families nos. 2, 7–9, 15, 22, 26, 28–29, 36, 48, 50, 55–57, 59, 62, 68–69, 76, 82–86, 101, 108, 110 and probably also family no. 60). 75 families has at least one child (families nos. 1, 3–6, 10–13, 16–17, 21, 25, 27, 30–35, 37–47, 49, 51–54, 58, 61, 63–67, 70–75, 77–78, 80–81, 88–100, 102–104, 107, 109, 112–115). In the other 12 cases the text is broken and therefore it is not clear if the family is childless or not (families nos. 14, 18–20, 23–24, 79, 87, 105–106, 111, 116). In sum, 75 of 104 slave families are known to have at least one child (72%), and the other 29 families are childless (28%). Males and females of these families are certainly infertile, but the percentage of infertility is clearly not 28%: at least a few of these families are presumably young couples still without children (see chapter II, discussion on family no. 26), and in other few cases males who lived with their mothers are possibly still unmarried (type-A5 families). Moreover, an adult slave couple might have been sold without their child/children.

4 One of these wealthy adoptive parents is AššÖr-mÊtu-taqqin. For his archive unearthed in the New city of Aššur see Ahmad, 1996; PNA, p. 195a(5). 5 Aššur 12: 3 (= Ahmad, 1996, no. 30, p. 266). 6 ND 3424 (= Wiseman, 1953, p. 140).

304

chapter seven B. Pledged People

Fourteen families of pledged people have at least one child; in one case it is not clear (no. 129) and only four families are known to be childless, two of type A1 (nos. 118 and 128), and two extended (nos. 124, 126). The percentage of childless families in this group is thus 22% (4 out of 18). As with the slave families, here too a few of these families might be young couples still without children. For example, the two extended families could have developed from type-A5 families with a mother and her two sons, one of whom is now married and presented as the family head, still without children.

C. “Land and People” Clear Data Ten out of the 16 families listed in Table 5, have at least one child (see chapter II). Three families are clearly childless, two of type A1 (nos. 148 and 176), and one of type A5 (no. 145). In the other three families the picture is unclear since only the total of the family members is listed (nos. 179–181). Indeterminate Data Seventeen out of 31 families presented in Table 6 (chapter II) have at least one child (nos. 137, 139, 141–142, 144, 151–155, 158, 160–161, 163, 170, 174–175). Three families are most likely childless, and consist only of two persons, a childless couple (nos. 171–173). In another eleven cases the picture is unclear: seven may include children. No. 136 is a family of four persons, a couple with two sons or two brothers; no. 138 consists of ve people, but is counted by the pattern PN—x persons so it might include children, but this is not certain; in no. 140 a child is known to be included, but it is not clear if one family is attested or more; no. 143 may include a child; and nos. 177–178 are families of three persons of whom one might be a child. No. 167 has at least a couple but probably more members, yet it is not clear if they are children. The situation in the following four families is less distinct, but they might have children: nos. 156–157 are both couples, but it is not clear if they have children; and nos. 162 and

childless families

305

182, each with two people, consist of a family head and an additional member of the family, who might be his wife or a child. In the schedule of “Land and People” (text no. 127) one family is childless (no. 187) and the other four have at least one child. In sum, seven of the 38 families in this group (18%) are childless.

D. Royal Grants In this group only two of the 13 families are childless (nos. 198 and 215); the other 11 have children (no. 208–209, 211, 241–248). Accordingly, 15% of these families are childless.

E. The Harran Census Clear Data—Scribe A Six out of 30 families (19%) are childless (nos. 277, 280, 283, 302, 310 and 313: see Table 11). The other 24 families have at least one child; and two other cases are unclear (nos. 306 and 316). Clear Data—Scribe B Three out of 21 families (14%) are childless (nos. 328, 330 and 339). The other 18 families include at least one child; and three other cases are unclear (nos. 326, 352 and 354); in all these cases a male with two females is attested, and the additional woman might be a daughter, a mother, a sister, or a second wife of the family head. If we add the data attested in texts attributed to these both scribes, the sum will be nine childless families out of 51 families (18%). Indeterminate Data The data presented in Table 12 are extremely unclear, and it is hard to draw any conclusion from this material. 13 families are recorded in texts which bear Scribe A’s characteristics: four families clearly have children (nos. 305, 311, 318 and 355); but the other nine cases are

306

chapter seven

unclear: four might have children (nos. 287, 292–293 and 301); and two might be childless (nos. 295 and 307). In the texts attributed to Scribe B the picture is even less distinct: two clearly include children (nos. 322 and 343); one family might be childless, but it is unclear (no. 329), and the other eight are indeterminate but might have children. So the only clear conclusion is that six out of these families include at least one child. In sum, nine out of the 57 families in this group (16%) are childless.

F. Deportees and Displaced People Clear Data Nine of the 24 families presented in Table 15 are childless: three of type A1 (nos. 402, 420 and 428); two are of type A5 (nos. 421 and 434), two extended ones (nos. 395 and 418), and two of indeterminate type (nos. 394 and 406). The other 15 clearly include at least one child. Indeterminate Data Seventeen of the 33 families presented in Table 16 have at least one child. Only one family is childless (no. 405), and in the other 15 the situation is unclear (nos. 378–389, 400, 425 and 427). In sum, ten out of 42 families (24%) are childless. This relatively high percentage may also indicate child mortality during the transfer of people.

G. Summary About 22% out of the 272 families discussed in this chapter are childless (61): most of them are type-A1 families, ten are of type-A5, and a few are extended or of indeterminate type. The highest percentage is observed among the slaves (28%), and a relatively high percentage is evident in the groups of the Deportees (24%) and the pledged people

307

childless families Table 35: Childless Families 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Slaves Pledged people “Land and People” Royal grants The Harran Census Deportees

Total

29 4 7 2 9 10

out out out out out out

of of of of of of

104 18 38 13 57 42

= = = = = =

28% 22% 18% 15% 16% 24%

61

out of

272

=

22%

(22%). Relatively low percentage is evident in three groups: “Land and People” (18%), the Harran Census (16%), and Royal grants (15%). These data probably do not indicate the rate of infertility in this period, which was probably lower than 22%. If the ten A5-type families are reduced from these calculations, the average percentage of the childless family is about 19%. Moreover, one might suppose that the percentage of infertility was actually about 15% or even less, because a few of these childless families were presumably young couples recently married and still without children. This is based on the assumption that females married at a relatively young age.7 Infertility is a well known matter in Ancient Near Eastern literature, and in various cultures is a central motif especially in literary texts, but also in marriage contracts, which address the possibility that the wife will be barren.8 The differences between the percentages of childless families among the various groups presented in the discussion above probably do not indicate various fertility rates among these groups but other factors, mainly low motivation to reproduce in slave families,

7 For the marriage age in the Neo-Assyrian period see Roth, 1987, with earlier bibliography. A comparison of the conclusions of this book with the results of the World Fertility Survey (= WFS) conducted in the 1970s and 1980s may be of special interest. The WFS survey in Cameroon indicated that about one fth of all ever-married women were childless at the end of their reproductive period and higher national gures have been reported in several other countries in West Africa (see Cleland—Scott, 1987, pp. 1000 –1001). The causes of childlessness include poor health, early sexual union, and especially venereal diseases. In several developing countries such as Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Senegal the median age at rst marriage is 16 years or less. These women who marry very young, particularly in some Asian countries, have lower completed fertility due to greater risk of complications and miscarriages from early pregnancies, and a number of developing countries have even tried to raise age at marriage by legislation (see Cleland—Scott, 1987, p. 1001). 8 See Stol, 2000, pp. 33–37.

308

chapter seven

or the sale of some members of the family by the master, who keeps the others in his hands. The term {aqara (childless woman) occurs in the Bible ten times, and once in the locution “{qar ve {aqarqa” (Deut 7: 14), which probably does not signify a concept that the male may also be barren.9 In Akkadian there are various general denitions to a childless woman/man or to childlessness, such as “(a woman) that does not conceive and bear (children)” (see chapter VI), or “DUMU ul irašši”—he will not have a son;10 or “DUMU-a-a la-áš-šu”—I have no son.11 The closest terms to the Hebrew {aqara are la Êlittu—a woman who does not bear;12 munutukû—without heir, childless; munutukûtu—the status of being without heir, childlessness, for example, in the sentence: “If a dog urinates on the chair of a man MU.NU.TUKU illak he will have no heirs”.13

9 See Gen 11: 30; 25: 21; 29: 31; Exod 23: 26; Judg 13: 2–3; 1 Sam 2: 5; Isa 54: 1; Ps 113: 9; Job 24: 21. 10 See CAD, M/I, p. 309a. 11 See SAA X 294: r. 25. For this text see Parpola, 1987, pp. 28–278. 12 Stol, 2000, p. 35. 13 See CAD, M/II, p. 208; CDA, 2nd ed., p. 217b.

CHAPTER EIGHT

CHILDREN’S AGE

The Assyrians customarily dened children by their height and their state of dependence on their mother (as pointed out in chapter III). Adolescent or adult sons are dened by the term Éa = Éahurtu and adolescent daughters by Éa or batÖssu. Younger children are presented by their height: three, four, or ve spans’, sometimes with the addition of the term ru¢u, probably about 25 cm. In other texts the scribe uses two additional numbers, two and six (SAAB 9 92B: 4; ND 2485).1 This is very likely only a general estimate. The last two denitions are “weaned” ( UD = pir, pirsu) and “suckling” (GA = ša zizibi ). The term Éa = Éahurtu in a few texts refers to an adult son, as clearly indicated by SAA XI 202, II: 16–23 (text no. 135 = family no. 288): this text denes a married son who already has begot his own baby by the term Éa = Éahurtu. The distinction between the categories “weaned” and “3” is especially unclear since a newborn baby was probably about two spans in length, ca. 50 cm., and most babies probably reached the length of about three spans (ca. 75 cm.) during their rst year, so one might suppose that breastfeeding, which was probably widely practiced in all Ancient Near Eastern societies, stopped during the child’s rst year.2 Accordingly, one might suggest that the terms UD (weaned) and “3” may be interchangeable, and refer to children independent of their mother’s or wet nurse’s breastfeeding; similarly, the terms “2” and “GA” (suckling) are synonyms because, as mentioned above, a newborn baby was about two spans’ long. On the other hand, sometimes scribes dene two children in the same family by the terms UD and “3”, so at least

1 Fales, 1973, pp. 118–122; Fales, 1975, pp. 342–346; Roth, 1987, p. 717; Radner, 1997, pp. 126–152; Radner, 1997a, pp. 119–120; Fales, 2001, pp. 176–178, 327; For the registration of children in the Neo-Babylonian records see Joannes, 1997, pp. 120–133; Brinkman, 1982, pp. 1–8. See also CAD, R, pp. 438–439. 2 The WFS indicates that a large majority of women, particularly in Africa and Asia, breastfeed their children usually between one and two and a half years (see Cleland—Scott, 1987, p. 1002). Stol (2000, pp. 181, 190) states that in the Ancient Near East “children were nursed for two or three years”.

310

chapter eight

in his opinion these terms were probably not synonyms. One possible explanation for this complex issue might be related to the unxed and vague nature of these terms, like the others, “4” or “5”, which are also very general denitions which might refer to children of various ages that look like a “4”-span child or a “5”-span child. The size/“age” of 147 children are attested in the texts studied in this book (see Table 36): 136 of them feature in ve groups (Slaves, “Land and People”, Royal grants, The Harran Census, and Deportees), and the remaining eleven are enumerated in lists of “Fathers and Sons” of the Harran Census. About two thirds are sons, and only one third—daughters. In the Slave group the age of only 22 children (17%) is mentioned; a similar ratio (nine children, 18%) is attested in the group of “Land and People”. In the Deportee group the age of 36 children (48%) is attested; and in the Harran Census the age of about 50% of the children is indicated (in Scribe A’s texts the gure is 95%). In the Royal grants group the age of only eleven children is mentioned (probably a very low percentage of the children in this group). Note that the level of infant and child mortality in the Ancient Near East was relatively high, so the number of children attested in these texts obviously does not indicate the number of children actually given birth by the family’s mother.3 On the other hand, measures of population control are clearly evident in Ancient Near Eastern texts, so in the following discussion it is supposed that family planning was usual in the Neo-Assyrian period.4

3 On infant mortality in the Ancient Near East see Robbins, 1999, p. 58, and note 16. The rate of infant mortality in the Ancient Near East is unclear, but it is reasonable to suppose that it was not very different from the rate in pre-industrial societies in Europe in the 17th–18th centuries A.D. or in several developing countries in Africa or the Middle East in the 20th century. The WFS indicates that the level of infant and child mortality of children under ve in Senegal in 1975–1979 was 26%, in Yemen 23%, and in Nepal 23% (see Cleland—Scott, 1987, pp. 868–869). In Egypt and Turkey (in the same period) the rate of infant mortality of children in their rst year of life was about 13%, and of children under ve 17%–19%. The rates in northern France and in the Paris Basin in the 17th–18th centuries were similar: 21%–28.8% (Flandrin, 1979, p. 198, and see also p. 59). In the same regions of France in the 20th century the rate of infant mortality was only about 3%. See also Beaver, 1973, pp. 243–254. 4 For means of population control in the Ancient Near East see Gruber, 1989, pp. 75–79; Malul, 1999; Biggs, 2000; Stol, 2000, pp. 37–39.

children’s age

311

A. Slave Families In the Slave group the age of only 22 children (out of at least 130, 17%) is mentioned (—see Tables 1–2, chapter II). Most are the only child in the family (12 out of 22, 55%), and the great majority (86%–91%) are babies or small children: suckling, weaned, or of three spans’ height (19 or 20 out of 22). Only a few children were of four or ve spans’ height, and adults or adolescent children are entirely absent. Eight out of 19 (42%) of the families in which the age of the children is attested are of type A4, namely a maid (probably unmarried) with a child: in all these cases the child is very young—suckling or weaned (for possible causes of this phenomenon see chapter IX below). The 22 children whose age is clear are divided into ve sub-groups, as follows: Suckling—5 (23%)—3 sons and 2 daughters: families nos. 32, 74, 80, 90 and 93. The rst family probably includes additional children; but in the other cases the son (90, 93) or the daughter (74, 80) is an only child. Weaned—9 (41%)—4 sons and 5 daughters: families nos. 37, 52–53, 72, 78, 88, 98 and 104. The rst family has two weaned daughters (this family has two sons also); family no. 52 has two sons and a daughter. One son is of three spans’, the other is weaned, and the age of the daughter is not noted; family no. 53 has a weaned daughter and a son (or a brother of the family head) whose age is unclear; family no. 104 has four sons, one of them weaned and three whose age is not attested; family no. 72 has at least a weaned son; and no. 78 has only a weaned son. Families nos. 88 and 98 both have an only daughter. “3”—5 or 6 (22–26%)—4 or 5 sons and one daughters: families nos. 65 and 73 both have an only son; family no. 52 has two sons and a daughter; family no. 42 has an only daughter; family no. 77 has a son of three or four spans’ tall (see below—“5”); and family no. 103 has 3–5 sons, one of them of three spans’. “4”—1 or 2 sons (5%–9%): family no. 51 has an only son; and family no. 77 has two sons and a daughter whose age is unclear: one son is ve spans’ tall and the other son is three or four.

312

chapter eight

“5”—1 son (5%): family no. 77 (see “4” above). Only in two cases (families nos. 52 and 77) it is possible to estimate the children’s age difference. In family no. 52 the two sons are very young, and they are dened as weaned and three spans’ tall, so it is reasonable to suppose that the difference is minimal, and that the daughter is older than the sons. In family no. 77 the older son is ve spans’ tall and the other is three or four, so the age difference between them is evidently a few years. Fourteen of these 22 children (64%) are sons and only eight (36%) are daughters. The sons are clearly older than the daughters: of eight children three to ve spans’ tall, only one is a daughter; but among the 14 suckling and weaned children the number of daughters is equal to that of the sons (seven). The absence of older children in slave families might be related to the early age of marriage of slaves, mainly maids, or possibly the sale of these children by their owner, who kept the other members of the family.

B. “Land and People” The age of only nine children (out of at least 51, 18%) are enumerated in sales of “Land and People” (see Tables 5–6, chapter II). Most are babies or small children: suckling, weaned, or three spans in length (5 out of 9, 56%). Only two children are four or ve spans’ tall, and two are adults or adolescents. The nine children whose “age” is clear are divided into ve subgroups: Suckling—3 (33.3%): families nos. 151, 170 and 174. The rst family has a son or a daughter, the second a daughter (probably an only child), and the third a suckling son and a daughter four spans’ tall. Weaned—1 (16.7%): family no. 159: an only son. “3”—1 (16.7%): family no. 155, a son probably an only child.

children’s age

313

“4”—2 (22.2%): families nos. 154 and 174: the rst has a son four spans’ tall and the other a suckling son and a daughter of four spans’ height. Adult or adolescent—2 (22.2%): families nos. 164–165, each with an only son. Only in one case (family no. 174) is it possible to estimate the children’s age difference. This family has two children, a suckling son and a daughter four spans’ tall, so their age difference is probably a few years. Six or seven out of these nine children are sons (about two thirds) and only two or three are daughters. Here too the sons are older than the daughters; there are no adult or adolescent daughters.

C. Royal Grants The ages of only eleven children of this group are listed, so one should be cautious in drawing conclusions from these data. Moreover, all these eleven children are sons, and all of them are adolescent/adults (six), or very small (ve: four weaned and one suckling). In two cases the age difference is very signicant: family no. 244 has two sons, one weaned and the other an adolescent/adult; and family no. 246 has three adolescent/adult sons and one suckling. In both cases the families are monogamous, but it is not clear if the babies in both families are the descendents of the same mother who bore the adolescent/adult son(s), or if the family head has married another woman after his rst wife perhaps died or was divorced. Family no. 242 also has a weaned son and an adolescent/adult son, but it also has three daughters whose age is not specied. The age difference among these ve children is thus unclear, and the daughters might be between the adolescent/adult son and the weaned one.

D. The Harran Census D.1 Texts Nos. 135–145 The age of 58 out of at least 61 children (about 95%) are attested in texts attributed to Scribe A (texts nos. 135–139, 145; see Tables 11–12,

314

chapter eight

chapter II). Actually this is the only group of texts that indicates most children’s “age”/size. On the other hand in the texts attributed to scribe B, the age/size of the children is missing entirely (these texts list at least 31 sons; probably also daughters, but their exact number is unclear since they are included within the same category as the women). 36–37 of these 58 children are sons (63%), and 21–22 are daughters (37%). The group of 36–37 sons whose “age” is clear are divided into ve sub-groups: Suckling—3 (8%): families nos. 281, 294, 318. Weaned—1 (3%): family no. 311. “3”—6–7 (17–19%): families nos. 288 (grandson), 290, 300, 309, 311–312, 355 (son or daughter). “4”—10 (27–28%): families nos. 278–279, 282, 284, 291, 297–298, 304, 319, 356. Adult or adolescent—16 (43–44%): families nos. 278, 281, 286, 288 (two), 289, 291, 294, 297 (two), 305, 308 (two), 311, 314, 317. The 21–22 daughters whose “age” is clear are divided into ve subgroups, as follows: Weaned—3 (14%): families nos. 288, 290, 297. “3”—6–7 (29–32%): families nos. 281, 289, 296 (two), 298, 300, 355 (son or daughter). “4”—7 (32–33%): families nos. 281, 285, 294, 305, 311–312, 356. “5”—1 (5%): family no. 285. Adolescent or batÖssu—4 (18–19%): families nos. 286, 311, 312 (two).

children’s age

315

These data may be placed in three main groups: (1) small children (suckling, weaned, and “3”), with a total of all children (sons and daughters) of 20 (34.5%); (2) “4” and “5” spans’ tall, with a total of 18 children (31%); and (3) Adolescent/adults, with a total of 20 children (34.5%) The groups may thus seem relatively balanced in size, but actually this picture is misleading. The relation between the number of sons and daughters in each group is of interest, and here the conclusions are different: the rst group, (20 small children) has 10–11 sons (53%) and 9–10 daughters (47%); the second group (18 bigger children) has ten sons (56%) and eight daughters (44%). In both these groups males and females are relatively balanced. But in the third group, adolescents/ adults, 16 of the 20 children are sons (80%) and only four are daughters (20%); this signicant difference probably indicates the early age of marriage of females, as already pointed out by Fales and Roth.5 D.2

Texts Nos. 146–147: “Fathers and Sons”

The age/size of children is attested in seven out of 19 families listed in texts nos. 146–147: the total is eleven sons (see Families nos. 357–362 and 373). Of these, one is a suckling, one is three spans’ tall, one is four spans’, three are ve spans’, and ve are adolescents or adults. As in texts nos. 135–145 there is a relative balance between the older and the younger sons: in texts 134–145 there are 20–21 small sons (56%) as against 16 adolescent or adult sons (44%); and in texts nos. 146–147 there are six small sons (55%) as against ve adolescent or adult sons (45%).

E. Deportees and Displaced Persons In 16 out of 57 families of this group the age/size of the children is listed (28%): a total of 36 children (out of more than 75) are listed (about 48%). 20–27 out of these 36 children are sons, and 9–16 are daughters. The group of sons whose “age” is clear is divided into six sub-groups:

5

Fales, 1975, pp. 342–343, 346, 349; Roth, 1987, p. 735.

316

chapter eight

Suckling—3–6 (15–22%): families nos. 390, 398, 422, possibly also 411 (son or daughter), and possibly also no. 432 (two sons or two daughters). Weaned—3–4 (15%): families nos. 409, 432 (two), possibly also no. 411 (son or daughter). “3”—3–4 (15%): families nos. 396, 409, 433, possibly also no. 403 (son or daughter). “4”—5–6 (22–25%): families nos. 391–392, 398 (two), 433, and possibly also no. 423 (son or daughter). “5”—3 (15%): families nos. 393, 398–399. Adult or adolescent—3–4 (ca. 15.5%): families nos. 409 (two), 410, possibly also no. 423 (son or daughter). The daughters whose “age” is clear are divided into ve sub-groups, as follows: Suckling—0–3 (0%–19%): Possibly family no. 411 (son or daughter); and possibly also no. 432 (two sons or two daughters). Weaned—0–1 (0%–6%): Possibly family no. 411 (son or daughter). “3”—0–1 (0%–6%): Possibly family no. 403 (son or daughter). “4”—4–5 (31–44%): families nos. 398, 399 (two), 409, and possibly also no. 423 (son or daughter). Adolescent or batÖssu—5–6 (38–56%): families nos. 399, 408 (three daughters), 409, and possibly also no. 423 (son or daughter). These data may be placed in three main groups: (1) small children (suckling, weaned and “3”), with a total (sons and daughters) of 14

children’s age

317

(39%); (2) “4” and “5” spans’ tall, with a total of 13 (36%); and (3) adolescents/adults, with a total of 9 (25%). Here too, as in the Harran Census, the groups appear relatively balanced in size, but this picture likewise is misleading. The relation between the number of sons and daughters in each group is of interest, and here the conclusions are different. In the rst group (14 small children) there are 9–14 sons (64%–100%) and only 0–5 daughters (0%–36%); in the second group (13 bigger children) there are 8–9 sons (62%–69%) and 4–5 daughters (31%–38%); the most surprising data are those in the third group (adolescents/adults): only 3–4 out of 9 are sons (33%–44%) and 5–6 are daughters (56%–67%). This is a most signicant nding since against 4–10 small daughters, there are 5–6 adults (43%–56%), more than twice of the percentage of the adult daughters in the Harran Census (18–19%—4 out of 21–22). It is hard to believe that this difference is just accidental, and one possible explanation is that the transfer and the resettlement process delayed the age of marriage of the females.

4 4–5 1–2 1

14

0 14

Weaned “3” “4” “5”

Total of small children

Adolescents or adults Grand total

0 8

8

5 1 0 0

2

D

0 22

22

9 5–6 1–2 1

5

T

D

0 0 1 0

2 0 6–7 2–3

4–5 2–3

1 1 1 0

1–2 1–2

S

2 9

7

1 1 2 0

3

T

“LAND AND PEOPLE”

6 11

5

4 0 0 0

1

S

0 0

0

0 0 0 0

0

D

6 11

5

4 0 0 0

1

T

ROYAL GRANTS

3 6–7 7 1

0

D

16 4 36–37 21–22

20–21 17–18

1 6–7 10 0

3

S 3

T

20 58

38

4 13 17 1

HARRAN CENSUS

0–1 0–1 4–5 0

0–3

D

3–4 5–6 20–27 9–16

17–23 4–10

3–4 3–4 5–6 3

3–6

S

9 36

27

4 4 10 3

6

T

DEPORTEES

3–7

D

18

T

27–28 9–10 87–96 40–49

60–68 31–39

37 136

99

13–14 8–9 22 14–17 7–9 23–24 17–19 12–13 30–31 4 1 5

11–15

S

TOTAL

* The Harran Census: “Fathers and Sons”: GA—1; UD—0; “3”—1; “4”—1; “5”—3; total of small children—6; AD—5; Grand total—11

3

Suckling

S

SLAVES

Table 36: Children’s Age

318 chapter eight

CHAPTER NINE

SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES

A. Single-Parent Families versus Monogamous and Polygamous Families 74 single-parent families of the lower stratum are attested in the NeoAssyrian Period. In chapter VI, 192 families with both parents were discussed: 159 monogamous; three polygamous; and 30 that are either monogamous or polygamous. So the percentage of the single-parent families is 28%. 36 out of these 74 single-parent families (48%) are slave families; 11 (15%) are ration recipients; eight (11%) are deported families; six (8%) are enumerated in sales of “Land and People”; ve (6.5%) each are in the groups of pledged people and royal grants; and only four single-parent families (5% of the 74 families) are attested in the Harran Census. Most families of rations recipients are single-parent: 11 out of 13 (85%); the other two are monogamous. The percentage of single-parent families in this group is almost double the gure for slave families; however this is a very small sample and this percentage may be accidental and not representative. About half of the slave families are single-parent (42%): 36 out of 85 (the other 49 are monogamous or polygamous). In the royal grants ve single-parent families are attested against ten monogamous, so the percentage of these families is relatively high (one third ); but since the type and structure of most families in these group are unclear, and only in 15 out of 87 cases (17%) is it possible to know if the family is monogamous or single-parent, one should be cautious in drawing any conclusions from these data. In the group of pledged families ve are single-parent and 13 are monogamous: single-parent families in this group thus constitute 28%. In the group of “Land and People” six families are single-parent and 24 are monogamous or polygamous ones: single-parent families in this group constitute about 20%, only half of gure for the slave families. In the group of “Deportees and Deported Persons” seven singleparent families are attested versus 29 monogamous or polygamous ones:

320

chapter nine

single-parent families in this group thus constitute 19%. This datum refers to 63% of the families of this group (it is unclear if the other families are single-parent, monogamous or polygamous). In the Harran Census only four single-parent families are attested versus 65 monogamous or polygamous ones: single-parent families in this group thus constitute only 6%—the lowest gure for all groups. This datum refers to 86% of the families listed in texts nos. 135–145 (it is unclear if the other families are single-parent, monogamous or polygamous). The groups of the rations recipients and slaves present the highest percentages of single-parent families (83% and 42% respectively), and the Harran Census group presents the lowest (6%); clearly, group status is correlated with percentage of single-parent families in the given groups. Between these two poles, slaves and probably tenants attested in the Harran Census, other groups are located that evidently include slaves as well as free families, such as pledged people, and possibly “Land and People”, which might also include a few slave families. Note however that the percentage of single-parent families in the group of “Land and People” (20%) is only a half the gure for these families in the slave families (42%). The gure for single-parent families in the group of Deportees and Deported Persons (19%) may indicate changes that take place in the structure of these families during the conquest and the transfer.

B. Families without a Father versus Families without a Wife/Mother In 74% of the single-parent families (55 out of 74) the father is missing, and only in 19 cases (26%) is the wife/mother missing (most of them are type-A3 or type-A5 families; a few are extended families). The gures for motherless as against fatherless families in the various groups are as follows: ration recipients—0%: no families without a wife/mother versus 11 without a father; slaves—16%: ve motherless families versus 31 fatherless; pledged families—20%: one motherless versus four fatherless; Royal grants—40%: two motherless families versus three fatherless; “Land and People”—67%: four families motherless and two fatherless; Deportees—71%: ve motherless versus two fatherless; the Harran Census—100%: four families motherless and no fatherless families, especially no type-A4 families.

single-parent families

321

Here too an evident clear correlation is found between group’s status and the relation between the numbers of fatherless and motherless single-parent families. Among the ration recipients and the slaves, the percentage of motherless single-parent families is the lowest (0% and 16%); the highest percentage of motherless families out of the single-parent ones is attested in the groups of the Harran Census (100%); between these two poles the other groups are located: deportees—71%; “Land and People”—67%; royal grants—40%; pledged families—20%.

C. Reasons for the Existence of Single-Parent Families Most single-parent families in the Ancient Near East probably came into being not through the free choice of a man or a woman who at some time decided to establish a single-parent family because he or she had not found a suitable partner or preferred not to marry; it is more reasonable to suppose that most single-parent families came into being due to various constraints, as follows: (1) Death of Father or Mother Since the bride was probably younger than the groom (“the eastern pattern”),1 it is possible that the husband died before his wife, leaving a widow with children, and turning a nuclear family into a single-parent one. If one of the sons was already an adult it probably became a typeA5 family (a childless unmarried male with his mother and sometimes also his brothers and sisters). In other cases attested in Neo-Assyrian texts the wife took her husband’s place and become the head of the family, probably until her son grew up (see, e.g., SAAS V 28 = text no. 91). There were probably also unnatural causes of death, like the mother’s death in childbirth or through illness: these might explain cases where only a father is attested with babies or very young children (type-A3 families). But only 13 type-A3 families are attested (7%), and only in three cases are infants listed (families nos. 52, 244 and 411—two infants, one suckling and one weaned). Even if one assumes that in all three cases the mother had died in childbirth, the percentage of such

1

See Roth, 1987, pp. 720–722.

322

chapter nine

deaths would still be very low.2 Giving birth is a natural process which usually does not require external intervention, so there should be no surprise that death in childbirth was a rare phenomenon. (2) Divorce It is reasonable to suppose that in a few cases the reason for the existence of single-parent families was a divorce.3 It is well known that the males as well as females could initiate divorce;4 but the penalties for dissolution of marriage were heavy and probably made the divorce option difcult, especially for the women, and even more problematic for women of the lower stratum. (3) A Maid Who Bears Her Master a Child without Marrying Him One of the most usual single-parent family patterns is a maid and her child. There might be two main reasons for this situation: (1) breakup of a slave family in a sale (see reason [4] below); (2) a maid who was not originally bought as the wife of one of the master’s slaves or other family member, but at some time lay with her master or one of his sons and bore him a child. In a few of these cases the master’s wife may have initiated the sale of the maid with her illegitimate child.5 (4) Breakup of a Slave Family in a Sale In a few cases the master might have decided, for personal or economic reasons, to break up the slave family, and to sell only a few of its members, retaining the others.6 This might be the reason for the sale of a slave with his child or children, without the family mother; she might be dead, but she also might have been left with her current master.

2 For a similar conclusion see Roth, 1987, p. 736, note 55. For an elegy for a woman dead in childbirth see Reiner, 1985, pp. 85–93; Livingstone, 1989, pp. 37–39 (no. 15); Stol, 2000, pp. 140–141; Foster, 2005, p. 949. For the possibility of the death of the mother at childbirth see also von Weiher, 1998, pp. 58–61; Foster, 2005, p. 980. 3 For dissolutions of marriages in the Neo-Assyrian period see Chapter VI, note 2. 4 See Postgate, 1976, pp. 105–107; Postgate, 1979a; Roth, 1989, pp. 12–14. 5 In Diakonof ’s opinion many slaves in the Ancient Near East were illegitimate, born of a female slave to her master. See Diakonof, 1972, p. 73. 6 Fales, 1975, p. 351.

single-parent families

323

(5) Pledging of Some Family Members At least in one case a family head is known to have placed his family as a pledge, and it is unclear whether this family was ever reunited (Family no. 133 = SAA XIV 181). (6) Breakup of Families Due to Political Circumstances Scholars have discussed the Neo-Assyrian deportation policy: the Assyrian kings were interested in resettlement of the exiles and the continued existence of nuclear families. It is not reasonable to suppose that they formed single-parent families by breaking up their previous structure. Yet there are a few cases of corrupt ofcials who abused their status, and even enslaved deportees, as clearly stated in text no. 151 (SAA XV 181 = ABL 212). During the transfer a few people might have died of disease, or were killed during the conquest of their lands by the Assyrian army. “Single-parent families” are probably presented in several Neo-Assyrian paintings and bas-reliefs which depict deportees: these artifacts sometimes depict only one adult with his child. In the following discussion single parent-families are arranged in their work-groups.

D. Single-Parent Slave Families (36) Thirty-six out of 85 slave families (42%) are single-parent; 26 of them (72%) are type-A4 families, namely a maid with her child or children. In 23 of these families (88%) only one child is attested. Usually the age/size of children is not attested in sales of people: of 116 slave families, only in 19 cases (16%) are the children’s ages/sizes attested. But in the A4 families the percentage is almost double: in eight of these 26 families (31%) the ages/sizes of the children are listed, and in all these cases the children are babies or very small. In six cases they are suckling or weaned: families nos. 72, 74, 80, 88, 90, 93; and in the other two cases the child is three spans tall: nos. 65 and 73). In another 15 cases a maid is mentioned with her single son or daughter without indication of their age/size: in ve texts a maid is sold with her son (nos. 31, 40, 66, 91, 99) and in the other 10 cases a maid is sold with her daughter (nos. 10, 41, 43, 47, 63–64, 75, 80, 92, 97). Only in three families are two or three children attested (no. 11: a maid with her two daughters;

324

chapter nine

no. 46: a maid with her two sons; no. 81: a maid with her two sons and daughter). Since the mother is presented as the “family head” it is reasonable to suppose that the children are minors. As mentioned above, out of 23 transactions of a maid and an only child, 14 (61%) are the sale of a maid with her daughter and only nine (39%) are a maid with her son. Four single-parent slave families are of type A5, and include a son with his mother (nos. 2, 9, 59, 76), or in one case a family consisting of a son, his mother and two brothers (no. 57). Five other single-parent slave families are of type A3, namely a father with his child or children: in two cases a father is listed with one son (nos. 51 and 71); one family is a father, a son, and a daughter (no. 38); another is a father with two daughters (no. 70); and in the fth family (no. 52) a father is listed with three children: a daughter, and two sons. A single-parent slave family is included in a frérèches (no. 25), consisting of the family head’s brother and two sons, but no wife.

E. Single-Parent Pledged Families (5) Five out of 18 pledged families (28%) are single-parent. Four out of these ve families are of type A3 or A4: no. 120 is a father and a son; three families consist of a woman with her children (no. 131, a woman with her son; no. 132, a woman with her daughter; and no. 130, a woman with a son and probably three daughters). The fth family (no. 133) consists of a mother, two sons, a daughter, and an additional male; the father placed his family members as a pledge. In most of these families the father is absent.

F. Single-Parent Families Listed in Sales and Lists of “Land and People” (6) Six out of 30 families listed in sales and lists of “Land and People” (20%) are single-parent. One is a type-A3 family consisting of a father and a son (no. 146); two are type-A4 families: a mother with a son and a daughter (nos. 150) and a mother with a daughter (no. 168); one is an A5 family: a family head, with his mother and three brothers (no. 145); one is an extended family of four persons: a family head with his son, mother and brother, but his wife is absent (no. 159); and the

single-parent families

325

sixth (no. 181) is an A-type family: a woman with an additional unclear family member.

G. Single-Parent Families Enumerated in Royal Grants (5) Only ve single-parent families are attested in the royal grants. Three of these families are type-A4 families: a woman with two or three children (nos. 208–209, 223); in another case (no. 244) a father is attested with his two sons, one adult and one weaned; and the fth family is a male with his mother and brothers (no. 205). The type and structure of most families in this group are unclear, so caution should be exercised in drawing any conclusions from these data.

H. Single-Parent Families Enumerated in the “Harran Census” (4) Two of the four single-parent families attested in the Harran Census are of type A3 (a father with his children) and the other two are of type A5 (a son with his mother); only one family consists of three persons: a father with an adult son and a minor of four spans’ height (no. 291); the other three families are of two persons each: a father with an adult son (no. 317) and two families consisting of a son with his mother (nos. 277, 280). In the last two cases it is reasonable to suppose that after the death of the father the son took his place; and in the rst two families the male was probably divorced or a widower.

I. Single-Parent Families of Deportees and Displaced Persons (7) In the group of “Deportees and Deported Persons” seven single-parent families are attested. Six are nuclear, and one is extended. Two type-A3 families are listed, both of three persons: the rst is a father with his two daughters (no. 397) and the other is a father with two babies (no. 411). The two type-A5 families consist of a male with his mother and maid (no. 421) and the other of a eunuch with his mother (no. 434). Two are clearly type-A4 families (nos. 430–431; possibly no. 424 also). The extended family consists of ve persons: a father, with his son, daughter, mother and brother—but without his wife (no. 416).

326

chapter nine J. Single-Parent Families of Rations Recipients (11)

All eleven single-parent families in this group are of type A4: seven consist of a mother with her daughter (nos. 435–438, 445 and 446); two are a mother with her son (nos. 442 and 443) and two are a mother with her two daughters (nos. 439–440).

CHAPTER TEN

NUMERICAL PROPORTIONS AMONG FAMILY MEMBERS

The numerical proportions among family members in the Neo-Assyrian period have been discussed in previous studies, especially by Fales;1 but, as mentioned previously, Fales studied only a few of the available data, and therefore the issue will be reconsidered. Of the 447 families discussed in this book, this chapter covers data of 181, as follows (see Table 37): 73 slave families (40.5%: see all the families recorded in Chapter II, Table 1); 15 pledged families (8%: see all the families recorded in Chapter II, Table 3); 17 families enumerated in sales of “Land and People” (9.5%: see all the families recorded in Chapter II, Tables 5 and 7, without families nos. 179–181, 183); 11 families enumerated in the Royal grants (6%: see Chapter II, Tables 8 and 10, families nos. 198, 211, 215, 241–248); 35 families enumerated in the Harran Census (19.5%): 23 are attested in texts which bear Scribe A characteristics: (12.5%: texts nos. 135–139, 145, families nos. 277, 279–286, 289–291, 294, 296–298, 309–310, 312–314, 317, 356); 12 are attested in texts which bear Scribe B characteristics: (7%, texts nos. 140–144: families nos. 324, 327–328, 330–332, 334, 336, 337, 339, 349, 351);

17 families of Deportees (9.5%: see Chapter II, Table 15, families nos. 392, 395, 397, 402, 407–409, 412–413, 417–421, 428–429, 434.

1

Fales, 1975, pp. 335–340, 342; Fales, 2001, pp. 174–175.

328

chapter ten

13 families enumerated in the lists of ration recipients (7%; see Chapter II, Table 17). The average family in this sample of 181 families consists of 3.20 persons: 0.78 men, 0.88 women, 0.80 sons, 0.55 daughters, 0.20 “others” (brothers, sisters, etc.). A. Men ¤ Women There is almost a balance between men and women (24% men, 27% women). The small difference reects the fact that many families are singleparent, headed by women. The percentage of men in most groups is close: 23%–27% (see Table 37); and the percentage of women in most groups is 20%–31.5%, with the exception of the rations recipients (7% men, 43% women). B. Sons ¤ Daughters There are signicant differences between the number of sons and the number of daughters in the average family: sons account for 25% of the family, close to the percentage of the fathers (24%) and the wives (27%); but only 17% of the family members are daughters. The most probable explanation for this feature is the relatively early age of marriage of the daughters, attested in most groups, as mentioned previously. The percentage of sons ranges from 20% in the slaves families (and even only 13% in the rations recipients) to 35.5–37% in the groups of “Land and People” and the Harran Census (Scribe B). The other groups lie between these two poles: 32% in the royal grants, 27% in the Harran Census (Scribe A), 25% in the Pledged persons, and 20% in the Deportees. The percentage of daughters in most groups ranges from 16% to 23% as follows: pledged people, 16%; slaves, 17.5%; royal grants, 20.5%; Harran Census (Scribe A), 21% and Deportees, 23% The two exceptions are rations recipients, 37%, and “Land and People” group, only 3.5%. The reason for this very low percentage in the last-named is clearly related to the poor preservation of the sales of “Land and People”: in the clear cases only 3.5% daughters are found in the aver-

numerical proportions among family members

329

age family as against 35.5% sons; but in the indeterminate families (see chapter II, Table 6) at least 16 sons are attested as against at least 15 daughters (these data are not considered in our discussion as they are unclear).

C. Other Family Members Only 37 of the 580 persons (6%) constituting these 181 families are “others”: brothers, sisters, mothers, slaves, maids, and more. In a few groups there are no “others” at all, for example, royal grants; but the size and structure of only ten out of the 89 families included in this group are attested, so the sample is small, and it should not be supposed that there are no “others” in the families of this group. On the other hand, it is most important that in the very large sample of the Harran Census only 2% of the family members are “others”, while the highest percentage is attested in the group of Deportees—12%. However, in the texts of the Harran Census attributed to Scribe B it is possible that a few “other” women (sisters, mothers, etc.) are included in the category of “women”. In the slaves group the percentage of the “others” is 7.5%, and in the groups of “Land and People” and pledges it is 10%–11%. The relatively high percentage of “others” (12%) in the determinate families of the Deportees group accords well with the fact that about 25%–30% of the determinate and indeterminate families of this group included “others” (14–17 out of 57 families: see Chapter II, Tables 15–16, Families nos. 390–391, 394–395, 398, 401, 406, 415–416, 418– 419, 421, 425, 434; and possibly families nos. 396, 399, 405 also). D. Male ¤ Female The proportions of males and females is studied in two main groups: (1) the above-mentioned 181 determinate families, and (2) 42 families which have an additional male who might be the family head’s brother or son; and/or additional women/woman whose relationship to the family head is unclear (see Table 38).2

2

The list of these 42 families is the following:

330

chapter ten

In the 181 families the relation is 51% males (298) and 49% females (282); in most groups the percentage of the males exceeds that of females, with three exceptions: slaves (53% females and 47% males), deportees (52% females and 48% males) and rations recipients (80% females and 20% males). In two of the other groups the percentage of males is 54%, and that of females is 46% (pledged persons and the Harran Census—scribe A). But in the groups of “Land and People” and the Harran Census (scribe B) the percentages are different: 66–68% males and only 32–34% female. In the 42 families the relation is 54% males (113) and 46% females (97), close to this relation in the 181 families; in most groups, the percentage of the males is about 46–58%, and that of females is 42–54%, with one exception: “Land and People” (83% males and 17% females). In sum, there is almost a balance between males and females in both studied groups, and the grand total of all these 223 families is as follows: 52% males (411) and 48% females (379). Excursus: The Exiles of Que (SAA XI 167) This text enumerates exiles from Que, divided into four main groups: 334 men; 172 sons (divided into ve sub-groups: suckling, weaned, “3”, “4”, “5”); 349 women; 121 daughters (divided into ve sub-groups, like the sons): a total of 976, but the grand total attested in r. 3, is 977

Slaves (4): families nos. 37 (3 males, 4 females), 53 (2 males, 2 females ), 54 (2 males, 2 females), and 87 (1 male, 1 female); Pledges (3): families nos. 130 (1 male, 4 females), 133 (3 males, 2 females), and 134 (3 males, 1 female); “Land and People” (1): family no. 161 (5 males, 1 female); Harran Census—scribe A (12): families nos. 278 (3 males, 2 females), 288 (4 males, 4 females), 299 (2 males, 2 females); 300 (3 males, 3 females), 301 (2 males, 1 female); 302 (1 males, 2 females), 303 (2 males, 1 female), 308 (3 males, 2 females), 311 (5 males, 3 females), 315 (2 males, 1 female), 318 (4 males, 2 females), and 319 (4 males, 2 females); Harran Census—scribe B (12): families nos. 320 (4 males, 3 females), 325 (3 males, 2 females), 326 (1 male, 2 females); 333 (2 males, 2 females), 340 (3 males, 2 females), 341 (2 males, 3 females); 342 (2 males, 3 females), 348 (3 males, 3 females); 350 (2 males, 3 females); 352 (1 male, 2 females); 353 (3 males, 5 females), and 354 (1 male, 2 females); Deportees (10): families nos. 390 (3 males, 2 females), 391 (3 males, 2 females), 393 (2 males, 3 females), 394 (2 males, 3 females); 396 (3 males, 2 females); 399 (4 males, 3 females), 404 (5 males, 3 females), 406 (3 males, 2 females), 425 (3 males, 2 females), and 426 (3 males, 1 female);

numerical proportions among family members

331

persons. Since adult sons and daughters are not attested in a separate category, but probably included in the numbers of the males and the females, it is impossible to determine the number of the families. The relation between males and females is clear: 506 males (52%) versus 470 females (48%), exactly like the relation between males and females in the 223 families studied in this chapter. The relation between sons and daughters in SAA XI 167 is similar to that in the group of 181 families. In SAA XI 167 there are 293 children, of whom 172 (59%) are sons and 121 (41%) are daughters; the 181 families include 245 children (including two sons of the family head’s brother), of whom 145 (59%) are sons and 100 (41%) are daughters. The relation between men and women is also close in these two groups: in SAA XI 167 there are 334 men (49%) and 349 women (51%); in the 181 families group there are 140 men (47%) and 160 women (53%).

5 2 6 2 — —

200 73 2.74

Persons Families Average

15–0.21–7.5%

Others

Brothers Brother’s sons Mothers Sisters Slaves Maids

47–0.64–23.5% 63–0.86–31.5% 40–0.55–20% 35–0.48–17.5%

Men Women Sons Dau.

Slaves

56 15 3.73

3 — 3 — — —

6–0.41–11%

13–0.86–23% 14–0.93–25% 14–0.93–25% 9–0.60–16%

Pledged Persons

58 17 3.41

3 — 2 1 — —

6–0.35–10%

15–0.88–26% 15–0.88–26% 20–1.18–35.5% 2–0.12–3.5%

Land and People

44 11 4.00

— — — — — —

—

11–1.00–25% 10–0.91–22.5% 14–1.27–32% 9–0.82–20.5%

Royal grant

Deportees

Rations

Total

85 23 3.70

— — 2 — — —

2–0.09–2%

38 12 3.17

— — — — — —

—

69 17 4.06

2 — 4 1 — 1

8–0.47–12%

30 11 2.31

— — — — — —

—

580 181 3.20

13 2 17 4 — 1

37–0.20–6%

23–1.00–27% 12–1.00–31.5% 17–1.00–25% 2–0.17–7% 140–0.78–24% 19–0.83–22% 12–1.00–31.5% 14–0.82–20% 13–1.00–43% 160–0.88–27% 23–1.00–27% 14–1.17–37% 14–0.82–20% 4–0.33–13% 143–0.80–25% 18–0.78–21% — 16–0.94–23% 11–0.83–37% 100–0.55–17%

The Harran Census Scribe A Scribe B

Table 37: Numerical Proportions among Family Members

332 chapter ten

7–50% 7–50%

37–53% 33–47%

8–47% 9–53%

42 Families Males Females

Total: 223 Families Males 102–47% Females 115–53%

30–54% 26–46%

94–47% 106–53%

43–67% 21–33%

5–83% 1–17%

38–66% 20–34%

Pledged Land Persons and People

181 Families Males Females

Slaves

25–57% 19–43%

— —

25–57% 19–43%

Royal grants

81–56% 64–44%

35–58% 25–42% 53–55% 44–45%

27–46% 32–54%

26–68% 12–32%

133–55% 108–45%

61–52% 57–48%

72–59% 51–41%

The Harran Census B A+B

46–54% 39–46%

A

64–52% 59–48%

31–57% 23–43%

33–48% 36–52%

Deportees

Table 38: Numerical Proportions among Family Members: Males versus Females

6–20% 24–80%

— —

6–20% 24–80%

Rations

411–52% 379–48%

113–54% 97–46%

298–51% 282–49%

Total

numerical proportions among family members 333

CHAPTER ELEVEN

THE NUMBER OF GENERATIONS IN THE FAMILY

This chapter concerns 295 families: most of them, 247 families (84%), consist of two generations; 42 of them (14%) are of one generation; and only six families (2%) have three generations (see Table 39); in ve out of these six cases only the mother of the family head is listed, and in one single case a man is clearly attested with his son, grandson, and probably also his wife (family no. 288).1 There are differences between the various groups: 80 slave families (78.5%) are of two generations as against 22 families (21.5%) of only one generation (there are no three-generation families); in the Harran Census only six families (8%) are of one generation, one family is of three generations (1%), and 71 (91%) are of two generations. In the Deportees only four families (11%) are of one generation, three families are of three generation (8%), and 30 families (81%) are of two generations. Pledged families: one family (6%) is of three generations, 14 (82%) are of two generations, and two (12%) are of one generation. “Land and People”: one family (3%) is of three generations, 27 families (79%) are of two generations, and six (18%) are of one generation. Royal grants: 12 families (86%) are of two generations and two (14%) are of one generation (there are no three-generation families). The rations recipients group is again unusual, with 100% two-generation families. The most signicant datum in this chapter is the very low percentage of the three-generation families: only six of these 295 families—about 2%. This is a clear-cut nding, with only a few exceptions: (1) nine families attested in texts of the Harran Census attributed to Scribe B consist of two or three generations (families nos. 320, 325, 333, 340–342, 348, 350, 353), but since all the women in these texts are placed in one category, it is unclear whether the additional woman/ women are the family head’s daughter(s), sister(s), mother(s), second wife, or daughter-in-law; it is reasonable to suppose that in most of

1

See Fales, 1975, pp. 332, 344; Gelb, 1979, pp. 76–77; Snell, 1993, p. 222.

the number of generations in the family

335

these cases the additional woman is the family head’s daughter, sister, or even daughter-in-law or second wife, so these families are of only two generations. Still, in a very few cases the additional woman may be the family head’s mother, and this would enlarge the number of the three-generation families slightly; (2) four slave families are of two or three generations since an additional person in each of these families may be the family head’s mother (Families nos. 33, 61, 95, and 102), but it is unclear whether this additional person is the family head’s daughter, sister, mother, or brother, and again it is possible that in a few cases the additional person may be the family head’s mother, and this would also enlarge the number of the three-generation families slightly; But even assuming that all these 13 families consist of three generations they would still amount only about 6%. The meaning of this nding is that only in very rare cases did members of the lower stratum see their grandchildren. This conclusion carries highly signicant implications for the question of longevity in the Neo-Assyrian period. In the second volume of this study it will be shown that the members of the middle and the upper strata reached their sixties, as can be clearly indicated from the dates of their legal transactions. Roth is right in claiming that there are no clear-cut data on longevity in Ancient Near Eastern records, with a few exceptions;2 on the other hand, as mentioned earlier, there are dozens of dated legal transactions which may serve as important data on this issue. Moreover, the Book of Kings states the age of the kings of Judah as well as the duration of their reigns, so it is possible to calculate their longevity:3 there are clear indications of the age of 15 kings and their average lifespan was 46 years. The duration of one generation is about 22.3 years. Even if one calculates only the longevity of the ten kings of Judah that died in “natural” circumstances, and were not assassinated or killed on the battleeld, their average age at death is only about 51 years; still, about half of these kings lived past the age of 50, and a few even reached their late sixties (Manasseh, 67 years; Uzziah, 68).4 These gures well match the conclusions of this chapter: assuming an average of about 25 years duration for one generation, it is clear

2 See Roth, 1987, pp. 718–719, and note 9. For a different opinion see Dandamaev, 1984, p. 185. 3 See Galil, 1996, p. 155. 4 See also Galil, 2004, pp. 419–420.

336

chapter eleven

that most males did not reached the age of 50 since only in one out of these 295 families does a grandfather live with his grandchild. Moreover, if the marriage pattern in the Ancient Near East is the “eastern” one, as rightly claimed by Roth,5 and if females bore their rst child around the age of 20 or even a few years younger, then these females’ lifespan might be even shorter than their husbands’, since only in very rare cases did these females live to see their grandchildren; they probably died in their forties.

A. Slaves One Generation (22) Clear Data (21) Twenty-one families have only one generation. All these are type-A1 families (nos. 7–8, 22, 28–29, 36, 48, 50, 55–56, 62, 68–69, 82–86, 101, 108, 110). Unclear Data (1) One “unclear” family distinctly includes one generation: nos. 15. Two Generations (80) Clear Data (54) The following 54 clear families have two generations: 14 nuclear families with children (type A2): nos. 1, 3–6, 27, 42, 49, 58, 67, 77, 96, 100, 114; ve A3 families: nos. 38, 51–52, 70–71; 26 A4 families, nos. 10–11, 31, 40–41, 43, 46–47, 63–66, 72–75, 80–81, 88, 90–94, 97, 99; ve A5 families: nos. 2, 9, 57, 59, 76; three extended families (nos. 17, 26, 78); and one frérèche (no. 25). Unclear Data (26) Twenty-six “unclear” slave families evidently include two generations: nos. 12–13, 16, 21, 30, 32–35, 37, 39, 44–45, 53–54, 61, 89, 95, 98, 102–104, 107, 109, 113, 115; four out of these families (nos. 33, 61, 95, and 102) clearly include two generations, but since an additional

5

See Roth, 1987, pp. 720–722.

the number of generations in the family

337

person in each of these families may be the family head’s mother they might be of three generations (see introduction to this chapter ). Unclear Number of Generations (14) In 14 cases the number of generations is unclear: in four cases it is unclear if one or two generations are attested: no. 14 is a family of three persons, and it may include a child, but this is only one possibility; no. 24 consists of six persons, but it is not clear if this gure refers to one or two families; no. 87 consists of two persons: a man with his wife, daughter or mother; nos. 105–106 probably include a couple but it is unclear whether another member of this family is mentioned. Eight of the other nine families probably are of two generations but it is not certain: it is likely in families nos. 23, 79, 112 and is possible in the ve more cases: nos. 18–20, 111, and 116. In the last family, no. 60, there are two women, probably the head’s two wives; this is the most reasonable possibility but it is no more than that.

B. Pledged People One Generation (2) Two type-A1 families are clearly of one generation: a couple without children (Families nos. 118, 128). Two Generations (14) Clear Data (13) The following 13 clear families include two generations: seven nuclear families with children (type A2: nos. 117, 119, 121–123, 127, 135); one A3 family (no. 120); three A4 families (nos. 130–132); and two extended families (nos. 124 and 126). Unclear Data (1) Family no. 133, which is placed as pledge by its head, clearly has two generations: a woman with her two sons and a daughter, and one additional male, possibly the family head’s son, brother, or slave.

338

chapter eleven

Three Generations (1) Family no. 125 clearly has three generations: the family head’s mother, wife, brother and son. Unclear Number of Generations (2) The number of generations in the following two families is unclear: family no. 129 has one or two generations (a couple without children, or a father with his child or another family member); and family no. 134 is a couple with two additional males: probably the family head’s sons or brothers.

C. “Land and People” One Generation (6) Clear Data (3): Three A1 families (a couple without children): nos. 148, 176,187. Unclear Data (3): Families nos. 171–173 are probably also A1 families. Two Generations (27) Clear Data (13) The following 13 known families have two generations: nine nuclear families with children (type A2: nos. 147, 149, 164–166, 169, 184–186); one A3 family (no. 146); two A4 families (nos. 150 and 168); and one A5 family (no. 145). Unclear Data (14) Fourteen families clearly are of two generations since each has at least one child (families nos. 139, 144, 151–155, 160–161, 163, 170, 174–175, 183). Three Generations (1) Family no. 159 clearly has three generations: the family head’s mother, sister, and weaned son.

the number of generations in the family

339

Unclear Number of Generations (18) The number of generations in the following 18 families is unclear: families nos. 141–143 probably include a couple and a son each, but it is not clear; no. 136 is a family of four persons, a couple with two sons or two brothers; in three other cases (nos. 137, 140, 158) it is not clear if one family is attested or more; in Families nos. 138, 179–180, only the name of the family head is attested, with a total of the family members; in two other families (nos. 156–157) it is not clear if children are included; nos. 162 and 182 consist of only two persons each, possibly a couple without children; Family no. 167 consists of two to ve persons, but it is not clear if it includes children; families nos. 177–178 are each of three people, and they may include a child but it is not clear; and no. 181 consist of two persons: a woman and an additional family member whose identity is unclear.

D. Royal Grants One Generation (2) Clear Data (2) Families nos. 198 and 215 are two type-A1 families, each of one generation. Two Generations (12) Clear Data (12) The following 12 known families include two generations: eight nuclear families with children (type A2: nos. 211, 241–243, 245–248); one A3 family (no. 244); and three A4 families (nos. 208–209, 223).

E. The Harran Census One Generation (6) Families nos. 283, 310, 313, 328, 330, 339 are type-A1 families, each of one generation.

340

chapter eleven

Two Generations (71) The following 71 families have two generations: 25 nuclear families with children (type A2: nos. 279, 281–282, 284–286, 289–290, 294, 296–298, 309, 312, 314, 324, 327, 331–332, 334, 336–337, 349, 351, 356); two A3 families (nos. 291, 317); two A5 families (nos. 277, 280); 21 families of “Fathers and sons” (nos. 357–377); 12 “unclear families” which clearly include two generations (nos. 278, 299–300, 304–305, 308, 311, 318–319, 322, 343 and 355); and nine are of two or three generations (nos. 320, 325, 333, 340–342, 348, 350, 353: see introduction to this chapter). Three Generations (1) Family no. 288 clearly has three generations: the family head’s two sons, a daughter, and a grandson, and three women, probably his wife and two daughters-in-law. Unclear Number of Generations (23) The number of generations in the following 23 families is unclear: nos. 287, 292–293, 295, 301–303, 306–307, 315–316, 321, 323, 326, 329, 335, 338, 344–347, 352, 354.

F. Deportees and Displaced Persons One Generation (4) Nos. 402, 420 and 428 are type-A1 families, each consisting of one generation; and no. 395, an extended family—is a couple and the brother of the family head. Two Generations (32) Clear Data (17) The following 17 clear families include two generations: nine nuclear families with children (type A2: nos. 392, 403, 407–409, 412–413, 417, 429); two type-A3 family (no. 397, 411); two type-A4 families (nos. 430–431); two type-A5 families (nos. 421 and 434); an extended

341

the number of generations in the family

family (no. 418): a couple without children but with the family head’s mother and sister; and no. 404, probably a multiple-family kinship group (see chapter II). Unclear Data (15) The following 15 families, whose type is unclear, consist of two generations, parents and children: nos. 390–391, 393, 396, 398–399, 401, 410, 414, 422–424, 426, 432–433. Three Generations (3) Family no. 419 clearly included three generations: a couple with two sons and the family head’s mother. Families nos. 415–416 include the family head’s mother and at least one of his children, so both clearly include three generations. Unclear Number of Generations (18) The number of generations in the following 18 families is unclear: nos. 378–389, 394, 400, 405–406, 425 and 427. Table 39: The Number of Generations in the Family

Slaves (102) Pledges (17) “Land and People” (34) Royal grants (14) Harran Census (78) Deportees (37) Rations (13) Total (295)

One Generation

Two Generations

Three Generations

22 21.5% 2 12% 6 18% 2 14% 6 8% 4 11% —

80 78.5% 14 82% 27 79% 12 86% 71 91% 30 81% 13 100% 247 84%

—

42 14%

1 6% 1 3% — 1 1% 3 8% — 6 2%

SUMMARY

This book studies 447 families of the lower stratum in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. These families are divided into seven groups for discussion: A. Slaves (116 families); B. Pledged persons (19 families); C. Persons enumerated in sales and lists of “Land and People” (52 families); D. Families attested in royal grants (89); E. Families of the Harran Census (101); F. Deportees and displaced families (57); and G. Recipients of rations (13 families). These lower stratum families are attested in 177 texts, which are divided into four main types: legal transactions, administrative records, court decisions, and letters. Most texts (69%) are legal transactions (122), mainly conveyances of two types: sales of people (78) and sales of “Land and People” (30); the others are administrative records (49) or letters (6). Most texts originate in the three main cities of Assyria (Affur, Calah, and Nineveh); however, the texts do not reect only the situation in these three cities; on the contrary, many texts from Nineveh refer to diverse areas of the Assyrian empire, from Til Barsib and NÏrubu in the west to Arbail in the east; and from TalmÖsa, the province of the rab-fÊqê and Izalla in the north, to Babylonia in the south.The earliest text is dated to 800 B.C. and the latest ones to the end of the 7th century, but most data refer to the end of the 8th and the 7th centuries B.C. About 30% of these families are clearly slaves or temporarily in that status, namely pledged people (groups A and B). Most of the other families were probably free persons employed as tenants on land owned by the members of the middle and upper strata. The signicant differences between these seven groups are reected in the various chapters of this book. In most chapters the two poles are slaves on the one hand and the people in the Harran Census on the other hand (see the discussion below). The status of the families enumerated in sales of “Land and People” is discussed in chapter III as well in the second part of this book. These people seem to be slaves since they are “sold” along with the land and are recorded with the land in the inventory of sold property; however, very signicant differences in terminology and formulation appear in sales of people and in those of “Land and People”: A. The usual

summary

343

terms signifying slaves (ARAD/ARAD.MEe, GEMÉ/GEMÉ.MEe, LÚ.eÁM), which are very common in sales of people, are very rare in sales of “Land and People”. In 221 of 249 sales of people (89%), the ones sold are dened by one of the above three terms, and only in 28 of 249 texts (11%) are the sold people not dened by any of these three terms; but in the sales of “Land and People” only in four out of 18 texts (22%) are the people sold dened by one of these terms, and in the other 14 texts (78%) the people are not dened by any of them, but are called souls/persons: ZI.MEe or UN.MEe. B. “Guarantee Clauses” are rare in sales of “Land and People”, while in sales of people they are more frequent: a Guarantee Clause exists in only three sales of “Land and People” (21% of the unbroken texts), while in sales of people this clause is found in 104 of 193 unbroken texts (54%). C. In sales of people, whether the profession of the men being sold is noted can be checked in 187–189 cases (it is not clear if SAA VI 255 is a sale of people or of land and people); the other texts are broken. In fact, the profession of only 14–16 male slaves (7–9%) is attested. The other 91–93% of the adult male slaves and all the female slaves are “non-professional”. In the sales of “Land and People” the profession of 23–25 males (61–63%) is indicated. Note that in the Harran Census the profession of 107 adult men (92%) is mentioned, and only nine adult men are “non-professional” (seven of them are riÊqu).1 D. In some sales of “Land the People” the price of the transaction is so low as to be unreasonable for people (if they were slaves) to be included, even if we assume that the price of the land was very cheap (this matter is considered at length in chapters II–III). E. Moreover, if the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” were indeed slaves, one would expect to nd sales of enslaved farmers without the land, but out of 468 Neo-Assyrian sales of persons, only in one text is the sold man dened as a “gardener” (SAA XIV 49), and even in this case it is not clear whether the seller owned the gardener’s land. All these points indicate that the issue is indeed very problematic and intricate, and it is even unclear whether the status of all the people enumerated in sales of “Land and People” was the same. In my opinion, although a few families listed in these texts might be slaves, most people attested in sales of “Land and People” were probably tenants (see below).

1 Families of riÊqu or of day-laborers are not attested at all in Neo-Assyrian records, probably since most of these men were unable to maintain a family.

344

summary

Most families listed in the texts of grants and exemptions from tax to ofcials as well in royal grants and personal decrees to temples were probably also tenants or temple employees of low rank. A very common formula in the texts of grants and exemptions from tax to ofcials signies that the family head is “with his people” (adi UN.MEe-gú), without detailing how many people; this differs from the sales of people, in which those sold are almost always indicated by their name or by their connection with the family head. Moreover, the people enumerated in text no. 131 (= SAA XII 26–28) are probably not true slaves but tenants. It is clearly stated in SAA XII 26 r. 1–8 that the personnel of these elds may not be called up for the corvée. Clearly then, before Assurbanipal exempted these people of Nabû-farru-uÉur from taxes, they were obliged to perform ilku duties; therefore their status is related to the question of whether true slaves were liable for these services. In the Neo-Assyrian period there is actually still no evidence that true slaves were sent to perform these services on behalf of their masters; yet no text indicates the reverse possibility. However, in the Neo-Babylonian period privately owned slaves were not obliged to perform public works (Dandamaev). Moreover, one might claim that sending true slaves to perform public services would be too risky and economically not sensible, since the slaves might run away, while the yearly cost of ilku service (per person) was only a few shekels (assuming a cost of one shekel or less per month for one person’s service). Would it be logical to risk a property of 60 shekels or more for an outlay of one or two shekels? More reasonably, the slave-owner would rather pay money than perform these duties, or would send one of his day-laborers or tenants to do them. So it is more reasonable to suggest that the personnel attested in the royal grants were tenants and not slaves. The families recorded in royal grants and personal decrees to temples were probably also tenants or temple employees of low rank. In text no. 132 the professions of these people are not specied in the detailed description of this text, but in the summary (lines r. 12–13) the people are clearly dened as tillers: “a grand total of 41 people from ArbÏla whom I have donated to ZabÊba as tillers” (PAB 41 ZI.MEe URU.arbail-a-a a-na LÚ. qa-tin-ú-te a-na DN ad-din-gú-nu-ti ). The scribe chose to dene the people by the term qatinnu (“ana LÚ qatinnÖte”), and not “ana urdÊnÖti”, so they probably were not temple slaves but temple employees of low rank, or temple tenants. They became part of the permanent temple staff, and there are no indications that the temple administrators were allowed to sell people donated to temples by the king.

summary

345

Their status might be different from that of slaves bought by the temple from private individuals or of day-laborers: they are protégés of the temple, dwell within it or its surroundings, cultivate its land, and are provided with corn rations or share the elds’ corn with it. The families attested in the Harran Census were probably tenants, and their status was not different from that of other “farmers” and “gardeners” who tilled land that was not in their possession in return for a portion of the crop. It is most important to point out that a few cultivators attested in the Harran Census own land: two gardeners own ten hectares (text no. 135 I: 1–11); a guardian of a poplar grove owns twelve hectares of land; and two farmers own an ox or two (text no. 136 II: 20 –24; III: 1–7; 8–11). The gardeners and the grove guardian own land, and the farmers own only oxen. But in text no. 146 III: 1–24 the scribe notes three times that small parcels of two or four hectares of land have been given to the farmers. So these cultivators, most probably tenants, are allowed to accumulate land and oxen, namely means of production; yet they are still tenants who cultivate land owned mainly by the members of the middle and upper strata in the Neo-Assyrian Empire; one might suggest that in their eyes they already see a glimmer of light in the darkness, and they seem to be on the high road to complete economic independence. But it is of great signicance that these two families, which have managed to accumulate enough land to maintain themselves, continue to function as tenants and to cultivate land owned by others. They do so probably not because they are obliged to cultivate these elds or forced to serve their masters, but because tenancy is an important anchor in their life, which provides better economic stability and is an insurance against bad times, a shelter from drought and hunger, as well as from powerful wicked neighbors or corrupt ofcials who might take over the land accumulated by these tenants through hard work and application. So tenancy in the Assyrian realm is a major economic system, but it also has signicant social and political implications; a system of patronage and dependence that serves the masters, but also the tenants. This is well reected in dozens of documents, mainly petitions to the king, with complaints about corrupt ofcials who plunder lands owned by other ofcials, expel the personnel who have cultivated these ravaged farms, and resettle these holdings with their own tenants. The deportees and displaced persons discussed in this book are only the families still in transit from their original places to their new ones, and not deportees who have been settled in their new place. During their

346

summary

transfer the deportees probably hold the provisional status of prisoners of war. Only at the second stage does the Assyrian administration place them in different positions on the various levels of Assyrian society. In the fullness of time they become an inseparable part of Assyrian society. The deportees are slotted in primarily according to the king’s requirements and their talents. Some are given low-level or even senior positions in the Assyrian bureaucracy; others (only in rare cases) are sold as slaves by corrupt ofcials or are awarded, by the king, as slaves to his ofcials. But most of the deportees are apparently placed as tenants on lands owned by the king or his ofcials, or by the temples. The 327 families whose size is clear constitute 1212 persons, an average of 3.71 per family (see Table 32). The two largest families are of 15 and 14 persons, and eleven families consist of eight persons or more. But these 13 large families account for only 4% of the 327 families of known size. Thirty-four families consist of six or seven persons (some 10%); and another 95 families are of four or ve persons (29%). The other 185 families are of minimal size, having only two or three members. The average family size of rations recipients is the smallest (2.31 members). The average slave family has 3.18 members, the average pledged family has 3.79, and the average family attested mainly in sales of “Land and People” has 3.29. The largest average family is attested in the group of deportees and displaced people: 4.56 members; the average family in the Harran Census has 4.08 members and that in the group of Royal grants has 3.96. One of the main conclusions of this book is the manifest reduction in the size of the families after 680 B.C. compared with the size of families before 681 B.C. (see Tables 33–34). The size of the average family in the earlier period is 4.36, and in the later it is 2.79 (only about 64% of the size of the average family in the earlier period). These differences, apparent in most work groups, cannot be accidental; they probably indicate the weakening of the lower stratum with a reduction in its family size, as against the strengthening of the middle and upper strata at the expense of the lower stratum at the zenith of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, mainly in the reigns of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. These differences, as mentioned, are indicated in most work groups: slaves, 4.39 members in the average family before 681 and 2.58 after 680 B.C.; Pledged families, 4.30 and 2.83 respectively; “Land and People”, 3.88 and 3.67 respectively; royal grants, 4.67 and 3.14 respectively.

summary

347

Another important conclusion is the homogeneity of the data relating to these two periods, especially in the earlier one. The differences in the sizes of the average family in the six groups attested in this early period are very modest: the average family is of 4.36 close to the size of the average slave family in this period (4.39), that of pledged people has 4.3, that of “Land and People”—3.88, and that of the Harran Census—4.08. The highest gures are for the royal grants—4.67, and for the Deportees—5.1. So the lowest datum (3.88) is about 89% of the average (4.36) and the highest (5.1) is 117% of this average. In the material data dated after 680 the differences between the groups are more signicant but still moderate compared with the differences between the two main periods: the average family has 2.79 members, approximately the size of the average pledged family in this period (2.83); the average family of rations recipients has 2.31 members; that of slaves 2.58, of royal grants 3.14, and of “Land and People” 3.67. So the lowest gures (for rations recipients and slaves) are about 83%-92% of the average (2.79) and the highest (for “Land and People” and royal grants) are 113%–132% of this average. In the second part of this study, which will be published as a separate volume, I reach the conclusion that the average family of the various groups of the middle and upper strata in the Neo-Assyrian period consists of about ve to six persons, so there is a clear correlation between the families status and size in the 8th and early 7th centuries; this phenomenon is even more signicant in the reigns of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. This last conclusion is in full accordance with the results of the study of the relation between families’ size and their status in various pre-industrial societies worldwide, but especially in England and France in the 17th and 18th centuries A.D.2 A popular French proverb holds that “children are the wealth of the poor” but the conclusions of my study indicate that the motivation for reproduction among the members of the lower stratum in the NeoAssyrian period was low, even very low. The small size of the lower stratum families in this period might be a result of a strict planning of manpower by the landowners:3 they probably preferred small and efcient families, namely nuclear families, to large and inefcient kinship groups. These landowners possibly

2 3

See, e.g., Flandrin, 1979, pp. 53–65. For this idea see Fales, 1975, pp. 352–358.

348

summary

encouraged their tenants’ second and subsequent sons to move to other farms owned by the same landowners, and to cultivate them (as tenants) as potential family heads, rather than remain at the farm cultivated by their father and under his or the eldest brother’s supervision. That brother probably remained on the farm cultivated by his father, and became the family head after his death, taking care of his mother and other family members. The small size of the lower stratum families exacerbated the shortage of manpower in the Neo-Assyrian Empire, especially of people employed in agriculture (therefore, deportees are placed as tenants even though they were formerly weavers or cooks see SAA XI 201 I: 41–43; 202 II: 16’–17’). The dearth of manpower and the surplus of lands allowed the resettlement of nuclear deported families on relatively large parcels (see, e.g., SAA XI 219) and a system of cultivating only about 50% of the land per year, as is indicated in the various texts of placing land as a pledge.4 The lack of manpower created the feature of abandoned and uncultivated lands, indicated in a few Neo-Assyrian records, mainly letters. One of these letters originating in Calah, and probably sent ca. 730 B.C. (ND 2734+ = CTN V, p. 210, rev. ll. 48–50), distinctly refers to the right to cultivate abandoned land (or land presented as abandoned): “eqlu (A.eÀ.GA) ga pÊhat URU ur-zu-hi-na gum-ma ra-mu ga la bÏlÒ e-gu-ú man-nu ga eqlu (A.eÀ.GA) Éa-hi-tú-u-ni i-bat-taq” (= “If land of the province of ArzÖhina is abandoned, there will be confusion without (an appropriate decision by) my lord. Whoever desires a eld, he should cut off (a piece from unused land)”. This information is very important since the disputed area was only about 100 km north of the city of Affur, an area under Assyrian control since the reign of AssurnaÉirpal II. There is a similarity between this letter and Hammurabi’s Laws (no. 30), which refers to a problem seems similar. It states that if a “soldier or a trapper” abandons his land for three years and in the meantime

4

See, e.g., Jas, 2000, with earlier literature. There are no indications of land shortage in the Ancient Near East in any period: see van Driel, 1998; van Koppen 2001, p. 486; Oded, 1979, pp. 64–74; and cf. Liverani, 2004, p. 214, who refers to the fact that AssurnasÉirpal II returned Assyrians to lands abandoned, (see RIMA 2 134–135, A.O. 98.1: 60–63). For manpower shortage in the Hittite Empire see Bryce, 2002, pp. 77–78.

summary

349

someone else has cultivated it, and then the rst one returns and wants it back, his landed assets are not restored to him. Instead, “the one who has taken them over and assumed the duties shall continue to do so himself ”.5 Other Neo-Assyrian records indicate donations of abandoned lands to deportees for cultivation: for example, in a letter sent to Sargon II by Nabû-hamÊtÖ’a, possibly the deputy governor of MÊzamua, he refers to the people whom he settled outside the forts and cites the order he gave them: “Go! Each one of you should build (a house) in the eld and stay there!” (SAA V 210: 11–13 = ABL 208). Another example is SAA XV 219 (=ABL 314), sent to Sargon II by earru-Ïmuranni, governor of Babylon; in r. 5’–10’ of this letter, he writes:” . . . there are fty who came here and are building houses for themselves. I told them: ‘Everybody should build himself a house, enter it, and live in his house’ ”. A third example is SAA XV 54 (= ABL 556, see especially ll. 7’–17’). The excess land caused a further reduction in the size of the cultivators’ families since some of the younger sons may have taken the opportunity to leave their fathers’ houses and go to work as tenants in another farm, with the option of establishing their own families. The size of lower stratum families in the reigns of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal is reduced; so the weak elements apparently grew still weaker, while the wealthy families grew still richer and stronger, accumulating more and more estates and slaves. Smallholders probably lost their land in time; they were obliged by economic circumstances to sell their lands, becoming tenants in their own erstwhile properties. Large estates grew up in various areas, and the large holdings of RÏmanniAdad are probably only one example of the feature of latifundization in the 7th century; the records clearly indicate transfer of land from small landowners to large ones, and from the king to his ofcials. Middle and high ranking ofcials sometimes buy whole villages from many

5 See Richardson, 2000a, pp. 52–53; and cf. also Roth, 1995, pp. 86–87. This law is similar to the law on the abandoning of a wife: if a man has abandoned his city and his family and has disappeared (probably for a few years), his wife is allowed to marry another man and to enter his house; and if then the man returns and wishes to take his wife back the wife shall not be restored to her rst husband. See Hammurabi’s Laws, no. 136 (Richardson, 2000, pp. 84–85); and see also MAL, 36, 45 (for a period of abandonment of two or ve years), and the Laws of Eshnunna, no. 30. On this issue see recently Fleishman, 2005, pp. 487–491, with earlier literature.

350

summary

small owners, and receive generous land grants and exemptions, and a salary from the king’s treasury. The Assyrian kings seem to have tried to counter and slow these processes by close control of the accumulation of the means of production in the hands of a relatively small group of ofcials. At the same time a clear tendency is evident in the central administration to allow tenants to own some of the holdings that they cultivate. Accumulation of land and people by ofcials might be translated into political power, and the possibility that a few of these ofcials were at least suspected of involvement in the conspiracy headed by SÊsî, is well known.6 To weaken the power of these ofcials the Assyrian king decentralized their holdings by donating land to ofcials not in the province that they governed but in that under a different governor. The intention was twofold: to limit the land owned or administered by a given provincial governor, and to cause interminable conicts between the governor and other ofcials who owned land in that area (divide et impera). Most families of the lower stratum are nuclear (about 94%: see the full discussion in chapter IV); only about 5% are extended families, which include “other” family members, such as the family head’s brother, sister, mother, and more. Multiple-family kinship groups are a very rare phenomenon among the lower stratum families (only about 1%). The families are patriarchal, and most are monogamous (see chapter VI). Polygamy is very rare in families of the lower stratum: only three of the families treated here are known to be polygamous (1.5%), and even with the addition to them of three cases where the likelihood of polygamy is high the percentage of these families will still be very low (about 3%). One of the central issues discussed in this book is single-parent families. About 28% of the known families discussed were single-parent ones (see chapter IX). Moreover, great differences exist in the percentages of single-parent families in the various groups: the highest level is attested among the slave families (42%; only the rations recipients—who are a very small sample—are exceptional). At the other end of the scale the Harran Census families show the lowest percentage: only 6%; in the other groups the percentage is between 33% and 19%. Most single-parent families in the Ancient Near East probably did not form

6 See Nissinen, 1998, pp. 103–153, with earlier literature; idem, PNA, pp. 1093b– 1094a (7).

summary

351

voluntarily but resulted from various constraints such as (1) the death of the father or mother, (2) divorce, (3) a maid who bore a child to her master without marrying him, (4) breakup of a slave family that was sold, (5) pledging of a few family members and (6) breakup of families due to political circumstances. About 22% out of the 272 families discussed in chapter VII are childless (61): most of them are nuclear families without children (type-A1), ten are of type-A5 (a childless male, unmarried, divorced, or widower, with his mother; or with his mother and unmarried brother or sister), and a few are extended or of indeterminate type. The highest percentage is observed among the slaves (28%), and a relatively low percentage is evident mainly in two groups: the Harran Census (16%), and Royal grants (15%). These data probably do not indicate the rate of infertility in this period, which was probably lower than 22%. If the ten A5-type families are reduced from these calculations, the average percentage of the childless family is about 19%, and one might suppose that the percentage of infertility was actually about 15% or even less, because a few of these childless families were presumably young couples recently married and still without children. This is based on the assumption that females married at a relatively young age. In the whole population under study there is almost equality in the numbers of men (24%) and women (27%), as well as between males and females (52% males, 48% females: see chapter X and Tables 37–38). But there are signicant differences between the number of sons and the number of daughters in the average family: the sons constitute 25% of the family, close to the percentage of the fathers (24%) and the wives (27%); but only 17% of the family members are daughters. The main explanation for this is probably the relatively early age of marriage of the daughters, attested in most groups, with only one notable exception: the Deportees (see chapter VIII). The transfer and the process of resettlement could have delayed the age of marriage of the deported females. Most of the lower stratum families usually consist of two generations (84%). About 14% are of one generation and only six families (2%) have three generations; in ve out of these six cases only the mother of the family head is listed, and in one single case a man is attested with his son, grandson and probably also his wife. This is a clear-cut conclusion, with only a few negligible exceptions (see chapter XI). But even assuming that in these few exceptions the families consist of three generations the percentage of these families will still be only about 6%.

352

summary

The meaning of this nding is that only in very rare cases did members of the lower stratum see their grandchildren. This conclusion carries signicant implications for the question of longevity in the Neo-Assyrian period. In the second volume of this study it will be shown that the members of the middle and the upper strata reached their sixties, as can be clearly indicated from the dates of their legal transactions. Assuming an average of about 25 years duration for one generation, it is clear that most males of the lower stratum died in their forties since only in one out of these families does a grandfather live with his grandchild. Moreover, if the marriage pattern in the Ancient Near East is the “eastern” one, as rightly claimed by Roth, and if females bore their rst child around the age of 20 or even a few years younger, then these females’ lifespan might be even shorter than their husbands’, since only in very rare cases did these females live to see their grandchildren; they probably died in their early forties.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ABBREVIATIONS

ABC = J. Stevenson, Assyrian and Babylonian Contracts with Aramaic Reference Notes, Chicago 1901. ABD = D. N. Freedman (ed.), Anchor Bible Dictionary, I–VI, New York 1992. ABL = R. F. Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian Letters belonging to the Kouyunjik Collection of the British Museum, I–XIV, Chicago 1892–1914. ADB = C. H. W. Johns, An Assyrian Doomsday Book or Liber Censualis of the District Round Harran in the Seventh Century B.C., Leipzig 1901. ADD = C. H. W. Johns, Assyrian Deeds and Documents, Cambridge, I (1898), II (1901), III (1901), IV (1923); and AJSL 42 (1925/6), pp. 170–204, 228–275. AECT see Fales, 1986. Aerts—Klengel, 1990 = E. Aerts and H. Klengel (eds.), The Town as Regional Economic Centre in the Ancient Near East, Leuven 1990. AfO = Archiv für Orientforschung. AfO Bh. 6 = see Friedrich, et al., 1940. Aharoni, 1973 = Y. Aharoni (ed.), Excavations and Studies: Essays in Honour of Professor Shemuel Yeivin, Tel-Aviv 1973 (Hebrew). Ahmad, 1996 = A. Y. Ahmad, “The Archive of Affur-mÊtu-taqqin found in the New town of Affur and Dated Mainly by Post-Canonical Eponyms,” Al-RÊdÊn 17 (1996), pp. 207–288. AHw = W. von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch, Wiesbaden 1958–1981. AJSL = American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures. Åkerman = K. Åkerman, “The ‘Aussenhaken Area’ in the City of Assur during the Second half of the 7th Century BC: A Study of a Neo-Assyrian City Quarter and its Demography,” SAAB 13 (1999–2001), pp. 217–272. ALA = see Pedersén, 1986. Albenda, 1987 = P. Albenda, “Woman, Child, and Family: Their Imagery in Assyrian Art,” in Durand, 1987, pp. 17–21. AOAT = Alter Orient und Altes Testament. AoF = Altorientalische Forschungen. Andreau et al., 1997 = J. Andreau, P. Briant and R. Descat, Économie Antique: Prix et formation des prix dans les économies antiques, EAHSBC 3, Paris 1997. An St = Anatolian Studies. AOS = American Oriental Series. APN see Tallqvist, 1918. Archi, 1984 = A. Archi (ed.), Circulation of Goods in Non-Palatial Context in the Ancient Near East, Roma 1984. ARU see Kohler—Ungnad, 1913. AST = B. Menzel, Assyrische Tempel, I–II, Studia Pohl: Series Maior 10, Rome 1981. Avishur—Deutsch, 1999 = Y. Avishur and R. Deutsch (eds.), Michael: Historical, Epigraphical and Biblical Studies in Honor of Prof. Michael Heltzer, Tel-Aviv—Jaffa 1999. BaF = Baghdader Forschungen. Bahrani, 2001 = Z. Bahrani, Women of Babylon: Gender and Representation in Mesopotamia, London—New York 2001. Baker, 2001 = H. D. Baker, “Degrees of Freedom: Slavery in Mid-First Millennium BC Babylonia,” in Mitchell, 2001, pp. 18–26. Baker, 2002 = H. D. Baker, “Approaches to Akkadian Name-Giving in First-Millennium BC Mesopotamia,” in Wunsch, 2002, pp. 1–24.

354

bibliographical abbreviations

Baker, 2004 = H. D. Baker, The Archive of the NappÊhu Family, Wien 2004. BaM = Baghdader Mitteilungen. BASOR = Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. BAT = J. Amitai (ed.), Biblical Archaeology Today, Jerusalem 1985. BATSH 6 see Radner, 2002. Beaver, 1973 = M. W. Beaver, “Population, Infant Mortality and Milk,” Population Studies 27 (1973), pp. 243–254. Becking, 1981–1982 = B. Becking, “The Two Neo-Assyrian Documents from Gezer in their Historical Context,” JEOL 27 (1981–1982), pp. 76–89. Ben-Sasson, 1995 = M. Ben-Sasson (ed.), Religion and Economy: Connections and Interaction, Jerusalem 1995 (Hebrew). Biggs, 2000 = R. D. Biggs, “Conception, Contraception, and Abortion in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in George—Finkel, 2000, pp. 1–13. Böck et al., 1999 = B. Böck, E. Cancik-Kirschbaum and T. Richter (eds.), Munuscula Mesopotamica: Festschrift für Johannes Renger, AOAT 267, Münster 1999. Bongenaar, 1997 = A. C. V. M. Bongenaar, The Neo-Babylonian Ebabbar Temple at Sippar: its Administration and its Prosopography, Leiden 1997. Bordreuil—Briquel-Chatonnet, 1996–1997 = P. Bordreuil and F. Briquel-Chatonnet, “Aramaic Documents from Til Barsib,” Abr-Nahrain 34 (1996–1997), pp. 100–107. Braun et al., 1998 = J. Braun, K. Lyczkowska, M. Popko and P. Steinkeller (eds.), Written on Clay and Stone: Ancient Near Eastern Studies Presented to K. Szarzynska on the Occasion of Her 80th Birthday, Warsaw 1998. Breen—Rothman, 1995 = R. Breen and D. B. Rottman, Class Stratication: A Comparative Perspective, New York 1995. Brentjes, 1968 = B. Brentjes, “Zur Stellung der Produzenten materieller Güter im orientalischen Altertum,” Ethnographisch-Archäologishe Zeitung 9 (1968), pp. 45–68. Brinkman, 1979 = J. A. Brinkman, “Babylonia under the Assyrian Empire,” in Larsen, 1979, pp. 223–250. Brinkman, 1982 = J. A. Brinkman, “Babylonia c. 1000–748 B.C.,” in CAH III/1, pp. 282–313. Brinkman, 1982a = J. A. Brinkman, “Sex, Age and Physical Condition Designations for Servile Laborers in the Middle Babylonian Period,” in van Driel et al., 1982, pp. 1–8. Brinkman, 1984 = J. A. Brinkman, Prelude to Empire. Babylonian Society and Politics, 747–626 B.C., Philadelphia 1984. Brinkman, 1997 = J. A. Brinkman, “Unfolding the Drama of the Assyrian Empire,” in Parpola—Whiting, 1997, pp. 1–16. Brinkman—Kennedy, 1983 = J. A. Brinkman and D. A. Kennedy, “Documentary evidence for the economic base of early Neo-Babylonian society: a survey of dated Babylonian economic texts, 721–626 B.C.,” JCS 35 (1983), pp. 1–90. Bryce, 2002 = T. Bryce, Life and Society in the Hittite World, Oxford 2002. BSOAS = Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. BT see Parker, 1963. Bunnens, 1997 = G. Bunnens, “Til Barsib undr Assyrian Domination: A Brief Account of the Melbourne University Excavations at Tell Ahmar,” in Parpola— Witing, 1997, pp. 17–28. Bunnens, 2000 = G. Bunnens (ed.), Essays on Syria in the Iron Age, Louvain 2000. CAD = The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. CAH III = J. Boardman et al. (eds.), The Prehistory of the Balkans; and the Middle East and the Aegean World, Tenth to Eighth Centuries B.C., The Cambridge Ancient History, III, Cambridge 1982 (3rd ed.). Cameron—Kuhrt, 1983 = A. Cameron and A. Kuhrt (eds.), Images of Women in Antiquity, Detroit, MI 1983.

bibliographical abbreviations

355

CCNA see Fales, 1973. CDA = J. Black, A. George and N. Postgate, A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, Wiesbaden 2000 (2nd ed.). CHANE = Culture and History of the Ancient Near East. CIS II = Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum. Pars II: inscriptions aramaicas continens, Paris 1889 ff. Cleland—Scott, 1987 = J. Cleland and C. Scott (eds.), The World Fertility Survey: An Assessment, Oxford 1987. Cohen et al., 1993 = M. E. Cohen, D. C. Snell and D. B. Weisberg (eds.), The Tablet and the Scroll: Near Estern Studies in Honor of W. W. Hallo, Bethesda, MD 1993. Cole, 1996 = S. W. Cole, Nippur in Late Assyrian Times, c. 755–612 BC, SAAS IV, Helsinki 1996. Cole, 1996a = S. W. Cole, Nippur IV. The Early Neo-Babylonian Governor’s Archive from Nippur, OIP 114, Chicago 1996. Cole—Machinist, 1998 = S. W. Cole and P. Machinist (eds.), Letters from Priests to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, SAA XIII, Helsinki 1998. Contenau, 1926 = G. Contenau, Contrats et Lettres d’Assyrie et de Babylonie, TCL 9, Paris 1926, nos. 57, 59–66, pls. xxv–xxix. Contenau, 1966 = G. Contenau, Everyday Life in Babylonia and Assyria, New York 1966. Cooper, 2002 = J. S. Cooper, “Virginity in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Parpola—Whiting, 2002, pp. 91–112. CRAAI = Compte rendu de la . . . Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale. CT 53 see Parpola, 1979. CT 54 see Dietrich, 1979. CTN I see Kinner Wilson, 1972. CTN II see Postgate, 1973. CTN III see Dalley—Postgate, 1984. CTN V see Saggs, 2001. CTNMC = T. Jacobsen, Cuneiform Texts in the National Museum, Copenhagen, Chiey of Economical Content, Copenhagen 1939. Conder, 1904 = C. R. Conder, “Remarks on the Gezer Tablet,” PEF QS 36 (1904), pp. 400–401. Conder, 1905 = C. R. Conder, “Note on the Gezer Tablet,” PEF QS 37 (1905), p. 74. Curtis—Reade, 1995 = J. E. Curtis and J. E. Reade (eds.), Art and Empire. Treasures from Assyrian in the British Museum, New York 1995. Dalley, 1996–1997 = S. M. Dalley, “Neo-Assyrian Tablets from Til Barsib,” Abr-Nahrain 34 (1996–1997), pp. 66–99. Dalley—Postgate, 1984 = S. M. Dalley and J. M. Postgate, The Tablets from Fort Shalmaneser, CTN III, London 1984. Dandamaev, 1984 = M. A. Dandamaev, Slavery in Babylonia: From Nabopolassar to Alexander the Great (626–331 BC), Revised ed. by M. A. Powell; co-ed. D. B. Weisberg, DeKalb, Ill 1984. Dandamaev, 1990 = M. Dandamaev, “The Economy of the Uruk Region in the 6th–5th Centuries B.C. (Nergal-nÊÉir, son of Nanâ-ibni),” in Aerts—Klengel, 1990, pp. 85–93. Dandamaev, 1999 = M. A. Dandamaev, “Land Use in the Sippar Region during the NeoBabylonian and Achaemenid Periods,” in Hudson—Levine, 1999, pp. 363–389. Dandamaev— Lukonin, 1989 = M. A. Dandamaev and V. G. Lukonin, The Culture and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran, English ed. by P. L. Kohl, Cambridge 1989. DDD = K. van der Toorn et al. (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, Leiden 1995. Deller, 1961 = K. Deller, “Zur Terminologie neuassyrischer Urkunden,” WZKM 57 (1961), pp. 29–42. Deller, 1965 = K. Deller, “Neuassyrisches aus Sultantepe,” Orientalia 34 (1965), pp. 457–477.

356

bibliographical abbreviations

Deller, 1966 = K. Deller, “The Neo-Assyrian Epigraphical Remains of Nimrud,” Orientalia 35 (1966), pp. 179–194. Deller, 1984 = K. Deller, “Assyrisch um/nzarhu und Hebräisch ‘äzrah,” ZA 74 (1984), pp. 235–239. Deller, 1984a = K. Deller, “Drei wiederentdeckte neuassyrische Rechtsurkunden aus Affur,” BaM 15 (1984), pp. 225–251. Deller, 1985 = K. Deller, “SAG.DU UR.MAH, ‘Löwenkopfsitula, Löwenkopfbecher’,” BaM 16 (1985), pp. 327–346. Deller, 1987 = K. Deller, “TamkÊru-Kredite in neuassyrischer Zeit,” JESHO 30 (1987), pp. 1–29. Deller, 1990 = K. Deller, “aB umfarhum, mA umzarhu, nA unzarhu/unzahhu, nB unzarah,” NABU 1990/3, p. 63. Deller, 1991 = K. Deller, “Heiratsurkunde einer assyrischen Prinzessin,” NABU 1991/4, pp. 73–74. Deller, 1991a = K. Deller, “Neuassyrisch qanû, qinÒtu, tidintu,” in Charpin—Joannes, 1991, pp. 345–355. Deller, 1999 = K. Deller, “The Assyrian Eunuchs and Their Predecessors,” in Watanabe, 1999, pp. 303–311. Deller—Donbaz, 1987 = K. Deller and V. Donbaz, “Sancheribs Zababa-Temple in Affur,” BaM 18 (1987), pp. 221–228. Deller—Fadhil, 1993 = K. Deller and A. Fadhil, “Neue Nimrud-Urkunden des 8. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.,” BaM 24 (1993), pp. 243–270. Deller—Fales et al., 1995 = K. Deller, F. M. Fales and L. Jakob-Rost with contributions by V. Donbaz, Neo-Assyrian Texts from Assur, Private Archives in the Vorderasiatisches Museum of Berlin, Part 2, SAAB 9 (1995). Deller—Millard 1985 = K. Deller and A. R. Millard, “Zwei Rechtsurkunden aus Affur im British Museum,” AfO 32 (1985), pp. 38–52. Deller—Millard, 1993 = K. Deller and A. R. Millard, “Die Bestallungsurkunde des Nergal-Êpil-kÖmÖja von Kalhu,” BaM 24 (1993), pp. 217–242. Dercksen = J. G. Dercksen (ed.), Trade and Finance in Ancient Mesopotamia, Leiden 1999. Diakonoff, 1969 = I. M. Diakonoff (ed.), Ancient Mesopotamia: Socio-Economic History, Moscow 1969. Diakonoff, 1972 = I. M. Diakonoff, “Socio-economic Classes in Babylonia and the Babylonian Concept of Social Stratication,” in Edzard, 1972, pp. 41–52. Diakonoff, 1974 = I. M. Diakonoff, “Slaves, Helots and Serfs in Early Antiquity,” Acta Antiqua 22 (1974), pp. 45–78. Diakonoff, 1975 = I. M. Diakonoff, “The Rural Community in the Ancient Near East,” JESHO 18 (1975), pp. 121–133. Diakonoff, 1985 = I. M. Diakonoff, “Extended Families in Old Babylonian Ur,” ZA 75 (1985), pp. 47–65. Dietrich, 1967–1968 = M. Dietrich, “Neue Quellen zur Geschichte Babylonies (II),” WO 4 (1967–1968), pp. 183–251. Dietrich, 1979 = M. Dietrich, Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, part 54, London 1979. Dietrich, 2003 = M. Dietrich, The Babylonian Correspondence of Sargon and Sennacherib, SAA XVII, Helsinki 2003. Dietrich—Loretz, 1995 = M. Dietrich and O. Loretz (eds.), Vom Alten Orient Zum Alten Testament: Festschrift für W. F. von Soden zum 85. Geburstag am 19. June 1993, Kevelaer 1995. Donbaz, 1988 = V. Donbaz, “Some Neo-Assyrian Contracts from Girnavaz and Vicinity,” SAAB 2 (1988), pp. 3–30. Donbaz, 1998 = V. Donbaz, “Some selected Neo-Assyrian texts from Istanbul and elsewhere,” SAAB 12 (1988), pp. 57–82. Donbaz, 2002 = V. Donbaz, “A Neo-Assyrian Text of unknown Provenance,” NABU 2002/4, pp. 88–89.

bibliographical abbreviations

357

Donbaz—Parpola, 2001 = V. Donbaz and S. Parpola, Neo-Assyrian Legal Texts in Istanbul, StAT 2, Saarbrücken 2001. Driver—Miles = G. R. Driver and J. C. Miles, The Assyrian Laws, Oxford 1935. Durand, 1982 = J.-M. Durand, Documents cunéiformes de la IV ae Section de l’École pratique des Hautes Études, I, Hautes Études Orientales 18, Geneva—Paris 1982. Durand, 1987 = J.-M. Durand, La Femme dans le Proche-Orient antique, Paris 1987. EA = L. J. Delaporte, Epigraphes araméens, Paris 1912. EAHSBC = Entretiens d’archéologie et d’histoire, Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges, Musée archéologique départemental, Paris. Edzard, 1972 = D. O. Edzard (ed.), Gesellschaftsklassen im Alten Zweistromland und in den angrenzenden Gebieten: XVIII. Rencontre assyriologique internationale, München 1972. Eichler, 1976 = B. L. Eichler et al. (eds.), Kramer Anniversary Volume: Cuneiform studies in honor of Samuel Noah Kramer, AOAT 25, Kevelaer 1976. Eph’al, 1973 = I. Eph’a, “On the Identication of the Israelite Exiles in the Assyrian Empire,” in Aharoni, 1973, pp. 201–203 (Hebrew). Elat, 1987 = M. Elat, “Der TamkÊru im neuassyrischen Reich,” JESHO 30 (1987), pp. 233–254. Elat, 1998 = M. Elat, “Die wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen der Assyrer mit den Arabern,” in Maul, 1998, pp. 39–57. Ellickson— Thorland, 1995 = R. C. Ellickson and C. D. Thorland, “Ancient Land Law: Mesopotamia, Egypt, Israel,” Chicago-Kent Law Review 71 (1995), pp. 321–411. Ellis, 1976 = M. D. Ellis, Agriculture and the State in Ancient Mesopotamia: An Introduction to Problems of Land Tenure, Philadelphia 1976. Ep. Ar. = F. Vattioni, “Epigraa aramaica,” Augustinianum 10 (1970), pp. 493–452; 11 (1971), pp. 18–190; Orientalia 48 (1979), pp. 140–145; quoted by text number. ÉPHÉ see Durand, 1982. Faist, 2001 = B. I. Faist, Der Fernhandel des assyrischen Reiches zwischen dem 14. und 11. Jh. v. Chr., OAOT 265, Münster 2001. Fales, 1973 = F. M. Fales, Censimenti e catasti di epoca neo-assira, Studi Economici e Tecnologici 2, Roma 1973. Fales, 1974 = F. M. Fales, “Notes on Some Nineveh Horse Lists,” Assur 1/3 (1974), pp. 5–24. Fales, 1974a = F. M. Fales, “West Semitic Names from the Governor’s Palace,” Annali di Ca’ Foscari 13 (1974), pp. 179–188. Fales, 1975 = F. M. Fales, “Popolazione servile e programmazione padronale in tarda età neo-assira,” OrAnt 14 (1975), pp. 325–360. Fales, 1979 = F. M. Fales, “Studies on Neo-Assyrian Texts I: Joins and Collations to the Tell Halaf Documents,” ZA 69 (1979), pp. 192–216. Fales, 1980 = F. M. Fales, “New Assyrian Letters from the Kuyunjik Collection,” AfO 27 (1980), pp. 136–153. Fales, 1981 = F. M. Fales (ed.), Assyrian Royal Inscriptions: New Horizons, Roma 1981. Fales, 1983 = F. M. Fales, Cento lettere neo-assire: traslitterazione e traduzione, commento e note, I, Quaderni del Seminario di Iranistica, Uralo-Altasiatica e Caucasologia dell’Università degli Studi de Venezia 17, Venezia 1983. Fales, 1983a = F. M. Fales, “Studies on Neo-Assyrian Texts II: ‘Deeds and Documents’ from the British Museum,” ZA 73 (1983), pp. 232–255. Fales, 1984 = F. M. Fales, “The Neo-Assyrian Period,” in Archi, 1984, pp. 207–220. Fales, 1984a = F. M. Fales, “A Survey of Neo-Assyrian Land Sales,” in Khalidi, 1984, pp. 1–13. Fales, 1986 = F. M. Fales, Aramaic Epigraphs on Clay Tablets of the Neo-Assyrian Period, Roma 1986. Fales, 1987 = F. M. Fales, “The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, 1. The Archive of Remanni-Adad,” SAAB 1 (1987), pp. 93–114.

358

bibliographical abbreviations

Fales, 1988 = F. M. Fales, “Babylonian Slave-Documents in the State Archives of Assyria,” SAAB 2 (1988), pp. 41–57. Fales, 1988a = F. M. Fales, “The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, 2. The Many Faces Nabu-farru-uÉur,” SAAB 2 (1988), pp. 105–124. Fales, 1989 = F. M. Fales, “The Assyrian Village of BÒt Abu-Ila’a,” in Zaccagnini, 1989, pp. 169–200. Fales, 1990 = F. M. Fales, “Grain Reserves, Daily Rations, and the Size of the Assyrian Army: A Quantitative Study,” SAAB 4 (1990), pp. 23–34. Fales, 1990a = F. M. Fales, “The Rural Landscape of the Neo-Assyrian Empire: A Survey,” SAAB 4 (1990), pp. 81–142. Fales, 1993 = F. M. Fales, “River Transport in Neo-Assyrian Letters,” in Zablocka— Zawadski, 1993, pp. 79–92. Fales, 1994 = F. M. Fales, “A Fresh Look at the Nimrud Wine Lists,” in Milano, 1994, pp. 361–380. Fales, 1996 = F. M. Fales, “Prices in Neo-Assyrian Sources,” SAAB 10 (1996), pp. 11–35, 1*–18* (Charts I–VIII). Fales, 1996a = F. M. Fales, “An Aramaic Tablet from Tell Shioukh Fawqani, Syria,” Semitica 46 (1996), pp. 81–121. Fales, 1997 = F. M. Fales, “People and Professions in Neo-Assyrian Assur,” in Waetzoldt—Hauptmann, 1997, pp. 33–40. Fales, 1997a = F. M. Fales, “An Overview of Prices in Neo-Assyrian Sources,” in Andreau et al., 1997, pp. 291–312. Fales, 2000 = F. M. Fales, “Preparing for War in Assyria,” in Économie Antique: La guerre dans les économies antiques, EAHSBC 5, Paris 2000, pp. 35–62. Fales, 2000a = F. M. Fales, “The Use and Fanction of Aramaic Tablets,” in Bunnens, 2000, pp. 89–124. Fales, 2001 = F. M. Fales, L’impero assiro: storia e amministrazione (IX–VII secolo a.c.), Roma—Bari 2001. Fales—Jakob-Rost, 1991 = F. M. Fales and L. Jakob-Rost (with two appendixes by K. Deller), Neo-Assyrian Texts from Assur, Private Archives in the Vorderasiatisches Museum of Berlin, Part 1. SAAB 5 (1991). Fales—Postgate, 1992 = F. M. Fales and J. P. Postgate (eds.), Imperial Administrative Records, Part I: Palace and Temple Administration, SAA VII, Helsinki 1992. Fales—Postgate, 1995 = F. M. Fales and J. P. Postgate (eds.), Imperial Administrative Records, Part II: Provincial and Military Administration, SAA XI, Helsinki 1995. Farber, 1989 = W. Farber, Schlaf, Kindchen, Schlaf ! Mesopotamische Baby-Beschwörungen und Rituale, Mesopotamian Civilization 2, Winona Lake, IN 1989. Finkelstein, 1953 = J. J. Finkelstein, “Cuneiform Texts from Tell Billa,” JCS 7 (1953), pp. 111–176. Finkelstein, 1957 = J. J. Finkelstein, “Assyrian Contracts from Sultantepe,” An St 7 (1957), pp. 137–145. Finley, 1980 = M. I. Finley, Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology, London 1980. Flandrin, 1979 = J.-L. Flandrin, Families in Former Times: Kinship, Household and Sexuality (Tran. by R. Southern), Cambridge 1979. Fleishman, 2005 = J. Fleishman, “Continuity and Change in Some Provisions of the Code of Hammurabi’s Family Law,” in Sefati et al., 2005, pp. 480–496. FNALD see Postgate, 1976. Foster, 2005 = B. R. Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature, Bethesda, MD 2005 (3rd ed.). Frahm, 1997 = E. Frahm, Einleitung in die Sancherib-Inschriften, Wien 1997. Frahm, 2002 = E. Frahm, “Assur 2001: Die Schriftfunde,” MDOG 134 (2002), pp. 47–86. Frahm, 2002a = E. Frahm, “SÒn-ahhê-erÒba,” PNA 3/I, (2002), pp. 1113–1127. Frame, 1984 = G. Frame, “The ‘First Families’ of Borsippa During the Early NeoBabylonian Period,” JCS 36 (1984), pp. 67–80.

bibliographical abbreviations

359

Frame, 1992 = G. Frame, Babylonia 689–627 B.C.: A Political History, PIHANS 69, Istanbul 1992. Frame, 2004 = G. Frame (ed., with the assistance of L. S. Wilding), From the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea: Studies on the History of Assyria and Babylonia in Honour of A. K. Grayson, Leiden 2004. Freydank, 1980 = H. Freydank, “Zur Lage der deportierten Hurriter in Assyrien,” AoF 7 (1980), pp. 89–117. Freydank, 1992 = H. Freydank, “Das Archiv Assur 18764,” AoF 19 (1992), pp. 276–321. Friedl, 2000 = C. Friedl, Polygynie in Mesopotamien und Israel: Sozialgeschichtliche Analyse polygamer Beziehungen anhand rechtlicher Texte aus dem 2. und 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr., AOAT 277, Münster 2000. Friedrich, et al., 1940 = J. Friedrich, G. R. Meyer, A. Ungnad and E. F. Weidner, Die Inschriften vom Tell Halaf. Keilschrifttexte und aramäische Urkunden aus einer assyrischen Provinzhauptstadt. AfO Bh. 6, Berlin 1940. Fuchs—Parpola, 2001 = A. Fuchs and S. Parpola (eds.), The Correspondence of Sargon II, Part III, Letters from Babylonia and the Eastern Provinces, SAA XV, Helsinki 2001. Gaál, 1988 = E. Gaál, “The Social Structure of Alalah,” in Heltzer—Lipinski, 1988, pp. 99–110. Galil, 1996 = G. Galil, The Chronology of the Kings of Israel and Judah, SHCANE 9, Leiden 1996. Galil, 1998 = G. Galil, “The Economic Activity of Wealthy Families in Nineveh in the 8th and 7th Centuries BCE,” in I. Bartal and I. Gafni (eds.), Sexuality and the Family in History: Collected Essays, Jerusalem 1998, pp. 27–41 (Hebrew). Galil, 2001 = G. Galil, Israel and Assyria, Haifa—Tel-Aviv 2001 (Hebrew). Galil, 2001a = G. Galil, “Two Neo-Assyrian Tablets from Tel Hadid,” NABU, 2001/3, pp. 68–69. Galil, 2004 = G. Galil, “The Chronological Framework of the Deutronomistic History,” Biblica 85 (2004), pp. 413–421. Galil, forthcoming (a) = G. Galil, “The Prices of the Slaves in the Neo-Assyrian Period.” Galil, forthcoming (b) = G. Galil, “A New Look at a Neo-Assyrian Sale of ‘Land and People’.” Galil, forthcoming (c) = G. Galil, “Financing of Private commercial enterprises in the Neo-Assyrian Period: KAV 121 and other related Texts from Assur,” SAAB 15. Gallagher, 1994 = W. R. Gallagher, “Assyrian Deportation Propaganda,” SAAB 8 (1994), pp. 57–65. Galling, 1935 = K. Galling, “Assyrische und Persische Präfekten in Gezer,” PJB 31 (1935), pp. 81–86. Garelli, 1972 = P. Garelli, “Problèmes de stratication sociale dans l’empire assyrien,” in Edzard, 1972, pp. 73–79. Garelli, 1979 = P. Garelli, “Le Système scal de l’empire assyrien,” in van Effenterre, 1979, pp. 7–18. Garelli, 1986 = P. Garelli, “Les Archives inédites d’un center provincial de l’empire assyrien,” in Veenhof, 1986, pp. 241–246. Garelli, 1998 = P. Garelli, “Les dames de l’empire assyrian,” in Prosecký, 1998, pp. 175–181. Gelb, 1965 = I. J. Gelb, “The Ancient Mesopotamian Ration System,” JNES 24 (1965), pp. 230–243. Gelb, 1972 = I. J. Gelb, “From Freedom to Slavery,” in Edzard, 1972, pp. 81–92; see also his notes in pp. 49–51. Gelb, 1973 = I. J. Gelb, “Prisoners of War in Early Mesopotamia,” JNES 32 (1973), pp. 70–98.

360

bibliographical abbreviations

Gelb, 1976 = I. J. Gelb, “Quantative Evaluation of Slavery and Serfdom,” in Eichler, 1976, pp. 195–207. Gelb, 1979 = I. J. Gelb, “Household and Family in Early Mesopotamia,” in E. Lipinski (ed.), State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East, OLA 5, Leuven 1979, pp. 1–97. George—Finkel, 2000 = A. R. George and I. L. Finkel (eds.), Wisdom, Gods and Literature: Study in Assyriology in Honour of W. G. Lambert, Winona Lake, IN 2000. Glassner, 1989 = J. J. Glassner, “Women, Hospitality and the Honor of the Family,” in Lesko, 1989, pp. 71–90. Goetze, 1939 = A. Goetze, “Cuneiform Inscriptions from Tarsus,” JAOS 59 (1939), pp. 1–16. Gordon, 1953 = C. H. Gordom, “Stratication of Society in Hammurabi’s Code,” Jewish Social Studies, 5 (1953), pp. 17–28. GPA see CTN II. Grayson, 1982 = A. K. Grayson, “Assyrian Civilization,” in CAH III, pp. 194–228. Grayson, 1991 see RIMA 2. Grayson, 1992 = A. K. Grayson, “History and Culture of Assyria,” in ABD, IV, pp. 732–755. Grayson, 1993 = A. K. Grayson, “Assyrian Ofcials and Power in the Ninth and Eighth Centuries,” SAAB 7 (1993), pp. 19–52. Grayson, 1995 = A. K. Grayson, “Eunuchs in Power: Their Role in the Assyrian Bureaucracy,” in Dietrich—Loretz, 1995, pp. 85–98. Grayson, 1996 see RIMA 3. Grayson—van Seters, 1975 = A. K. Grayson and J. van Seters, “The Childless Wife in Assyria and the Stories of Genesis,” Orientalia 44 (1975), pp. 485–486. Graziani, 2000 = S. Graziani (ed.), Studi sul Vicino Oriente antico dedicati alla memoria di Luigi Cagni, Napoli 2000. Greengus, 1969 = S. Greengus, “The Old Babylonian Marriage Contract,” JAOS 89 (1969), pp. 505–532. Gruber, 1989 = M. I. Gruber, “Breast-Feeding Practices in Biblical Israel and in Old Babylonian Mesopotamia,” JANES 19 (1989), pp. 61–83. Hämeen-Anttila = J. Hämeen-Anttila, A Sketch of Neo-Assyrian Grammar, SAAS XIII, Helsinki 2000. HANE/S = History of the Ancient Near East/Studies. Haring—de Maaijer = B. Haring and R. de Maaijer (eds.), Landless and Hungry? Access to Land in Early and Traditional Societies, Leiden 1998. Harper, ABL see ABL. Harris, 1989 = R. Harris, “Independent Women in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Lesko, 1989, pp. 145–156. Harris, 1992 = R. Harris, “Women (Mesopotamia),” in ABD, VI, pp. 947–951. Harris, 2000 = R. Harris, Gender and Aging in Mesopotamia: The Gilgamesh Epic and other Ancient Literature, Norman, OK 2000. Hawkins, 2002 = J. D. Hawkins, “Eunuchs among the Hittites,” in Parpola—Whiting, 2002, pp. 217–233. Heltzer, 1976 = M. Heltzer, The Rural Community in Ugarit, Wiesbaden 1976. Heltzer, 1987 = M. Heltzer, “The Neo-Assyrian ŠAKINTU and the Biblical SÅKENET,” in Durand, 1987, pp. 33–40. Heltzer—Lipinski, 1988= M. Heltzer and E. Lipinski (eds.), Society and Economy in the Eastern Mediterranean (c. 1500–1000 B.C.); Proceedings of the International Symposium held at the University of Haifa from the 28th of April to the 2nd of May 1985, OLA 23, Leuven 1988. Heltzer—Malul, 2004 = M. Heltzer and M. Malul (eds.), T eshûrôt LaAvishur: Studies in the Bible and the Ancient Near East, in Hebrew and Semitic Languages. Festschrift Presented to Prof. Yitzhak Avishur on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, Tel-Aviv—Jaffa 2004.

bibliographical abbreviations

361

Henshaw, 1994 = R. A. Henshaw, Female and Male: The Cultic Personnel: The Bible and the Rest of the Ancient Near East, Allison Park, PA 1994. Hrufka— Komoroczy, 1978 = B. Hrufka and G. Komoroczy (eds.), Festschrift L. Matouš, Budapest 1978. HSAO = Heidelberger Studien zum Alten Orient. Hudson—Levine, 1999 = M. Hudson and B. A. Levine (eds.), Urbanization and Land Ownership in the Ancient Near East, Cambridge, MA 1999. Hudson— Wunsch, 2004 = M. Hudson and C. Wunsch (eds.), Creating Economic Order: Record-Keeping, Standardization and the Development of Accounting in the Ancient Near East, Bethesda, MD 2004. Hug, 1993 = V. Hug, Altaramäische Gramatik der Texte des 7. und 6. Jh.s v.Chr, HSAO 4, Heidelberg 1993. Hunger, 1968 = H. Hunger, Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone, AOAT 2, NeukirchenVluyn 1968. Ismail, 1989 = B. Kh. Ismail, “Two Neo-Assyrian Tablets,” SAAB 3 (1989), pp. 61–64. Jakob-Rost—Fales, 1996 = L. Jakob-Rost and F. M. Fales, Neuassyrische Rechtsurkunden, I, Mit einem Beitrag von E. Klengel-Brandt, KAN I, WVDOG 94, Berlin 1996. Jakob-Rost et al., 2000 = L. Jakob-Rost, K. Radner and V. Donbaz, Neuassyrische Rechtsurkunden, II, Mit einem Beitrag von E. Klengel-Brandt, KAN II, WVDOG 98, Saarbrücken 2000. Jakobson, 1969 = V. A. Jakobson, “Some Problems of the Economy of the Assyrian Empire,” in Diakonoff, 1969, pp. 253–276. Jakobson, 1969a = V. A. Jakobson, “The Social Structure of the Neo-Assyrian Empire,” in Diakonoff, 1969, pp. 277–295. Jakobson, 1999 = V. A. Jakobson, “Some Remarks to the Assyrian Doomsday Book,” in Böck et al., 1999, pp. 241–243. Jankowska, 1969 = N. B. Jankowska, “Some Problems of the Economy of the Assyrian Empire,” in Diakonoff, 1969, pp. 253–276. Jaruzelska, 1998 = I. Jaruzelska, Amos and the Ofcialdom in the Kingdom of Israel: The SocioEconomic Position of the Ofcials in the Light of the Biblical, the Epigraphic and Archaeological Evidence, Poznaq 1998. Jas, 1996 = R. M. Jas, Neo-Assyrian Judicial Procedures, SAAS V, Helsinki 1996. Jas, 2000 = R. M. Jas (ed.), Rainfall and Agriculture in Northern Mesopotamia, PIHANS 88, Istanbul 2000. Jas, 2000a = R. M. Jas, “Land Tenure in Northern Mesopotamia: Old Sources and the Modern Environment,” in Jas, 2000, pp. 247–263. JCS = Journal of Cuneiform Studies. JEOL = Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschap “Ex Oriente Lux”. JESHO = Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient. Joannès, 1997 = F. Joannès, “La mention des enfants dans les texts néo-babyloniens,” Ktema 22 (1997), pp. 119–133. Joannès, 2000 = F. Joannès (ed.), Rendre la justice en Mésopotamie, Saint-Denis 2000. Johns, ADB see ADB. Johns, 1904a = C. H. W. Johns, “Notes on the Gezer Contract Tablet,” PEF QS 36 (1904), pp. 237–244. Johns, 1904b = C. H. W. Johns, “Remarks on the Gezer Tablet,” PEF QS 36 (1904), pp. 401–402. Johns, 1905 = C. H. W. Johns, “The New Cuneiform Tablet from Gezer,” PEF QS 37 (1905), pp. 206–210. Johns, 1908 = C. H. W. Johns, “The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel,” PSBA 30 (1908), pp. 107–115, 137–141. Jursa, 1995 = M. Jursa, Die Landwirtschaft in Sippar in neubabylonischer Zeit, AfO Bh. 25, Vienna 1995.

362

bibliographical abbreviations

Jursa—Radner, 1995–1996 = M. Jursa and K. Radner, Kielschrifttexte aus Jerusalem, AfO 42/43 (1995–1996), pp. 89–108. KAJ = E. Ebeling, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur juristischen Inhalts, WVDOG 50, Leipzig 1927. KAN = Keilschrifttexte aus neuassyrischer Zeit: I see Jakob-Rost—Fales, 1996; II see JakobRost et al., 2000. Kataja—Whiting, 1995 = L. Kataja and R. M. Whiting (eds.), Grants, Decrees and Gifts of the Neo-Assyrian Period, SAA XII, Helsinki, 1995. KAV = O. Schröder, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur verschiedenen Inhalts, WVDOG 35, Leipzig 1920. KB 4 = F. E. Peiser, Texte juristischen und geschäftlichen Inhalts, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, IV, Berlin 1896. Khalidi, 1984 = T. Khalidi (ed.), Land Tenure and Social Transformation in the Middle East, Beirut 1984. Kinner Wilson, 1972 = J. V. Kinner Wilson, The Nimrud Wine Lists, CTN I, London 1972. Klengel, 1975 = H. Klengel, “Zur ökonomischen Funktion der hethitischen Temple,” Studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici 16 (1975), pp. 181–200. Knobloch, 1992 = F. W. Knobloch, “Adoption,” in ABD, I, pp. 76–79. Kohler—Ungnad, 1913 = J. Kohler and A. Ungnad, Assyrische Rechtsurkunden, Leipzig 1913. Kuhrt, 1989 = A. Kuhrt, “Non-Royal Women in the Late Babylonian Period: A Survey,” in Lesko, 1989, pp. 215–239. Kuhrt, 1995 = A. Kuhrt, The Ancient Near East c. 3000–300 BC, II, London—New York, 1995, pp. 473–546. Kümmel, 1974–1977 = H. M. Kümmel, “Ein Fall von Sklavenhehlerei,” AfO 25 (1974–1977), pp. 72–83. Kümmel, 1979 = H. M. Kümmel, Familie, Beruf und Amt im spätbabylonischen Uruk, Berlin 1979. Kwasman, 1986 = T. Kwasman, “Neo-Assyrian Legal Archives in the Kouyunjik Collection,” in Veenhof, 1986, pp. 237–240. Kwasman, 1988 = T. Kwasman, Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents in the Kouyunjik Collection of the British Museum, Studia Pohl: Series Maior 14, Roma 1988. Kwasman, 2000 = T. Kwasman, “Two Aramaic legal documents,” BSOAS 63 (2000), pp. 274–283. Kwasman—Parpola, 1991 = T. Kwasman and S. Parpola (eds.), Legal Transactions of the Royal Court of Nineveh, Part I: Tiglath-Pileser III through Esarhaddon, SAA VI, Helsinki 1991. Lackenbacher, 1983 = S. Lackenbacher, “À Propos de ADD 780,” Syria 30 (1983), pp. 47–51. Lambert, 1992 = W. G. Lambert, “Prostitution,” Xenia 32 (1992), pp. 127–161. Lanfranchi—Parpola, 1990 = G. B. Lanfranchi and S. Parpola (eds.), The Correspondence of Sargon II, Part II, Letters from the Northern and Northeastern Provinces, SAA V, Helsinki 1990. Larsen, 1979 = M. T. Larsen (ed.), Power and Propaganda: A Symposium on Ancient Empires, Copenhagen 1979 (= Mesopotamia 7). Larsen, 2002 = M. T. Larsen, The Assur-nada Archive, Leiden 2002. LAS see Parpola, 1983. Laslett, 1972 = P. Laslett (ed.), Household and Family in Past Time, Cambridge 1972. Laslett, 1972a = P. Laslett, “Introduction: The History of the Family,” in Laslett, 1972, pp. 1–89. Lebeau—Talon 1989 = M. Lebeau and Ph. Talon (eds.), Reets des deux euves: Volume de Mélanges offerts À A. Finet, Akkadica Suppl. 6, Leuven 1989. Leichty, 1989 = E. Leichty, “A Legal Text from the Reign of Tiglath-pileser III,” in Rochberg-Halton, 1987, pp. 227–229.

bibliographical abbreviations

363

Lesko, 1989 = B. S. Lesko (ed.), Women’s Earliest Records: From Ancient Egypt and Western Asia, Atlanta 1989. Lieb = S. J. Lieberman, “The Aramaic Argillary Script in the seventh century,” BASOR 192 (1968), pp. 25–31. Lindgren, 1995 = J. Lindgren, “Measuring the Value of Slaves and Free Persons in Ancient Law,” Chicago-Kent Law Review 71 (1995), pp. 149–215. Lion, 1997 = B. Lion, “Les enfants des families deportées de Mésopotamie du nord à Mari en ZL 11’,” Ktema 22 (1997), pp. 109–118. Lipinski, 1975 = E. Lipinski, Studies in Aramaic Inscriptions and Onomastics, I, OLA 1, Leuven 1975. Lipinski, 1985 = E. Lipinski, “Aramaic-Akkadian Archives from the Gozan-Harran Area,” in BAT, pp. 340–348. Lipinski, 1994 = E. Lipinski, Studies in Aramaic Inscriptions and Onomastics, II, Leuven 1994, pp. 213–240. Lipinski, 1995 = E. Lipinski, “Aramaic Clay Tablets from the Gozan-Harran Area,” JEOL 33 (1993–1994 published 1995), pp. 143–150. Lipinski, 1997 = E. Lipinski, “Straw in the Neo-Assyrian Period,” in Werdini, 1997, pp. 187–195. Lipinski, 1997a = E. Lipinski, “The Personal Names Handî, HarrÊny and Kurillay in Neo-Assyrian Sources,” in Waetzoldt—Hauptman, 1997, pp. 89–93. Lipinski, 1998 = E. Lipinski, “Aramaean Economic Thought,” AoF 25 (1998), pp. 289–302. Lipinski, 1998a = E. Lipinski, “Old Aramaean Contracts of Guarantee,” in Braun et al., 1998, pp. 39–44. Lipinski, 2004 = E. Lipinski, “Silver is owed to Haddiy,” in Heltzer—Malul, 2004, pp. 131*–139*. Liverani, 1984 = M. Liverani, “Land Tenure and Inheritance in the Ancient Near East: The Interaction between ‘Palace’ and ‘Family’ Sectors,” in Khalidi, 1984, pp. 33–44. Liverani, 2004 = M. Liverani, “Assyria in the Ninth Century: Continuity or Change?” in Frame, 2004, pp. 213–226. Livingstone, 1989 = A. Livingstone (ed.), Court Poetry and Literature Miscellanea, SAA III, Helsinki 1989. Luckenbill, 1924 = D. D. Luckenbill, The Annals of Sennacherib, OIP 2, Chicago 1924. Luukko—van Buylaere, 2002 = M. Luukko and G. van Buylaere (eds.), The Political Correspondence of Esarhaddon, SAA XVI, Helsinki 2002. Macalister, 1912 = R. A. S. Macalister, The Excavation of Gezer 1902–1905 and 1907– 1909, I, London 1912, pp. 22–31, and Fig. 1–4. Machinist, 1993 = P. Machinist, “Assyrians and Assyria in the First Millennium B.C.,” in Raaaub, 1993, pp. 77–104. Magen, 1986 = U. Magen, Assyrische Königsdarstellungen—Aspekte der Herrschaft, BaF 9, Mainz 1986. MAL = Middle Assyrian Laws. Malbran-Labat, 1982 = F. Malbran-Labat, L’armée et l’organisation militaire de l’Assyrie, Genève—Paris 1982. Malul, 1988 = M. Malul, Studies in Mesopotamian Legal Symbolism, AOAT 221, Kevelaer— Neukirchen-Vluyn 1988. Malul, 1998 = M. Malul, “Review of: R. M. Jas, Neo-Assyrian Judicial Procedures, SAAS V, Helsinki 1996,” Orientalia 67 (1998), pp. 277–280. Malul, 1999 = M. Malul, “Some Measures of Population Control in the Ancient Near East,” in Avishur—Deutsch, 1999, pp. 221–336. Malul, 2002 = M. Malul, Knowledge, Control and Sex. Studies in Biblical Thought, Culture, and Worldview, Tel Aviv—Jaffa 2002. Malul, 2003 = M. Malul, “Review of: R. Westbrook and R. Jasnow (eds.), Security for

364

bibliographical abbreviations

Debt in Ancient Near Eastern Law, CHANE 9, Leiden 2001,” Orientalia 72 (2003), pp. 243–249. Marx, 1964 = K. Marx, Pre-capitalist Economic Formations, Tran. by J. Cohen, London 1964. Mattila, 2000 = R. Mattila, The King’s Magnates: A Study of the Highest Ofcials of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, SAAS XI, Helsinki 2000. Mattila, 2002 = R. Mattila (ed.), Legal Transactions of the Royal Court of Nineveh, Part II: Assurbanipal through Sin-garru-igkun, SAA XIV, Helsinki 2002. Maul, 1998 = S. M. Maul (ed.), Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburstag am 24. Mai 1994: tikip santakki mala bagmu . . ., CM 10, Groningen 1998. Maul, 2000 = S. M. Maul, “Die Schriftfunde aus Assur von den Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft im Frühjahr 2000,” MDOG 132 (2000), pp. 65–100. MDOG = Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft. Mederos—Lamberg-Karlovsky, 2004 = A. Mederos and C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, Weight Systems and Trade Networks in the Old World (2500–1000 BC),” in Hudson— Wunsch, 2004, pp. 199–214. Melville, 1999 = S. C. Melville, The Role of Naqia/Zakutu in Sargonid Politics, SAAS IX, Helsinki 1999. Mendelsohn, 1949 = I. Mendelsohn, Slavery in the Ancient Near East, New York 1949. Menzel, AST see AST. Milano, 1994 = L. Milano (ed.), Drinking in Ancient Societies. History and Culture of Drinks in the Ancient Near East, HANE/S 6, Padua 1994. Milano, 1998 = L. Milano, “Aspects of Meat Consumption in Mesopotamia and the Food Paradigm of the Poor Man of Nippur,” SAAB 12 (1998), pp. 111–127. Mitchell, 2001 = P. Mitchell (ed.), The Archaeology of Slavery, London 2001 (= World Archaeology 33/1). Müller, 1999 = G. G. W. Müller, “Review of: K. Radner, Die neuassyrischen Privatrechtsurkunden als Quelle für Mensch und Umwelt, SAAS 6, Helsinki 1997,” OLZ 94 (1999), pp. 320–325. Na’aman— Zadok, 2000 = N. Na’aman and R. Zadok, “Assyrian deportations to the province of Samerina in the light of two cuneiform tablets from Tel Hadid,” Tel Aviv 27 (2000), pp. 159–188. NABU = Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires. NALK see Kwasman, 1988. NARGD see Postgate, 1969. Nissinen, 1998 = M. Nissinen, References to Prophecy in Neo-Assyrian Sources, SAAS VII, Helsinki 1998. NWL see Kinner Wilson, 1972. Oded, 1979 = B. Oded, Mass Deportations and Deportees in the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Wiesbaden 1979. Oded, 1992 = B. Oded, War, Peace and Empire: Justications for War in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, Wiesbaden 1992. OLA = Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta. OLP = Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica. OLZ = Orientalistische Literaturzeitung. Op = J. Oppert and J. Ménant, Document juridiques de l’Assyrie et de la Chaldée, Paris 1877. Oppenheim, 1955 = A. L. Oppenheim, “‘Siege-documents’ from Nipur,” Iraq 17 (1955), pp. 69–89. Oppenheim, 1967 = A. L. Oppenheim, “A New Look at the Structure of Mesopotamian Society,” JESHO 10 (1967), pp. 1–16. Or Ant = Oriens Antiquus. Rivista del Centro per le Antichità e la Storia dell’Arte del Vicino Oriente.

bibliographical abbreviations

365

Parker, 1954 = B. Parker, “The Nimrud Tablets, 1952—Business Documents,” Iraq 16 (1954), pp. 29–58. Parker, 1957 = B. Parker, “The Nimrud Tablets, 1956—Economic and Legal Texts from the Nabû Temple,” Iraq 19 (1957), pp. 125–138. Parker, 1961 = B. Parker, “Administrative tablets from the North-West Palace, Nimrud,” Iraq 23 (1961), pp. 15–67. Parker, 1963 = B. Parker, “Economic Tablets from the Temple of Mamu in Balawat,” Iraq 25 (1963), pp. 86–103. Parker, 1997 = B. Parker, “Garrisoning the Empire: Aspects of the Construction and Maintenance of Forts on the Assyrian Frontier,” Iraq 59 (1997), pp. 77–87. Parpola, 1975 = S. Parpola, “A Note on the Neo-Assyrian Census Lists,” ZA 64 (1974 published 1975), pp. 96–115. Parpola, 1979 = S. Parpola, “Collations to Neo-Assyrian Legal texts from Nineveh,” Assur 2/5 (1979), pp. 109–197. Parpola, 1979a = S. Parpola, Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum: Neo-Assyrian Letters from the Kuyunjik Collection, part 53, London 1979. Parpola, 1981 = S. Parpola, “Assyrian Royal Inscription and Neo-Assyrian Letters,” in Fales, 1981, pp. 117–141. Parpola, 1983 = S. Parpola, Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, Part II, Commentary and Appendices, AOAT 5/2, Neukirchen-Vluyn 1983. Parpola, 1985 = S. Parpola, “Si’gabbar of Nerab Resurrected,” OLP 16 (1985), pp. 273–275. Parpola, 1986 = S. Parpola, “The Royal Archives of Nineveh,” in Veenhof, 1986, pp. 223–236. Parpola, 1987 = S. Parpola, “The Forlorn Scholar,” in Rochberg-Halton, 1987, pp. 258–278. Parpola—Porter, 2001 = S. Parpola and M. Porter, The Helsinki Atlas of the Near East in the Neo-Assyrian Period, Helsinki 2001. Parpola—Whiting, 1997 = S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting (eds.), Assyria 1995, Helsinki 1997. Parpola—Whiting, 2002 = S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting (eds.), Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East, Helsinki 2002. Peoírková, 1978 = J. Peoírková, “On Land Tenure in Assyria,” in Hrufka—Komoroczy, 1978, pp. 178–200. Pedersén, 1986 = O. Pedersén, Archives and Libraries in the City of Assur, II, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Semitica Upsaliensia 8, Uppsala 1986. Pedersén, 1998 = O. Pedersén, Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East 1500–300 B.C., Bethesda, MD 1998. Pedersén, 2003 = O. Pedersén, “Review of: V. Donbaz and S. Parpola, Neo-Assyrian Legal Texts in Istanbul, StAT 2, Saarbrücken 2001,” OLZ 98 (2003), pp. 354–361. PEF QS = Palestine Exploration Fund, Quarterly Statement. Peiser, 1905 = F. E. Peiser, “Ein neuer assyrischer Kontrakt,” OLZ 8 (1905), pp. 130–134. Petschow, 1976 H. P. H. Petschow, “imittu,” RlA V (1976), pp. 68–73. PIHANS = Uitgaven van het Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istnbul. Publications de l’Institut historique-archéologique néerlandais de Stamboul. Pinches, 1904 = T. G. Pinches, “The Fragment of an Assyrian Tablet Found at Gezer,” PEF QS 36 (1904), pp. 229–236. PKTA = E. Ebeling, Parfümrezepte und kultische Texte aus Assur, Rome 1950. PNA = The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Helsinki 1998–: Vol. 1/I, 1998 (ed. by K. Radner); Vol. 1/II, 1999 (ed. by K. Radner); Vol. 2/I, 2000 (ed. by H. D. Baker); Vol. 2/II, 2001 (ed. by H. D. Baker); Vol. 3/I, 2002 (ed. by H. D. Baker). Ponchia, 1990 = S. Ponchia, “Neo-Assyrian Corn-Loans: Preliminary Notes,” SAAB 4 (1990), pp. 39–58.

366

bibliographical abbreviations

Postgate, 1969 = J. N. Postgate, Neo-Assyrian Royal Grants and Decrees, Studia Pohl: Series Maior 1, Rome 1969. Postgate, 1970 = J. N. Postgate, “More ‘Assyrian Deeds and Documents’,” Iraq 32 (1970), pp. 129–164, and plates XVIII–XXXII. Postgate, 1971 = J. N. Postgate, “Land Tenure in the Middle Assyrian Period: A Reconstruction,” BSOAS 34 (1971), pp. 496–520. Postgate, 1973 = J. N. Postgate, The Governor’s Palace Archive, CTN II, London 1973. Postgate, 1974 = J. N. Postgate, “Some Remarks on Conditions in the Assyrian Countryside,” JESHO 17 (1974), pp. 225–243. Postgate, 1974a = J. N. Postgate, Taxation and Conscription in the Assyrian Empire, Studia Pohl: Series Maior 3, Rome 1974. Postgate, 1976 = J. N. Postgate, Fifty Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents, Warminster 1976. Postgate, 1979 = J. N. Postgate, “The Economic Structure of the Assyrian Empire,” in Larsen, 1979, pp. 193–221. Postgate, 1979a = J. N. Postgate, “On Some Assyrian Ladies,” Iraq 41 (1979), pp. 89–103. Postgate, 1979b = J. N. Postgate, “Assyrian Documents in the Musée et d’Art d’Histoire, Geneva,” Assur 2/4 (1979), pp. 93–107. Postgate, 1982 = J. N. Postgate et al. (eds.), Societies and Languages of the Ancient Near East: Studies in Honour of I. M. Diakonoff, Warminster 1982. Postgate, 1987 = J. N. Postgate, “BM 118796: A Dedication Text on An ‘Amulet’,” SAAB 1 (1987), pp. 57–63. Postgate, 1987a = J. N. Postgate, “Employer, Employee and Employment in the NeoAssyrian Empire,” in Powell, 1987, pp. 257–270. Postgate, 1988 = J. N. Postgate, The Archive of Urad-ferÖa and his Family. A Middle Assyrian household in government service, Rome 1988. Postgate, 1989 = J. N. Postgate, “The Ownership and Exploitation of Land in Assyria in the 1st Millennium B.C.,” in Lebeau—Talon, 1989, pp. 141–152. Postgate, 1992 = J. N. Postgate, Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History, London—New York 1992. Postgate, 1992a = J. N. Postgate, “The Land of Assur and the Yoke of Assur,” World Archaeology 23 (1992), pp. 247–263. Postgate, 1995 = J. N. Postgate, “Some Latter-day Merchants of Affur,” in Dietrich—Loretz, 1995, pp. 403–406. Postgate, 1997 = J. N. Postgate, “Middle-Assyrian to Neo-Assyrian: The Nature of the Shift,” in Waetzoldt—Hauptmann, 1997, pp. 159–168. Postgate, 2000 = J. N. Postgate, “The Assyrian Army in Zamua,” Iraq 62 (2000), pp. 89–108. Postgate—Ismail = J. N. Postgate and B. K. Ismail, Texts from Nineveh, Texts in the Iraq Museum, XI, Baghdad n.d. (ca. 1979). Postgate—Mattila, 2004 = J. N. Postgate and R. Mattila, “Il-yadax and Sargon’s Southern Frontier,” in Frame, 2004, pp. 235–254. Powell, 1984 = M. A. Powell, “On the Absolute Value of the Assyrian qa and emÊr,” Iraq 46 (1984), pp. 57–61. Powell, 1987 = M. A. Powell (ed.), Labor in the Ancient Near East, AOS 68, New Haven 1987. Powell, 1990 = M. A. Powell, “Masse und Gewichte,” RlA 7 (1990), pp. 457–517. Powell, 1996 = M. A. Powell, “Money in Mesopotamia,” JESHO 39 (1996), pp. 224–242. Prosecký, 1998 = J. Prosecký (ed.), Intellectual Life of the Ancient Near East, CRRAI 43, Prague 1998. R (2R; 3R) = H. C. Rawlinson, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, II, London 1866 (= 2R); III, London 1870 (= 3R). Raaaub, 1993 = K. Raaaub (ed.), Anfänge politischen Denkens in der Antike, München 1993.

bibliographical abbreviations

367

Radner, 1997 = K. Radner, Die neuassyrischen Privatrechtsurkunden als Quelle für Mensch und Umwelt, SAAS 6, Helsinki 1997. Radner, 1997a = K. Radner, “Vier neuassyrische Privatrechtsurkunden aus dem Vorderasiatischen Museum, Berlin,” AoF 24 (1997), pp. 115–134. Radner, 1997b = K. Radner, “Erntarbeiter und Wein: Neuassyrische Urkunden und Briefe im Louvre,” SAAB 11 (1997), pp. 3–29. Radner, 1997–1998 = K. Radner, “Review of: R. M. Jas, Neo-Assyrian Judicial Procedures, SAAS V,” Helsinki 1996, AfO 44/45 (1997–1998), pp. 379–387. Radner, 1997–1998a = K. Radner, “Review of: L. Jakob-Rost and F. M. Fales, Neuassyrische Rechts-urkunden, I, KAN I, WVDOG 94, Berlin 1996,” AfO 44/45 (1997–1998), pp. 387–393. Radner, 1999 = K. Radner, Ein neuassyrisches Privatarchiv der Templegoldschmiede von Assur, StAT 1, Saarbrücken 1999. Radner, 1999a = K. Radner, “Traders in the Neo-Assyrian Period,” in Dercksen, 1999, pp. 101–126. Radner, 1999b = K. Radner, “Money in the Neo-Assyrian Empire,” in Dercksen, 1999, pp. 127–157. Radner, 2000 = K. Radner, “How did the Neo-Assyrian King Perceive his Land and its Resources?” in Jas, 2000, pp. 233–246. Radner, 2000a = K. Radner, “Die neuassyrischen Texte der Münchener Grabung in Assur 1990,” MDOG, 132 (2000), pp. 101–104. Radner, 2001 = K. Radner, “The Neo-Assyrian Period,” in Westbrook—Jasnow, 2001, pp. 265–288. Radner, 2002 = K. Radner, Die neuassyrischen Texte aus Tall fÏh Hamad. Mit Beiträgen von W. Röllig zu den aramäischen Beischriften. Berichte der Ausgrabung Tall eÏh Hamad / DÖr-Katlimmu (= BATSH), Band 6 (= Texte 2), Berlin 2002. Radner, 2004 = K. Radner, “A Neo-Assyrian Tablet from Til Barsip,” NABU 2004/1, pp. 25–27. Reiner, 1985 = E. Reiner, Your thwarts in pieces, Your mooring rope cut: Poetry from Babylonia and Assyria, University of Michigan 1985. Renger, 1994 = J. Renger, “On Economic Structures in Ancient Mesopotamia,” Orientalia 63 (1994), pp. 157–208. Renger, 1995 = J. Renger, “Institutional, Communal and Individual Ownership or Possession of Arable Land in Ancient Mesopotamia from the end of the Fourth to the end of the First Millennium B.C.,” Chicago-Kent Law Review 71 (1995), pp. 269–319. Reviv, 1993 = H. Reviv, The Society in the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, Jerusalem 1993 (Hebrew). Reynolds, 2003 = F. Reynolds (ed.), The Babylonian Correspondence of Esarhaddon and Letters to Assurbanipal and Sin-garru-igkun from Northern and Central Babylonia, with contributions by S. Parpola, SAA XVIII, Helsinki 2003. Rfdn = Al-RÊdÊn. Richardson, 2000 = M. E. J. Richardson, Hammurabi’s Laws: Text, Translation and Glossary, Shefeld 2000. Ries, 1976 = G. Ries, Die neubabylonischen Bodenpachtformulare, Abhandlungen zur rechtswissenschaftlichen Grundlagenforschung, 16, Berlin 1976. RIMA = The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Assyrian Periods. RIMA 2 = A. K. Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC, I (1114–859 BC), RIMA 2, Toronto 1991. RIMA 3 = A. K. Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC, II (858–745 BC), RIMA 3, Toronto 1996. RlA = Reallexikon der Assyriologie. Robins, 1993 = G. Robins, Women in Ancient Egypt, Cambridge MA 1993. Robins, 1999 = G. Robins, “Hair and the Construction of Identity in Ancient Egypt, c. 1480–1350 B.C.,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 36 (1999), pp. 55–69.

368

bibliographical abbreviations

Rochberg-Halton, 1987 = F. Rochberg-Halton (ed.), Language, Literature and History: Philological and Historical Studies presented to Erica Reiner, New Haven 1987. Röllig, 1996 = W. Röllig, “Deportation und Integration,” in Schuster, 1996, pp. 100–114. Rossides, 1997 = D. W. Rossides, Social Stratication: The Interplay of Class, Race, and Gender, Prentice Hall, NJ 1997 (2nd ed.). Roth, 1987 = M. T. Roth, “Age at Marriage and the Household: A Study of NeoBabylonian and Neo-Assyrian Forms,” Comparative Study of Society and History 29 (1987), pp. 715–747. Roth, 1988 = M. T. Roth, “ ‘She Will Die by the Iron Dagger’: Adultery and NeoBabylonian Marriage,” JESHO 30 (1988), pp. 186–206. Roth, 1989 = M. T. Roth, Babylonian Marriage Agreements, 7th–3rd Centuries B.C., AOAT 222, Kevelaer 1989. Roth, 1989a = M. T. Roth, “Marriage and Matrimonial Prestations in First Millennium B.C. Babylonia,” in Lesko, 1989, pp. 245–260. Roth, 1991–1993 = M. T. Roth, “The Neo-Babylonian Widow,” JCS 43/45 (1991– 1993), pp. 1–26. Roth, 1995 = M. T. Roth, Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor, SBL Writings from the Ancient World 6, Atlanta 1995. Roth, 1995a = M. T. Roth, “Mesopotamian Legal Traditions and the Laws of Hammurabi,” Chicago-Kent Law Review 71 (1995), pp. 13–37. Rawlinson see R. SAA = State Archives of Assyria. SAA III see Livingstone, 1989. SAA V see Lanfranchi—Parpola, 1990. SAA VI see Kwasman—Parpola, 1991. SAA VII see Fales—Postgate, 1992. SAA XI see Fales—Postgate, 1995. SAA XII see Kataja—Whiting, 1995. SAA XIII see Cole—Machinist, 1998. SAA XIV see Mattila, 2002. SAA XV see Fuchs—Parpola, 2001. SAA XVI see Luukko—Van Buylaere, 2002. SAA XVII see Dietrich, 2003. SAA XVIII see Reynolds, 2003. SAAB = State Archives of Assyria Bulletin. SAAB 5 see Fales—Jakob-Rost, 1991 SAAB 9 see Deller—Fales et al., 1995 SAAS = State Archives of Assyria Studies. SAAS V see Jas, 1996. SAAS VI see Radner, 1997. SAAS XI see Mattila, 2000. Saggs, 1956 = H. W. F. Saggs, “The Nimrud Letters, 1952—Part III,” Iraq 18 (1956), pp. 40–56. Saggs, 1965 = H. W. F. Saggs, Everyday Life in Babylonia and Assyria, London 1965. Saggs, 1973 = H. W. F. Saggs, “The Assyrians,” in Wseman 1973, pp. 156–178. Saggs, 1984 = H. W. F. Saggs, The Might That Was Assyria, London 1984. Saggs, 2001 = H. W. F. Saggs, The Nimrud Letters, 1952, CTN V, London 2001. Sallaberger et al., 2003 = W. Sallaberger, K. Volk and A. Zgoll (eds.), Literatur, Politik und Recht in Mesopotamien: Festschrift für Claus Wilcke, Wiesbaden 2003. Saporetti, 1979 = C. Saporetti, The Status of Women in the Middle Assyrian Period, Malibu, CA 1979. Sayce, 1904 = A. H. Sayce, “Note on the Assyrian Tablet,” PEF QS 36 (1904), pp. 236–237.

bibliographical abbreviations

369

Scheil = V. Scheil, “Quelques contrats ninivites,” RA 24 (1927), pp. 111–121. Schloen, 2001 = J. D. Schloen, The House of the Father as Fact and Symbol: Patrimonism in Ugarit and the Ancient Near East, Winona Lake, IN 2001. Schröder, 1920 see KAV. Schuster, 1996 = M. Schuster (ed.), Die Begegnung mit dem Fremden: Wertungen und Wirkungen in Hochkulturen vom Altertum bis zur Gegenwart, Stuttgart—Leipzig 1996. Sefati et al., 2005 = Y. Sefati, P. Artzi, Ch. Cohen, B. L. Eichler and V. A. Hurowitz (eds.), “An Experienced Scribe who neglects Nothing:” Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Jacob Klein, Bethesda, MD 2005. SHCANE = Studies in the History and the Culture of the Ancient Near East. Singer, 1995 = I. Singer, “The Economy of the Hittite Temple,” in Ben-Sasson, 1995, pp. 103–113 (Hebrew). Snell, 1993 = D. C. Snell, “Ancient Israelite and Neo-Assyrian Societies and Economies: A Comparative Approach,” in Cohen et al., 1993, pp. 221–224. Stamm, 1939 = J. J. Stamm, Die Akkadische Namengebung, Leipzig 1939. StAT = Studien zu den Assur-Texten: Band 1: see Radner, 1999; Band 2: see Donbaz—Parpola, 2001. Steiner = G. Steiner, “Die Bezeichnung von ‘Gruppen’ und ‘Klassen’ durch Abstrakta in Sprachen des Alten Orients,” in Edzard, 1972, pp. 191–208. Stol, 1995 = M. Stol, “Women in Mesopotamia,” JESHO 38 (1995), pp. 123–144. Stol, 1995a = M. Stol, “Sin,” in DDD, pp. 1480–1481. Stol, 2000 = M. Stol, Birth in Babylonia and the Bible: Its Mediterranean Setting (with a chapter by F. A. M. Wiggermann), Groningen 2000. Stol—Vleeming = M. Stol and S. P. Vleeming (eds.), The Care of the Elderly in the Ancient Near East, SHCANE 14, Leiden 1998. Stolper = M. W. Stolper, “Two Neo-Assyrian Fragments,” AfO 27 (1980), pp. 83–85. SVAT = E. Ebeling, Stiftungen und Vorschriften für Assyrische Temple, Berlin 1954. Tadmor, 1994 = H. Tadmor, The Inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III, Jerusalem 1994. Tadmor, 2002 = H. Tadmor, “The Role of the Chief Eunuch and the Place of Eunuchs in the Assyrian Empire,” in Parpola—Whiting, 2002, pp. 603–611. Tallqvist, 1918 = K. L. Tallqvist, Assyrian Personal Names, Acta Societatis Scientiarum Fennicae 43/1, Helsinki 1918. TB see Dalley, 1996–1997. TCAE see Postgate, 1974a. TCL = Textes cunéiform du Louvre. TCL 9 see Contenau, 1926. Teppo, 2005 = S. Teppo, Women and their Agency in the Neo-Assyrian Empire, University of Helsinki: Helsinki 2005 (MA Thesis). TH see Friedrich, et al., 1940. TIM = Texts in the Iraq Museum, Baghdad. TIM XI see Postgate—Ismail. TSF = siglum of the Aramaic text excavated at Tell Shioukh Fawqani (see Fales, 1996a). Uchitel, 2002 = A. Uchitel, “Women at Work: Weavers of Lagash and Spinners of San Luis Gonzagain,” in Parpola—Whiting, 2002, pp. 621–631. UF = Ugarit-Forschungen. Ungnad, 1907 = A. Ungnad, Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der Königlichen Museum zu Berlin, Heft I, Berlin 1907. van Driel, 1969 = G. van Driel, The Cult of Aggur, Assen 1969. van Driel, 1970 = G. van Driel, “Land and People in Assyria,” Bibliotheca Orientalis 27 (1970), pp. 168–175.

370

bibliographical abbreviations

van Driel et al., 1982 = G. van Driel et al. (eds.), Zikir Šumim. Assyriological Studies Presented to F. R. Kraus on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, Leiden 1982. van Driel, 1998 = G. van Driel, “Land in Ancient Mesopotamia: ‘That what remains undocumented does not exist’,” in Haring—de Maaijer, pp. 19–49. van Driel, 1998a = G. van Driel, “Landless and Hungry? An Assessment,” in Haring—de Maaijer, pp. 190–198 van Driel, 1998b = G. van Driel, “Care of the Elderly: The Neo-Babylonian Period,” in Stol—Vleeming, pp. 161–197. van Driel, 1999 = G. van Driel, “Capital Formation and Investment in an Institutional Context in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Dercksen, 1999, pp. 25–42. van Driel, 2000 = G. van Driel, “The Mesopotamian North: Land Use, An Attempt,” in Jas, 2000, pp. 279–299. van Effenterre, 1979 = H. van Effenterre (ed.), Points de vue sur la scalité antique, Paris 1979. van Koppen, 2001 = F. van Koppen, “The Organization of Institutional Agriculture in Mari,” JESHO 44 (2001), pp. 451–504. van Koppen, 2001a = F. van Koppen, “Sweeping the court and locking the gate: the palace of Sippir-ÉÏrim,” in van Soldt, et al., 2001, pp. 211–224. van Seters, 1968 = J. van Seters, “The Problem of Childlessness in Near Eastern Law and the Patriarchs of Israel,” JBL 87 (1968), pp. 401–408. van Soldt et al. 2001 = W. H. van Soldt, J. G. Dercksen, N. J. C. Kouwenberg and Th. J. H. Krispijn (eds.), Veenhof Anniversary Volume: Studies Presented to Klaas R. Veenhof on the Occasion of his Sixty fth Birthday, Leiden 2001. Vargyas, 1988 = P. Vargyas, “Stratication sociale à Ugarit,” in Heltzer—Lipinski, 1988, pp. 111–125. Vargyas, 1998 = P. Vargyas, “Talent of Karkamish and Talent of Yamhad,” AoF 25 (1998), pp. 303–311. Vargyas, 2001 = P. Vargyas, A History of Babylonian Prices in the First Millennium BC, HSAO 10, Heidelberg 2001. Veenhof, 1986 = K. R. Veenhof (ed.), Cuneiform Archives and Libraries, Istanbul 1986. Veenhof, 1996 = K. R. Veenhof (ed.), Houses and Households in Ancient Mesopotamia, CRRAI 40, PIHANS 78, Leiden1996. Veenhof, 2003 = K. R. Veenhof, Fatherhood is a Matter of Opinion. An Old Babylonian Trial on Filiations and Service Duties, in Sallaberger et al., 2003, pp. 313–332. Villard, 2000 = P. Villard, “Les texts judiciaries néo-assyriens,” in Joannès, 2000, pp. 171–200. von Weiher, 1998 = E. von Weiher, Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk, V, Mainz 1998. VS see Ungnad, 1907. Waetzoldt— Hauptmann, 1997 = H.Waetzoldt and H. Hauptmann (eds.), Assyrien im Wandel der Zeiten, CRAAI 39, HSAO 6, Heidelberg 1997. Wall, 1983 = R. Wall, “Introduction,” in Wall—Robin—Laslett, 1983, pp. 1–63. Wall—Robin—Laslett, 1983 = R. Wall, J. Robin and P. Laslett (eds.), Family forms in historic Europe, Cambridge 1983. Watanabe, 1999 = K. Watanabe (ed.), Priests and Ofcials in the Ancient Near East, Heidelberg 1999. Watanabe, 1999a = K. Watanabe, “Seals of Neo-Assyrian Ofcials,” in Watanabe, 1999, pp. 313–366. Weber, 1921 = M. Weber, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie III: Das Antike Judentum, Tübingen 1921. Werdini, 1997 = E. Werdini (ed.), Built on Solid Rock. Festschrift E. E. Knudsen, Oslo 1997. Westbrook, 1988 = R. Westbrook, Old Babylonian Marriage Laws,” AfO, Bh. 23, Horn 1988. Westbrook, 2003 = R. Westbrook, “A Sumerian Freedman,” in Sallaberger et al., 2003, pp. 333–339.

bibliographical abbreviations

371

Westbrook—Jasnow, 2001 = R. Westbrook and R. Jasnow (eds.), Security for Debt in Ancient Near Eastern Law, CHANE 9, Leiden 2001. Westenholtz, 1990 = J. G. Westenholtz, “Towards a New Conceptualization of the Female Role in Mesopotamian Society,” JAOS 110 (1990), pp. 510–521. WFS see Cleland—Scott, 1987. Winefeld, 1972 = M. Winefeld, “The Worship of Molech and of the Queen of Heaven and its Background,” UF 4 (1972), pp. 133–154. Wiseman, 1953 = D. J. Wiseman, “The Nimrud Tablets, 1953,” Iraq 15 (1953), pp. 135–160. Wiseman, 1973 = D. J. Wiseman (ed.), Peoples of Old Testament Times, Oxford 1973. Wittfogel, 1964 = K. A. Wittfogel, Le despotisme oriental, Paris 1964. WO = Die Welt des Orients. Wolf, 1966 = E. R. Wolf, Peasants, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1966. Wright, 1992 = C. J. H. Wright, “Family,” in ABD, II, pp. 761–769. Wunsch, 2002 = C. Wunsch (ed.), Mining the Archives: Festschrift for Christopher Walker on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, Dresden 2002. WVDOG = Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft. WZKM = Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgen landes. ZA = Zeitschrift für Assyriology und Vorderasiatische Archäologie. Zablocka, 1971 = J. Zablocka, Stosunki agrarane w parstwie Sargonidów, Poznaq, 1971, (Polish with a summary in German, pp. 154–158: Agrarverhältnisse im Reich der Sargoniden). Zablocka, 1972 = J. Zablocka, “Landarbeiter im Reich der Sargoniden,” in Edzard, 1972, pp. 209–215. Zablocka, 1986 = J. Zablocka, “Der Haushalt der neuassyrischen Familie,” Oikumene 5 (1986), pp. 43–49. Zablocka—Zawadski, 1993 = J. Zablocka and S. Zawadski, Šulmu IV: Everyday Life in Ancient Near East, Poznaq 1993. Zaccagnini, 1979 = C. Zaccagnini, “The Price of the Fields at Nuzi,” JESHO 22 (1979), pp. 1–31. Zaccagnini, 1989 = C. Zaccagnini (ed.), Production and Consumption in the Ancient Near East, Budapest 1989. Zaccagnini, 1989a = C. Zaccagnini, “Asiatic Production and Ancient Near East: Notes towards a Discussion,” in Zaccagnini, 1989, pp. 1–126. Zaccagnini, 1994 = C. Zaccagnini, “Joint Responsibility in the Barley Loans of the Neo-Assyrian Period,” SAAB 8 (1994), pp. 21–42. Zaccagnini, 1997 = C. Zaccagnini, “On the Juridical Terminology of Neo-Assyrian and Aramaic Contracts,” in Waetzoldt—Hauptmann, 1997, pp. 203–208. Zaccagnini, 1999 = C. Zaccagnini, “Economic Aspects of Land Ownership and Land Use in Northern Mesopotamia and Syria from the Late Third Millennium to the Neo-Assyrian Period,” in Hudson—Levine, 1999, pp. 331–352. Zaccagnini, 1999a = C. Zaccagnini, “The Assyrian Lion Weights from Nimrud and the ‘mina of the land’,” in Avishur—Deutsch, 1999, pp. 259–265. Zaccagnini, 2000 = C. Zaccagnini, “A Note on Old Assyrian Weight Stones and Weight System,” in Graziani, 2000, pp. 1203–1213. Zadok, 1977 = R. Zadok, On West Semites in Babylonia During the Chaldean and Achaemenian Periods. An Onomastic Study, Jerusalem 1977. Zadok, 1978–1979, R. Zadok, “Sources Relating to the Israelite Exiles in Assyria,” SHNATON: An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies, V–VI (1978–1979), pp. 223–226 (Hebrew). Zadok, 2002 = R. Zadok, The Earliest Diaspora: Israelites and Judeans in Pre-Hellenistic Mesopotamia, Publications of the Diaspora Research Institute, 151, Tel-Aviv 2002. Zawadski, 1990 = S. Zawadski, “Great Families of Sipar during the Chaldean and Early Persian Periods (626–482 BC),” RA 84 (1990), pp. 17–25.

I. INDEX OF SOURCES

Cuneiform Sources A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A

77 310 330 334 341 795+2565 962 1055+1070 1182 1797 1825 1857 1906 1912 1928 1929 2221 2486 2494 2509 2514 2527 2644 2648 2686 2692 2806 2919 3660 9745

ABL 201 ABL 208 ABL 212 ABL 314 ABL 336 ABL 500 ABL 556 ABL 969 ADB 1 ADB 2 ADB 3 ADB 4 ADB 5

see StAT 2 81 see StAT 2 184 199, 201–202 see StAT 2 313 see StAT 2 118 see StAT 2 119 see StAT 2 101 199, 203 see StAT 2 11 see StAT 2 73 203 see StAT 2 8 199, 203 see StAT 2 45 199, 203 see StAT 2 170 see FNALT 17 see StAT 2 64 see StAT 2 79 199, 203 199, 203 see StAT 2 164 see StAT 2 95 see StAT 2 94 199, 202 see StAT 2 140 199, 202 see StAT 2 137 44, 86, 161 see SAAS VI, pp. 160–161 see SAA V 16 see SAA V 210 see SAA XV 181 see SAA XV 219 see SAA XVIII 56 see SAA X 167 see SAA XV 54 see SAA XVIII 161 see SAA XI 201 see SAA XI 202 see SAA XI 203 see SAA XI 213 see SAA XI 219

ADB 6 ADB 7 ADB 8 ADB 9+11+ 12+16 ADB 10 ADB 13 ADB 14 ADB 19 ADB 20 ADB 21 ADD 58 ADD 59 ADD 64 ADD 65 ADD 66 ADD 78 ADD 79 ADD 85 ADD 221 ADD 229 ADD 230 ADD 231 ADD 232 ADD 233 ADD 235 ADD 236 ADD 237 ADD 238 ADD 240 ADD 241 ADD 244 ADD 245 ADD 246 ADD 247 ADD 248 ADD 250 ADD 253 ADD 257 ADD 258 ADD 259 ADD 261 ADD 265 ADD 266

see SAA XI 207 see SAA XI 220 see SAA XI 206 see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

XI 209 XI 210 XI 205 XI 208 XI 211 XI 218 XI 214 VI 81 VI 91 VI 245 VI 307 VI 97 XIV 181 XIV 209 XIV 216 XIV 165 VI 111 VI 177 VI 110 VI 89 XIV 24 XIV 49 VI 53 VI 319 VI 40 VI 41 VI 130 VI 96 VI 250 VI 52 VI 342 VI 6 XIV 16 VI 57 VI 284 VI 313 XIV 475 VI 86 XIV 196 VI 297

374 ADD 268 ADD 269 ADD 270 ADD 271 ADD 274 ADD 275+593 ADD 277 ADD 282+283+ 802 ADD 283 ADD 284+ ADD 287 ADD 288 ADD 294 ADD 296 ADD 305 ADD 306 ADD 307 ADD 308 ADD 309 ADD 310 ADD 316 ADD 322 ADD 369 ADD 399+803 ADD 420 ADD 421 ADD 422 ADD 423 ADD 424 ADD 426 ADD 427 ADD 428 ADD 429 ADD 430 ADD 432 ADD 435 ADD 443 ADD 447 ADD 448 ADD 452 ADD 453 ADD 455 ADD 456 ADD 457 ADD 458 ADD 462 ADD 471 ADD 473 ADD 474+ ADD 509 ADD 614 ADD 619 ADD 711

index of sources see see see see see see see

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI 294 VI 195 VI 343 VI 344 VI 172 XIV 146 VI 193

see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see

SAA XIV 213 ADD 282+ SAA XIV 65 SAA XIV 4 SAA VI 266 SAA VI 116 SAA XIV 186 SAA XIV 247 SAA VI 256 SAA XIV 161 SAA XIV 34 SAA XIV 37 SAA XIV 64 SAA XIV 5 SAA VI 345 SAA XIV 254 SAA XII 7 SAA VI 315 SAA VI 316 SAA VI 50 SAA VI 51 SAA VI 341 SAA XIV 198 SAA VI 37 SAA VI 253 SAA VI 334 SAA VI 173 SAA VI 149 SAA XIV 168 SAA VI 169 SAA VI 90 SAA VI 314 SAA XIV 6 SAA VI 163 SAA VI 112 SAA VI 155 SAA XIV 229 SAA XIV 265 SAA VI 269 SAA VI 326 SAA VI 100 SAA VI 101 SAA XIV 218 SAA VI 128 SAA XIV 155 SAA XIV 38

ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD ADD

718 719 727 741+ 763 783 789 801 802 804 + 811 825 826 861 882 891 911 1158 1168+ 1205+

see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see see

SAA XIV 326 SAA XI 181 SAA XIV 3 SAA XII 27+28 SAA XI 169 SAA XI 173 SAA XIV 337 SAA VI 312 ADD 282+ SAA VI 251 SAA XI 194 SAA XI 232 SAA XI 172 SAA XII 16 SAA XI 174 SAA XI 154 SAA XI 146 SAA VI 229 SAA XIV 345 SAA XIV 355

AECT 5 ACET 13 AECT 14 AECT 16 AECT 17 AECT 20 AECT 24 AECT 30 AECT 61

34 199–200, 203 35 38 36 35 36 36 27, 39, 76 164, 180

An St 7, 139–140 An St 7, 144

239 200, 203

AoF 24, 118–121 AoF 24, 129–133

27, 32, 76, 228 see SAAS V, 28

AfO 32, 38–42 228 AfO 42/3, 89–90 228 AfO 42/3, 100–102 239 ARU 70 ARU ARU ARU ARU ARU ARU ARU ARU ARU ARU

180 181 205 206 209 214 463 504 505 506

see AoF 24, 118–121 228 228 228 228 228 228 228 228 228 228

375

index of sources ARU ARU ARU ARU

507 508 539 655

228 228 228 see SAAS V, 28

Ass. 2000 D-26 199–200, 202 Ass. 2001 D-378 199–200, 202 BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM BaM

15, 16, 16, 24, 24, 24, 24, 24, 24, 24, 24, 24, 24,

BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH

247 371 373 1 3 6 8 9 12 16 17 19 20

199, 203 228 228 230 see ND 673 230 230 198, 231 231 231 231 231 231

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 33, 80, 159, 232 199 232 232 232 33, 69, 158, 232 232 232 232 33, 71–72, 232 232 33, 72, 158, 232 232 232 233 233 233 233 233 233 33, 74, 159, 233 233 233

3 4 8 17 18 19 21 26 30 34 41 42 44 45 46 47 49 52 53 54 56 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 69

BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

72 75 76 78 79 85 86 89 90 91 92 95 96 97 99 100 104 105 108 114 117 119 124 126 129 136 141 142 156 157 163 173 174 175 177 178 179 180

BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH BATSH

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

184 185 186 187 191 192 200 202

233 233 233 233 233 233 233 233 233 33, 78, 159, 233 233 233 233 33, 78, 159, 233 233 233 199–200, 203 233 199 199 199 233 233 233 199 233 33, 71, 161, 233 33, 73, 161, 233 233 199 233 233 233 233 233 233 233 37, 108, 164, 166, 198, 241 233 33, 84–85, 161, 233 233 233 233 233 33, 85, 161, 233 233

BM 103389 BM 103956

see AfO 32, 38–42 230

BT 102 BT 123 BT 125

200–202 200–202 239

376

index of sources

BT 126 BT 128 BT 139

239 200–202 200–202

CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 113 219 220 247 248

CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN CTN

III III III III III III III III III III III III III

8 9 33 34 35 36 37 47 48 49 50 51 59

292 231 231 231 231 231 231 231 189, 231 231 231 231 231 41, 142–143, 183, 254 292 194, 231 292, 301 231 199, 203 199, 203 231 231 241 302 199, 201–202 7, 292 231 231 231 292 199, 201–203

CTN V, 210

348

CTNMC 68

see AECT 61

EPHE 352

228

FNALD 8 FNALD 9 FNALT 14 FNALT 17 FNALT 18 FNALT 24 FNALT 49

194, 231 33, 69–70, 194, 231 292, 301 302 see AECT 61 see SAA VI 97 see ND 3443

G/1696 GEZER 1 GIR 75/157–2

200–202 37, 104–105, 164, 241 239

GIR 78/294 Hadid, Tell

239 see G/1696

Hammurabi’s laws 30 49 136 178 215 216 217 221 222 223 253

348–349 11, 222 349 11, 222 11, 222 11, 222 11, 222 11, 222 11, 222 11, 222 11, 222

JEOL 27, 81–82 KAV 39 KAV 197 KAJ 243 Laws of Eshnunna 30 LB 851 LBAF C 42

see GEZER 1 see SAA XII 87 86 26, 43, 153–155, 186–187 349 see OLZ 8, 130–4 see AfO 42/3, 100–102

MAL 36 45

349 349

MAss. 62

239

NABU 2002/90

see A 3660

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

see CTN II, 1 see CTN II, 219 see CTN II 113 33, 47, 157, 230 see CTN II, 247 199–202 231 209, 241 see FNALT 14 231 231 231 292, 231 232 232 232 232

267 407 451 673 815 2078 2082 2306 2307 2313 2314 2315 2316 2323 2324 2325 2326

377

index of sources ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

2327 2328 2329 2330 2333 2344 2443+ 2621 2734 3420 3422 3423 3424 3425 3426 3427 3428 3429 3441 3443 3460 3479 5448 5480 7011 7028 7091

232 232 232 232 199–202 232 41, 136–140, 183, 253 see ND 2443+ see CTN V, p. 210 231 231 302 231 197, 231 see FNALD 9 231 231 231 199, 201–202 199, 201–202 231 231 199, 202 see SAAS VI, 140 see CTN III 47 see CTN III 51 see CTN III 36

O 3648 O 3660 O 3680 O 3681 O 3683 O 3685 O 3687 O 3695 O 3701 O 3703 O 3706 O 3709 O 3710 OLZ 8, 130–134

29 33, 51, 157, 240 240 240 240 199 240 240 200–201 240 33, 55, 157, 240 33, 62, 157, 240 200, 202 228

PSBA 30, 137–141 PKTA 27–30

239 see SAA XII 86

RA 18, 32

see EPHE 352

RIMA 2 A.0.98.1: 60–63

348

RIMA 3 A.0.105.2: 9

138

Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn Rfdn

17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 30

228 228 228 228 228 228 228 228 228 228 302 199, 201 303

SAA I 21

86

SAA V 16 SAA V 210

223 349

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 34 37

8, 234 234 234 234 234 34, 49, 157, 234 234 234 234 50, 234 37, 94, 165, 198, 208–210, 241 SAA VI 38 50, 234 SAA VI 39 50, 234 SAA VI 40 34, 50, 54, 160, 234 SAA VI 41 34, 50, 54, 160, 234 SAA VI 45 50, 234 SAA VI 48 50, 234 SAA VI 49 234 SAA VI 50/51 38, 98–99, 164, 208–210, 241 SAA VI 52 34, 50, 157, 234 SAA VI 53 34, 50, 157, 234 SAA VI 54 234 SAA VI 55 198, 234 SAA VI 56 50, 234 SAA VI 57 34, 58, 160, 234 SAA VI 58 234 SAA VI 59 234 SAA VI 65 198, 206, 241 SAA VI 81 40, 86, 162, 200, 241 SAA VI 82 234 SAA VI 85 14, 234 SAA VI 86 34, 59, 160, 234 SAA VI 87 234

378 SAA VI 88 SAA VI 89

index of sources

234 34, 55–56, 160, 234 SAA VI 90 37, 97–98, 164, 198, 209–210, 242 SAA VI 91 39, 87–88, 162, 200, 242 SAA VI 92 234 SAA VI 94 209 SAA VI 96 34, 53, 157, 235 SAA VI 97 40, 86–87, 162, 200, 242 SAA VI 98 235 SAA VI 100/101 37, 94, 165, 209, 241 SAA VI 103 235 SAA VI 106 235 SAA VI 109 58, 99, 235 SAA VI 110 34, 57, 99, 157, 235 SAA VI 111 34, 54, 58, 60, 99, 160, 235 SAA VI 112 38, 99, 165, 241 SAA VI 116 34, 51, 157, 235 SAA VI 118 235 SAA VI 121 235 SAA VI 122 235 SAA VI 123 198, 241 SAA VI 127 235 SAA VI 128 34, 53, 160, 235 SAA VI 129 206, 208, 241 SAA VI 130 34, 51, 157, 160, 235 SAA VI 132 8, 235 SAA VI 134 235 SAA VI 135 235 SAA VI 138 198, 235 SAA VI 140 235 SAA VI 144 235 SAA VI 145 235 SAA VI 148 235 SAA VI 149 37, 95, 165, 198, 206, 208, 241 SAA VI 151 235 SAA VI 152 235 SAA VI 153 206, 208 SAA VI 155 37, 95, 165, 241 SAA VI 163 37, 96–97, 165, 209, 241 SAA VI 166 235 SAA VI 169 37, 69, 96, 165, 198, 241 SAA VI 172 34, 56, 160, 235 SAA VI 173 37, 97, 165, 209, 241 SAA VI 174 194, 235 SAA VI 177 34, 57, 157, 235 SAA VI 179 235 SAA VI 185 235

SAA VI 192 SAA VI 193 SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI

195 196 197 198 199 203 219 227 228 229 239 244 245

SAA VI 246 SAA VI 250 SAA VI 251 SAA VI 253 SAA VI 255 SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI

256 257 261 266

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI

267 269 272 274 280 283 284 286 289/90 294

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI VI

295 297/98 300 301 305/6 307 309 310 312/313

SAA VI 314 SAA VI 315/316

235 34, 57–58, 157, 160, 235 34, 58, 157, 235 235 235 235 236 236 194, 236 61, 236 61, 236 35, 61, 157, 236 88, 236 88, 236 39, 88, 162, 200, 242 88, 236 35, 63, 157, 236 38, 100, 165, 209, 241 38, 165, 198, 209, 241 68, 196, 198, 236, 343 35, 68, 161, 236 8, 236 236 35, 63–64, 160–161, 198, 236 236 38, 99, 165, 241 200, 202 236 206, 208, 241 206, 208, 241 35, 62, 157, 194, 236 236 236 35, 65, 157, 197, 236 200–203 35, 61–62, 160, 236 66, 198, 236 66, 197, 236 66, 197, 236 40, 89, 163, 200 236 236 35–36, 66, 68, 161, 236 38, 102–103, 166, 198, 242 38, 102, 164, 198, 209–210, 242

index of sources SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI VI

317 319 320/321 325 326

SAA VI 329/330 SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI

331 332 333 334

SAA VI 340 SAA VI 341 SAA VI 342 SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

VI VI VI VI VI

343/344 345 346 347 348

200, 203–204 36, 68–69, 236 206, 208, 242 198 38, 104, 164, 209–210, 242 112, 198, 206, 210, 242 112 242 242 38, 103, 105, 166, 198, 209–210, 242 205–206, 208, 242 38, 104, 166, 236, 242 35, 66, 158, 161, 196, 236 35, 67, 158, 236 35, 67, 158, 236 236 236 236

SAA VII 131

198

SAA X 167

223

SAA XI 146

41, 148–149, 182, 184, 255 56 6, 41, 56, 146, 182, 254 330–331 41, 144–145, 181, 254 41, 147–148, 182, 184, 255 41, 146–147, 150, 182, 184, 254–255 41, 145, 181, 184, 254, 299 41, 151, 182, 185, 256 41, 151, 182, 185, 256 26, 41, 151–152, 185, 256 26, 41, 152, 182, 256 26, 41, 150–151, 185, 256 27, 41, 149–150, 184, 255 29, 42, 117–120,

SAA XI 202 SAA XI 203

SAA XI 205 SAA XI 206 SAA XI 207 SAA XI 208 SAA XI 209 SAA XI 210 SAA XI 211 SAA XI 213 SAA XI 214

SAA XI 153 SAA XI 154 SAA XI 167 SAA XI 169 SAA XI 172 SAA XI 173 SAA XI 174 SAA XI 181 SAA XI 194 SAA XI 195 SAA XI 196 SAA XI 199 SAA XI 200 SAA XI 201

SAA XI 218 SAA XI 219 SAA XI 220 SAA XI 232 SAA XII 7 SAA XII 15 SAA XII 16 SAA XII 17 SAA XII 26 SAA XII 27+28 SAA XII 86 SAA XII 87 SAA XII 94 SAA XII 98

379 173, 177, 248–249, 348 29, 42, 120–123, 132, 173, 177, 222, 249, 309, 348 29, 42, 119, 123–126, 131, 174, 177, 215, 222, 249–250 29, 42, 126–127, 174, 250 29, 42, 126–127, 174, 177, 250 29, 42, 127–129, 174–175, 178, 222, 250–251 29, 42, 128–129, 175, 250–251 29, 42, 129–130, 175, 178, 251 29, 42, 136, 179, 217, 252 29, 42, 136, 179–180, 217, 252 29, 42, 124–126, 130–131, 176, 178, 215, 250 29, 42, 130–131, 176 29, 42, 132, 176, 178, 250 29–30, 42, 132–134, 179–180, 217, 252, 348 29, 42, 134–135, 179–180, 217, 252 41, 108–109, 167 42, 109, 168, 245 110 42, 109–110, 168, 245 26, 42, 110, 168, 246 112–113, 213, 344 42, 110–113, 168–170, 213, 246–248, 344 27, 43, 115–116, 170–172, 246 27, 43, 113–115, 170–171, 246 197, 232 27, 43, 116, 172, 246

380

index of sources

SAA XIV 1 SAA XIV 2 SAA XIV 3 SAA XIV 4 SAA XIV 5 SAA XIV 6 SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV

7 8 9 10 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 29 34

SAA XIV 36 SAA XIV 37 SAA XIV 38 SAA XIV 39 SAA XIV 48 SAA XIV 49 SAA XIV 50 SAA XIV 64 SAA XIV 65 SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV

67 78 85 90 91 93 97 100 101 105 108 115 128

65, 101, 206, 208, 242 65, 198, 65, 206, 208, 242 38, 65, 101, 165, 198, 236, 242 35, 65, 158, 236 35, 65–66, 158, 236 38, 65, 101, 165, 198, 206, 236, 242 65, 236 236 236 237 237 237 237 36, 72, 158, 237 237 237 237 237 237 206, 208, 242 36, 69, 158, 237 237 36, 74, 159, 237, 292 206, 208, 209, 242 36, 75, 159, 237, 292 36, 75, 159, 237, 292 237 237 36, 78, 159, 196, 210, 237, 343 237 35, 63, 157, 237 35, 67, 158, 194, 237 237 237 237 210, 237 237 199, 203 199, 203 237 199, 202 237 199–202 237 237

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV

129 146 147 150 153 154 155

237 36, 70–71, 158, 237 237 237 237 237 40, 75, 159, 161, 198 SAA XIV 159 200–202 SAA XIV 161 237, 292 SAA XIV 162 237 SAA XIV 163/164 222–223 SAA XIV 165 36, 77, 159, 237 SAA XIV 168 38, 105, 166, 209, 242 SAA XIV 174 237 SAA XIV 179 237 SAA XIV 181 40, 91, 163, 199 SAA XIV 186 36, 80, 159, 197, 238 SAA XIV 189 238 SAA XIV 195 238 SAA XIV 196 37, 84, 159, 238 SAA XIV 198 39, 107, 166, 242 SAA XIV 202 200, 203 SAA XIV 207 206, 208, 242 SAA XIV 209 40, 92, 163, 199 SAA XIV 212 238 SAA XIV 213 36, 81, 161, 238 SAA XIV 215 242 SAA XIV 216 39, 93–94, 162, 200 SAA XIV 218 292 SAA XIV 229 36, 39, 105–106, 164, 242 SAA XIV 240 238 SAA XIV 241 238 SAA XIV 242 238 SAA XIV 243 238 SAA XIV 244 238 SAA XIV 245 238 SAA XIV 246 238 SAA XIV 247 80, 161, 238 SAA XIV 254 39, 108, 164, 198, 242 SAA XIV 263 206, 208, 242 SAA XIV 264 238 SAA XIV 265 39, 107–108, 166, 210, 242 SAA XIV 301 238 SAA XIV 313 197 SAA XIV 326 36, 82, 161, 238 SAA XIV 333 238 SAA XIV 337 36, 82–83, 159, 161, 238

381

index of sources SAA SAA SAA SAA

XIV XIV XIV XIV

339 345 347 355

SAA XIV 364 SAA XIV 399 SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV

400 401 402 414 424

SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA SAA

XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV XIV

435 442 443 450 469 472 475

SAA XV 54 SAA XV 181 SAA XV 219 SAA XV 303 SAA XV 309 SAA XVI 53 SAA XVII 114

105, 238 39, 106, 164, 242 238 39, 106, 166, 206, 208, 242 238 27, 39, 106–107, 166, 207, 209, 242 238 206, 208, 242 238 26, 37, 84, 161, 238 27, 36, 72–73, 159, 198, 238 209, 238 302 292 302 238 238 36, 83, 161, 238 349 26, 44, 140–142, 181–183, 253, 299, 323 349 27, 44, 150, 184, 256 27, 44, 150, 184, 256

SAA XVIII 56 SAA XVIII 161

27, 44, 64, 157 26, 44, 144, 184, 254 292 292

SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB

1, 1, 1, 1, 3,

1 2 9 57–63 71–72

194, 232 232 232 see SAA XII 98 228

SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

13 17 29 31 34 39 41 43 44 45 50 51

199, 201–202 27, 40, 77, 159, 189 228 202 228 228 228 228 229 199, 201–202 199–202 228, 302

SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB

5 53 5 55 5 58 5 61 5, pp. 136–137

229 229 229 229 39, 77, 159

SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB

9 9 9 9

69 76 77 78

SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

79 85 95 103 109 119 124 126 127 132 139

199, 201–202 229 229 27, 32, 80, 159, 229 199, 203 229 199, 202 229 229 229 229 229 229 229 229

SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB SAAB

11, 12, 12, 12, 12,

4–6 64–66 66 68–70 70–71

SAAS V, pp. 28–30 SAAS V 23 SAAS V 28 SAAS V 29 SAAS SAAS SAAS SAAS

VI, VI, VI, VI,

140 142 160–161 369

229 229 229 229 229 59 see SAA XIV 450 44, 89–90, 163, 199, 321 see SAA XIV 15 302 302 292 44, 91, 162, 199, 240

SÉ 72

see AfO 42/3, 89–90

StAT 1 36

40, 90–91, 162, 199–200 199

StAT 1 55 StAT 2 6 StAT 2 8 StAT 2 11 StAT 2 16 StAT 2 33 StAT 2 45

292 292 27, 43, 152–153, 186 229 229 199, 203

382 StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT

index of sources 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

64 73 79 81 91 94 95 99 100 101 105 107 112 113 117 118

StAT 2 119 StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

120 121 122 123 124 125 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 144 145 146 158 164 169 170 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 245 266 267 268 269 270 271

199–202 199–202 302 302 229 292 302 229 229 27, 39, 48–49, 157 229 229 229 229 229 27, 32, 85, 161, 229 27, 33, 85, 161, 229 229 229 229 229 229 229 229 229 27, 32, 78, 161, 230 27, 230 230 27, 32, 71, 230 230 56, 230 230 71, 230 71, 230 230 292 230 199–200, 203 230 230 230 230 230 230 292 230 230 230 230 230 230 230

StAT StAT StAT StAT StAT

2 2 2 2 2

272 273 274 275 313

S.U. 51/36 S.U. 51/43 TB TB TB TB

8 9 13 22

230 230 230 230 292 see An St 7, 139–140 see An St 7, 144 239 239 239 239

TCL 9 57

see FNALT 17

TH 103 TH 109

239 239

TIM TIM TIM TIM

XI XI XI XI

2 14 15 24

see see see see

SAA SAA SAA SAA

XIV XIV XIV XIV

TSF F 204 I/3

200, 203

VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT

see StAT 2 6

3216 5602 5606 8232 8274 8280 8586

VAT 8592 VAT 8605 VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT

8641 8653 8660 8663 8664 8665 8669 8674

VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT

8676 8678 8680 8681 8695 8833 9137 9319

424 443 442 450

see SAAS V, 28 32, 74, 159, 239 239 239 43, 153–155, 186–187 see SAAB 9 78 43, 154–155, 186–187 239 199, 239 199, 203, 239 199, 239 43, 154, 187 43, 154, 186–187 153–154, 187 43, 153–155, 186–187 239 43, 154, 186–187 see A 1182 43, 153–155, 186–187 155 see KAJ 243 239 199, 201

383

index of sources VAT VAT VAT VAT

9582 9622 9689 9694

32, 70, 158, 230 see SAAB 9 69 see SAAB 9 79 see SAAB 9 95

VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT

9755 9778 9832a 9832b 9832c 9844 9930 14450 15461 15538 15580 19495 19497 19500 19506

32, 79, 159, 239 239 239 239 239 239 see SAAS VI, 142 see SAAB 5 17 199, 203 32, 79, 161, 240 see StAT 1 55 240 240 see SAAS VI, 369 239

VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT VAT

19508 19530 19550 19872 20341 20342 20349 20351 20363 20366 20377 20395 20688 20761 20786 20834 21049 21538

ZA 73, 11

240 240 see SAAB 5, 51 32, 49, 157, 240 see SAAB 5 31 see SAAB 5 13 see SAAB 5 17 240 see SAAB 5, pp. 136–137 240 see SAAB 5 50 see SAAB 5 45 240 240, 292 see StAT 1 36 292 240 240 see BM 103956

Biblical Sources Gen 11: 30 25: 21 29: 31

308 308 308

Exod 23: 26

1 Sam 2: 5

308

Kings

335

308

Isa 54: 1

308

Deut 7: 14

308

Ps 113: 9

308

Judg 13: 2–3

308

Job 24: 21

308

II. INDEX OF NAMES

Personal Names AbÊ-il 103 Abdâ (1) 82 Abdâ (2) 123, 125 Abdi-KubÖbi 94 AbdÖnu 103 Abi-dalâ 75 Abi-hÊri (1) 123 Abi-hÊri (2) 124 Abi-iahia 63 Abi-rahî (1) 35, 63, 157 Abi-rahî (2) 91 Abu- . . . 71 Abu-erÒba 104 Abu-lÊmur 147–148 Abu-rifa 77 Abu-¢Êba 48–49 Adad-ahu-iddina 63 Adad-bÏlu-uÉur 123, 126 Adad-bÏssunu 155 Adad-bixdÒ 126 Adad-erÒba 96 Adad-milki-Ïref 80 Adad-nÏrÊri III 20, 48, 109 Adad-rÏmanni 131 Adad-farru-uÉur 62 Adad-uballi¢ 111 Addâ 57 Adda-hutnÒ 136 Adda-lÖkidi 130 Adda-naÉaba 110 Adda-sÖrÒ (1) 132 Adda-sÖrÒ (2) 137 AddatÒ 34, 40, 86 Addî 124 Adi-mÊti-ilu 117 AdÒrtu 146 AdÖnÒ-¢Öbu 54–55 AdÖnu 82 Agî-[. . .] 137 Ahâ 126 Ah-abû (1) 117 Ah-abû (2) 120, 122 Ah-abû (3) 129 Ahatâ 78 AhÊt-abÒfa 70 AhÊ[tÒ-. . .] 90

AhÊtÒ-lÏxi 69 AhÊtÒ-¢Êbat 72 AhÊtu-lÊmur 89 Ahi-dÖrÒ 137, 139 Ah-immê 94–95 Ahi-nÊgi 134 Ahi-nÖrÒ (1) 50 Ahi-nÖrÒ (2) 132 Ahi-padâ 103 Ahi-¢allÒ 37, 39, 56, 98, 160, 164 Ahu 137 AhÖxa (1) 111 AhÖxa (2) 115 AhÖxa-erÒba 74 Ahu-dÖrÒ 96 Ahu-iddina 151 Ahu-lÏxi 111 Ahu-lÏfir 85 Ahu-lÏxûtÒ 111 AhÖnu (1) 115 AhÖnu (2) 117 AhÖnu (3) 132 Ahu-nÖrÒ 132 AhÖtu-kÒ-[. . .] 79 Aia-ahhÏ 74 Aia-ehu[. . .] 75 Aia-lÊmur 152–153 Akbaru 78 Aktur-la-Nafuh 132 Amat-BÏl-uÉur 140 Amat-Kurra 91 Amat-SalmÊnu (= ‘mtglmn) 71 Amman-tanahti 76 Ammi-iababa 82 Amurrî 55–56 Ana-mÒni-allak 109 Anu-ahu-u[Éur] 79 Anu-Ïref 140 Apî 76 AplÊia 94, 165 AqÊr-BÏl-lÖmur 144 Arad-Nergal see Urdu-Nergal ArbailÊiu (1) 60 ArbailÊiu (2) 104 Arbail-hammat 89–90

index of names Arbail-farrat 93 ArbÊiu 87 Arnabâ 117 Asâ 111 Asalluhi-ahhÏ-iddina 73 Asalluhi-fumu-iddina 73 AsanÖnu 123 Assî 124 Assurbanipal 21, 51, 63, 65–67, 78–80, 101–104, 111, 144, 280, 286, 344, 347, 349 AssurnaÉirpal II 348 Asusi 108 AffÖr-bÊni 49 AffÖr-bÏlu-taqqin (1) 94–95 AffÖr-bÏlu-taqqin (2) 141–142 AffÖr-bÏlu-uÉur (1) 49 AffÖr-bÏlu-uÉur (2) 52 AffÖr-bÏlu-uÉur (3) 109 AffÖr-erÒba 70 AffÖr-mÊtu-taqqin 272, 303 AffÖr-mÊtu-[taqqin?] 79 AffÖr-mÒtu-balli¢ 80 AffÖr-mu-BI-KAT 70 AffÖr-mufallim 75 AffÖr-nÊdin-ahi 75 AffÖr-naxid 80 AffÖr-reÉÖwa 116 AffÖr-rÏfÒ-iffi 70 AffÖr-fallim-ahhÏ (1) 62 AffÖr-fallim-ahhÏ (2) 66 AffÖr-fumu-iddina 107 Atara[. . .] 301 AttÊr-. . . 72 AttÊr-aiÊlÒ 152–153 AttÊr-bixdÒ 129 AttÊr-idrÒ 72 AttÊr-fumkÒ 121 Ateqanni 51 Atûti 72 AwÒrâ 111 Azi-il 128 Baxal-sÖrÒ 102 BaxaltÒ-iÊbatu 75–76 Baxassi 66 BÊbÊia 51 BÊbî 147 BÊbilÊiu (1) 53–54 BÊbilÊiu (2) 80 BÊbu- . . . 95 BÊdia 60–61, 293 BÊia 84–85 Baiadi-il 111 BakÒfa 110

Balaiâ 55 Bal¢Êku-ammar 115 Bal¢i-Aia (1) 52 Bal¢i-Aia (2) 96 B[a . . .]î 72 BÊnî (1) 89 BÊnî (2) 110 BÊnÒtu-abu-uÉur 155 BÊnÒtu-ummi 153 Bannâ 111 Bapî 80 Baqâ 154 Bar-ahÊtÒ 98–99 BarÒku 103 Barsipitu 54 BÊssÒ 151 Baffafa 105 BÊtÊnu 74 Bauiâ 64 BÏl-abu-uÉur 83 BÏl-ahhÏfu 146 BÏl-aplu-iddina 68 BÏl-bÊni 126 BÏl-Ïmuranni (1) 68 BÏl-Ïmuran[ni] (2) 91 BÏl-Ïref 80 BÏl-iddin 146 BÏlet-issÏxa 76 BÏlet-taddina 144 BÏl-HarrÊn-bÏlu-uÉur 137–139 BÏl-HarrÊn-idrÒ 131 BÏl-HarrÊn-issÏxa 50, 54 BÏl-HarrÊn-taklÊk (1) 50 BÏl-HarrÊn-taklÊk (2) 60–61, 293 BÏl-iqbi 83 BÏl-lÊmur 140 BÏl-lÏxi (1) 89 BÏl-lÏxi (2) 152–153 BÏl-na’di 68, 75–76 BÏl-nÊÉir 48–49 BÏl-nÖri 85 BÏl-rÒba 78 BÏl-famka 137, 139 BÏl-uballi¢ (1) 110 BÏl-uballi¢ (2) 113 Betuzati 74 BibÊia 85 BibÒa 86 Bi-DÊdi 99 Bitâ 105 Bittû 146 BÖru-ahu-iddina 74 BÖru-rapax 74 Busuku 84 BuxfÊia 72

385

386

index of names

DÊdi-dilÒni 120 Dadu 49 Dagal-il 301 DaiÊnu-idrÒ 72 Daxxinanni-Nergal 67 Dalâ-[. . .] 134 DalÖwa (1) 64 DalÖwa (2) 71 DandÖsi 61 DannÊia (1) 39 DannÊia (2) 88, 162 DannÊia (3) 123 Danqî 98 DÊri-BÏl 86 DÒdî (1) 64 DÒdî (2) 89 Dihatari 78 Dimbâ 64 DÒnÊna 68 DÒnÊnu 128 DÒfî 82 Dugul-pÊn-ili 137 Dullaiaqanun 87 EbÒsu 142 ¾du-qidira 51 Ehijâ 87 EmÖqÒ-AffÖr 47–48 ¾nÒ-il 102 Enqâ 155 Epix 85 ErÒba/RÒba—[. . .] 137 ErÒba-AffÖr 80 ¾risu 133 Esarhaddon 51, 57, 63–64, 65–66, 68, 88, 100–101, 144, 286, 342, 346–347, 349 ¾¢ir-[. . .] 84 Gabbu-Êmur 100 Gabbu-ilÊni-Ïref 67 Gabia 68 Gabrî (1) 49 Gabrî (2) 110 Gabri-il 132 Gaddijâ 70 Gad-il 96 Gagî 111 Gameu 142 Gir-IÊu 137–138 Gula-ramÊt 154 Gula-rifat 75 GurÊdu 137

Haia-ahi 71 HalÊma 124 Haldi- . . . 99 Halmusu (1) 80 Halmusu (2) 120 Hamadâ 108 Hambussu 69 HammÊia 153 HamnÖnu 57 Hanabax 115 Hanabufâ 76 HanÊna (1) 85 HanÊna (2) 144 Han-DÊdi/dada 120–122 Handî/hdy 51, 55, 63, 157 Hannî (1) 120 Hannî (2) 136 HanpafÊnu 120, 122 HanÖnu (1) 57 HanÖnu (2) 121 HanÖ[nu] (3) 134 HanÖnu-il 107 Hanzabâ 111 HarÒmâ 123 Harrâ 111 HarrÊnÊiu/hrny 51 HarrÊnÊiu 137 HarrÊnû 140 HarurÊnu (1) 94 HarurÊnu (2) 115 HafÊnu 98 HatezÊia 75 HazÊnu 141, 225 Hazi . . . 69 HazÖgâ 137 Hehe-ilÊxÒ 70 HilqÒ-IÊu 137–139 Hi¢ubarra 111 HuddÊia 72 Hulli 87 Hurubisa[. . .] 104 Husazâ 127 Hu¢-nahti 76 Ia-ahhÏ 104 IahimÒ 108 IÊluzu 115–116 Iamaniâ 134 Iannuqu 64 Iaqar-ahÒ 63 IaqÒrâ 105 Ia-sÖrÒ 137 IatÊmâ 111 IaÖ-idrÒ 111

index of names IbnÊia 97 IdÊia/IdÒ-Aia 70 IddÊti-BÏl-allak 62 IddinÊia 134 IddÖxa 35, 68, 161 IdrÒ-Anu (1) 117 IdrÒ-Anu (2) 130 IdrÒ-lî 136 IkkÊru 104 Il-abadi 117 Il-amar 95 IlÊxÒ-abÒ 133, 271 IlÊia-takara 142 Il-banâ 123 Il-ba[. . .] 120, 122 Il-bakî 71 Il-DÊdi (1) 129 Il-DÊdi (2) 132–133 Il-DÊdi (3) Il-dalâ 133, 271 Il-gabrÒ 132 Il-hazi 72 Il-iÊba 115 Il-iadax 141–142 Il-idrÒ (1) 72 Il-idrÒ (2) 131 Il-naqamÒ 123 Il-Nafuh-milkÒ (1) 120, 122 Il-Nafuh-milkÒ (2) 134 Il-natan (1) 54–55 Il-natan (1) 124 Il-nÖrÒ 117 Il-paxal 130 Il-sÏx-milkÒ 117 Il-sÖri 57 Il-fumkÒ (1) 80 Il-fumkÒ (2) 118 Ilu-bÊni 128 Ilu-ibni 70 Ilu-iddina 137 Ilu-islaka 129 Ilu-ittÒja 120, 122 Ilu-kÏnu-uÉur 61–62 Ilûtu 153 IlÖssa 64 Ilu-fal[. . .] 106 Indibî 40, 87 In-ili 111 InqÊia 146 InÖrta-Ïref 133 InÖrta-uÉalli 133, 271 Iqbi-AffÖr 74 Iqbi-IssÊr 147 IqÒfû 141

387

Isî 72 IsinnÊiu 84 IssÊr-. . . 85 IssÊr-dÖr-qalli 75 IssÊr-dÖrÒ (1) 38 IssÊr-dÖrÒ (2) 100 IssÊr-dÖrÒ (3) 123 IssÊr-ilÊxÒ 154 IssÊr-kulitti 85 Iffal[-. . .] 71 KakkullÊnu 36, 74–75, 79, 159, 191 Kalbi-Ukû 63 Kamasu 104 KandalÊnu (1) 57 KandalÊnu (2) 86 KÏnî 134 KankÊnu 117, 120, 296 KÏnu 113–114 KÏnu-abÖxa 103 KÏnu-lÏfir 108 KÒn-zÏru 115 KiqillÊnu (1) 50–51 KiqillÊnu (2) 72 Kiqillutu 153 Kiribtu 145 KubÊbu-ilÊxÒ 147 KubÊbu-lÖnu 106 KudurrÊ[nu] 79 Kul-ba-iadi-[il] 120, 122 KullÊia 146 KummÊiu 72 Kur-ilÊxÒ 67 Kurzâ 129 KÖsÊiâ 118 LÊ-abâfi 145 LÊ-dÊgil-ili 75 LaiÊ 82 LÊ-nasÒhi 80 LÊ-qÏpu 61 LÊ-tenni-amassa 63 LÊ-tubÊfinni 301 LÊ-turamanni-AffÖr 76 LibÖfÖ 111 Liphur-ilu 137 Liphur-BÏl 223 LÒt-ili 121 LÖ-bal¢at (1) 58 LÖ-bala¢ (2) 104 LÖ-bal¢at (3) 107 Lubâ-Nafhu 117, 120, 296 LÖqu (lqh) 36, 69, 158 LÖ-fakin 76

388

index of names

MÊdÊiu 60 MammÒtu-dÖri 79 Manasseh 335 Mannu-. . . 67 Mannu-iÊdix 121 Mannu-kÊ-DÊdi 133 Mannu-kÒ-Adad 111 Mannu-kÒ-AllÊia 63 Mannu-kÒ-Arbail 85 Mannu-kÒ-AffÖr (1) 76 Mannu-kÒ-AffÖr (2) 79 Mannu-kÒ-AffÖr (3) 137 Mannu-kÒ-InÖrta 93–94 Mannu-kÒ-NÒnua (1) 50 Mannu-kÒ-NÒnua (2) 104 Mannu-kÒ-ummi 75 Mannu-kÒ-SÏx 127 Mannu-lÊ-amÒni 132 MÊr-[. . .] 80 Mardî (1) 78 Mardî (2) 97–98 Marduk-ahu-iddina 107 Marduk-erÒba 104 Marduk-rÏmanni 66 MÊr-gubbi 137 MÊr-larÒm 68 Marqihitâ 62 MarÉif-adllal 67 MÊrtî 63 MatÒx 137 Matixî 111 Martux 97–98 MexÒsu 120 Mexsâ 60–61, 293 Milkia 87–88 Milki-natan 77 Milki-nÖrÒ 35, 65–66, 101, 157–158, 165 Milki-sÖrÒ 96 Minahimi 63 MÒnu-ah¢i 146–147 Mudammiq-AffÖr 77 Muhhi-ili-fapkÊku 64 Murabbataf 75 MusukÊiu 70 MuÉurÊiu 72 Mufallim-IssÊr 49–50, 157 Mufallim-Nafhu 120–122 Mutakkil-Marduk 75 Nabtê Nabûxa Nabûxa Nabûxa

87 (1) 53 (2) 62 (3) 85

Nabûxa (4) 97 Nabû-ahu-Ïref 140 Nabû-ahu-iddina 47–48 Nabû-ahu-uÉur 103 Nabû-Êpil-kÖmÖxa 108 Nabû-apkal-ilÊni 91 Nabû-aplu-iddina 67 Nabû-ballÊssu-iqbi 132 Nabû-balli¢ 115 Nabû-bÊni 140 Nabû-bÏl-uÉur 62 Nabû-dexiq 97 Nabû-dÏnÒ-amur 115 Nabû-dÖri 108 Nabû-Ïref 144 Naxid-Eferiga Nabû-erÒba (1) 57–58 Nabû-erÒba (2) 89 Nabû-Ï¢ir 50 Nabû-Ï¢iranni 114 Nabû-Ï¢ir-napfÊti (1) 97 Nabû-Ï¢ir-napfÊti (2) 113 Nabû-hamÊtÖ’a 349 Nabû-iddina (1) 50 Nabû-iddina (2) 115 Nabû-kÊÉir 115 Nabû-kÏnu-ubbib 107 Nabû-kÏnu-uÉur 115 Nabû-kibsÒ-uÉur 49 Nabû-ladÒ 132 Nabû-lÏxÊni 115 Nabû-nÊdin-ahhÏ 100 Nabû-nÊdin-ahi 140 Nabû-nÊdin-apli 123 Nabû-na’id 154 Nabû-rÏfÒ-iffi 113 Nabû-fabfi 115 Nabû-far-ilÊni 88 Nabû-farru-uÉur 111, 213 Nabû-fÏzib (1) 58 Nabû-fÏzib (2) 113 Nabû-fumu-ibni 47 Nabû-fumu-iddina (1) 69–70 Nabû-fumu-iddina (2) 70 Nabû-fumu-ifkun 34, 59 Nabû-fumu-kaxxin 113 Nabû-fumu-lÏfir 78–79 Nabû-tÏfî-balli¢ 109 Nabûtî 65 NabÖtu 83 Nabû-tuklatÖxa 47–48, 50, 157 Nabû-uÉalli 133 Nabû-ufallim 133, 271

389

index of names Nabû-zÊqip-enfi 115 Nabû-zÏru-iddina (1) 78 Nabû-zÏru-iddina (2) 91 Naxdi 104 Naxdi-ilu 52 Nagaha 72 Nahirî 92–93 Naxid-AffÖr 101 Naxid-Eferiga 140 NanÊia-ilÊxÒ 79 NanÊia-RÊmat 84–85 Nanî (1) 111 Nanî (2) 111 Nanî (3) 121 Nanî (4) 124 Nanî (5) 201 Napusî 115 Naqixa/Zakutu 101 Nafuh-dalâ 132 Nafuh-dilÒni (1) 123 Nafuh-dilÒni (2) 123, 126 Nafuh-dimrÒ 123 Nafku-dÖrÒ 123 Nafuh-gabrÒ 132 Nafuh-iddina 126 Nafuh-idrÒ (1) 117 Nafuh-idrÒ (2) 129 Nafuh-manÊni 134 Nafuh-qatar (1) 117 Nafuh-qatar (2) 132 Nafuh-sagab 129 Nafuh-samaxani 118 Nafuh-sa[. . .] 117 Nazibirî 111 Nufhu-salahanni 102 Nergal-dÊn 63 Nergal-iddina 60 Nergal-ilÊxÒ 129 Nergal-farru-uÉur (= xAthar-farru-uÉur) 71 Nergal-uballi¢ 100 NÒnuÊiu 36, 72, 158 NinuxÒtu 96 NÖrÊia 50 NÖrî 111 NÖr-IssÊr 110 NÖr-eamaf 69, 202 Nufku-ilÊxÒ (1) 117 Nufku-ilÊxÒ (2) 117 Nufku-fÏzibanni 120 Padî 130 Pahî 75 Pala . . . 78

PÊlihka-liblu¢ 140 PalÒ¢u 120 PaltaÉi 141 PÊn-AffÖr-[. . .] 149–150 Parnu-uarri 72–73 ParÖ¢¢u 100 Pilaqqâ 87 Pirahu 115 PÖdî 72 PufhÒ 69 Pu¢i-HÖru 144 Pu¢i-MÖnu 76 Qallussu 86 Qansê 107 Qarhâ 102 Qausu 94–95 QibÒt-AffÖr 74 QÒsÊia 114 QÒtÒ-ilÊni 111 QÒtÒ-mÖtÒ 111 Quia 137 Qunî 133, 271 Qunnabatu 146 Qurdi-Adad 86 Qurdi-IssÊr 147 Qurdi-IssÊr-lÊmur Qutarî 72

101

Rabba-il 142 RahÒmâ 118 Ramâ 72 RÊfi-il 223 Ratuxâ 86 Ratulu 105 RÏhÊnu 141 RÏmanni-Adad 35–36, 38, 40, 62, 66–69, 89, 102–104, 112, 158, 160–161, 163–164, 166, 241–242, 344 RÏmanni-IssÊr 116 RÏmÖt-Gula 146 RÏmÖt-ilÊni 97 RÏmÖtu 145 Ribsiru 142 Rimini 301 RÒsÊia (1) 51 RÒsÊia (2) 130 Sadaia 67 SagÒx 137 SagÒb-Adda 137 SagÒb/SÊkip-AffÖr SagÒbÒ (1) 65

77

390

index of names

SagÒbÒ (2) 151 SagÒbu 117 Saiâ 142 SaxÒlu 137 SÊkip-AffÖr 79 SalÊmÊnnu 70 SalÊmÊ[nu-. . .] 134 SalÒlÊnu 94 SalmÊnu-immÏ 67 SÊmidu 71 Sams[i-. . .] 77 Samsi-iÊbi 126 Samsi-ilÊxÒ 123, 126 SamÖnu-aplu-iddina 126 SanÊnu 89 Sanî 80 Sargon II 20–22, 31, 49–51, 95, 99, 141, 223, 272, 298, 344 SÊsî (1) 97 SÊsî (2) 127 SÊsî (3) 350 SÊsu 110 SÏx-aplu-iddina 117 SÏx-aqÊba (1) 118 SÏx-aqÊba (2) 129 SÏx-dikir 126 SÏx-dilÒni 120 SÏx-gabâ 60–61, 293 SÏx-hÊri 69 SÏx-iabÊba 132 SÏx-iÊtê 82 SÏx-idrÒ 117 SÏx-immê 82 SÏx-lawÊ 55 SÏx-ma’ÊdÒ 34, 38, 57, 60, 99, 157, 160, 165 SÏx-manÊni (1) 134 SÏx-manÊni (2) 134 SÏx-nâpi 117 SÏx-nÊtan 68–69 SÏx-nÖrÒ 65 SÏx-sakâ 132 SÏx-fumkÒ 126 Sennacherib 20–22, 31, 50–51, 57, 59–60, 63, 95, 99, 101, 115–116, 144, 211, 278, 280, 293 Shalmaneser IV 48 Shalmaneser V 49, 141 Silim-Adad 55 Silim-AffÖr (1) 61, 157 Silim-AffÖr (2) 79 Silim-DÊdi 103 Silim-InÖrta 107 SimkÒ-il 85

SÒn-[. . .] 124 SÒn-Êlik-pÊni (1) 66 SÒn-Êlik-pÊni (2) 91 SÒn-Ïref 131 SÒn-kÏnu-Òdi 44, 91, 162 SÒn-naxdi (1) 2 SÒn-naxdi (2) 117 SÒn-fumu-. . . 104 Sitir-[. . .] 60 Sukki-Aia (1) 70 Sukki-Aia (2) 91 Sukki-Aia (3 = son of Parnu-uarri) 72–73 SukkÒtu 111 Supala 74 SÖrâ 129 SÖrÊia 123 SÖrÒ-rÊmu 129 Âalam-farri-iqbi 93–94 Âalimtu (1) 74 Âalimtu (2) 153–154 ÂarÖru-iqbi 73 Âil-AffÖr 61–62 Âil-bÏl 52 Âil-IssÊr 137, 139 Âil-Nabû (1) 114 Âil-Nabû (2) 116 ÂiÉi 137 ÂubÏtu 301 Âumafferi 144 ÂÖÉu 111 eaddÒtu 38, 100–101 eamaf-abÖxa 91–92 eamaf-ahu-iddina 134 eamaf-ahu-uÉur 71 eamaf-aiÊlÒ 64 eamaf-bÏlu-uÉur 110 eamaf-erÒba (1) 77 eamaf-erÒba (2) 84 eamaf-ilÊxi (1) 58 eamaf-ilÊxi (2) 65 eamaf-immi 49 eamaf-issÏxa 99 eamaf-nÊÉir 89–90 eamaf-farru-uÉur 70 eamaf-fumu-iddina 108 eamaf-uballi¢ (1) 97 eamaf-uballi¢ (2) 301 eamgaiÊnu 111 ea[ngû-. . .] 105 ear-ilÊni-ilu 123, 126 ear-ili 77 ear-IssÊr 110 earranu 56

index of names earrî 111 earru-Ïmuranni 349 earru-lÖ-dÊri 111 earru-fumu-kaxxin 62 eep-AffÖr 79 eÏr-dalâ 117 eÏr-manÊni 118 eÒti-ahÊtÒ 152–153 eiti-dannat 80 eulmÒtu 89 eulmu-BÏl 104 eulmu-bÏli 53 eulmu-bÏli-lÊmur 75 eulmu-farri 69, 71–72, 74, 78, 158–159 eumma-Adad 100 eumma-ibaffi-kettu 61 eumma-ilÊni 21, 34, 37–38, 50–51, 54, 95, 99, 157, 160, 164–165 Taxallu 115 Taxlâ (1) 123, 126 Taxlâ (2) 126 TabÊlÊiu 69 Tangî 137 Tarhu-[. . .] 92–93 Tarhu-nazi 74 Tarhundapî 96 TarÒba-IssÊr 75 TarÒbi-IssÊr 53 Texitu 76 Tela-il 129 TÏr-dalâ 132 Thuri-[. . .]bi 49 Tiglath-pileser III 20, 48–49, 110, 138 Tiniâ 126 Tirî 57 Tiurame 92–93 TuqÖnnat/TuqÖn-mÊti 77 ”Êba-rigimÊtu-Adad 88 ”Êbî 132 ”ab-rigim-[. . .] 107 ”Êb-rÖhiti 87 ”uri-Aia 104 ”usî 89 Uar[i . . .] 104 Uasî 123, 126 UbÊru 141 Ubru-AffÖr 75

Ubru-ilÊni 70 Ubru-Nabû 59 UlÖlÊiu (1) 57 UlÖlÊiu (2) 129 UlÖlÊiu (3) 134 UlÖlÊiu (4) 201 Uppahir-ilu 137 Uqaiaqi 115 Urad-IssÊr (1) 67 Urad-IssÊr (2) 129 Urad-IssÊr (3) 129 [Ur]ad-IssÊr (4) 149–150 ÇrÊiu 60 Urda-BÊnÒitu 110 Urda-Gula (1) 110 Urda-Gula (2) 115 Urda-IssÊr (1) 57, 60 Urda-IssÊr (2) 111 [Urd]a-Nabû (1) 108 Urda-Nabû (2) 115 Urdî (1) 111, 113 Urdu 83 Urdu-InÖrta 70 Urdu-IssÊr 79 Urdu-Mullissu 94 Urdu-Nabû 75 Urdu-NanÊia 75 Urdu-Nergal 146 Urdu-eamaf 49 ÇrÒ-iâ 87 Urkittu-ilÊxÒ 55–56 Urkittu-lÏxât 75 Urkittu-refat 75 UruÉa 62 ÇsÏax (1) 60–61, 293 ÇsÏax (2) 65 UÉa . . . 66 Uzziah 335 Zabdâ 123 ZabÒnu 97–98 Zakutu see Naqixa Zarhi-ili 148–149 Zarî 97 ZÊzÊia 140 ZÏr-IssÊr 132 ZÏru-ibni 83 Zilî 67 ZizibÊiu 148–149 Zur[. . .] 122

391

392

index of names Place Names

Adia 45–46 Adian, Adi-il 45, 96 Agurima 49 ¹midu 223 Anditâ 45–46 Arbail (ArbÏla) 22, 45, 211, 246, 280–281, 342, 344 Arpad 104 Arrapha 94 Arumu (Aram) 45 ArzÖhina 348 AffÖr 20, 22–23, 25–27, 30, 32–33, 39–40, 43, 48–49, 70–71, 74, 76–80, 85–86, 89–90, 115, 157–159, 162–163, 186–187, 192–193, 195, 197, 199–200, 211, 228–230, 239–240, 274–275, 278, 292, 342, 348 AffÖr (Tabira gate) 114 Babylon 141, 145, 344 Babylonia 22, 45, 133, 141, 144, 225, 272, 342 BÊhÊia, Kapar BÊhÊia 65 Balawat see Imgur-Illil BalÒhu 28 BÏt-faffiri 45, 109 Calah (Kalhu) 20–23, 26, 33, 41, 45–49, 62–63, 70, 80, 116, 199, 138, 143, 157–158, 183, 192–193, 195, 197, 200, 230–232, 274–275, 287, 292, 342 Carchemish 57, 62–63, 67–68, 70, 85, 87–89, 101 Cutha 146, 225 Dadi-ualla 45, 87 Dimeti 137 DÏru 141 DÖr-Katlimmu 14, 22–23, 26–27, 33, 37, 69, 71–72, 74, 78, 84–85, 108, 158–159, 164, 166, 192–193, 195, 197, 199–200, 232–233, 274–275, 278–279 DÖr-earrukÒn 95, 99 Elam

87, 191

Galilee 138 GambÖlu 30, 128, 144, 221

Gezer 22–23, 26, 37, 104–105, 164, 192, 278–279 GôzÊn 239 Hadattu 28 Hadid see Tell Hadid HarrÊn 22, 28–29, 45, 61, 71, 82, 133, 173–180 HindÊnu 72 HuzÒrÒna 28, 200, 239 Imgur-Illil (Balawat) 193, 195, 197, 200, 239 Ispallurê 45, 103 Izalla 22, 103, 342 Kalhu see Calah Kannu’ 45 Kapar Adunu 70 Kapar BÏl-ahhÏ 87 Kapar MallÊsi 45 Kapar Nabû-nÊÉir 45–46 KÊfijÏri 45 Khabur 29 KipÊnu 28 Kif 114 Kummuh 73 Kurru-. . . 45–46 LahÒru 45, 68, 101 LÖ-ahhÏ 105 MaxallÊnÊte 21–23, 26, 29, 33, 51, 55, 62, 157, 199–200, 239–240, 274–275 Maganuba 95, 99 MagrÒsu 29 Maliyati 45 MÊzamua 344 Musina-aplu-iddina 104 mÊt rab gÊqê (mt rbgqn) 22, 45, 103, 342 Nabula 239 Nabû-fÏzib, Kapar Nabû-fezib 65 Nabur 45, 97 NaÉibina 29 NÏrubu/NÏrab 22, 45, 104, 342 Nikuxa 45, 107 Nineveh (NÒnua) 20–23, 25–27, 30, 34–45, 49, 51–63, 65–69, 71–72, 74–76, 79–80, 82–84, 86–89, 92, 94–97, 99–106, 149–152, 157–160,

393

index of names 162–172, 181–185, 192–193, 195, 197, 199–200, 234–238, 274–275, 278–279, 281, 287, 292, 342 PaddÊnu 45 Pattu-. . . 46 Qubate 88 QudÊru 46, 53 Que 330–331 rab gÊqê, province—see mÊt rab gÊqê RaÉappa 46, 88, 115–116, 280–281 Sagbat 137 SarÖgu 28 SingÊra ( Jebel Sinjar) 46, 112 Sparta 223 eazabinâ 58 eibanÒba 46, 97 eiddi-hiriti 46, 94–95

eulmu-birÊti

46

TalmÖsa 22, 45–46, 53, 87–88, 342 TamnÖna 30 Tell Abta 138–139 Tell Aqra 141 Tell Hadid 200 Tell Shioukh Fawqani 200 Tixi 46, 98–99 Til-Barsib 22, 46, 68, 239, 342 Til-Bu . . . 46 Til-Nahiri 46, 102 Til-ra . . . 46 Tll zy Qpn Hrn (= Tilul of the Qipan of Harran) 29 Transjordan 138 Uruk 145, 225 Urakka 46, 54 Zabarra

46

God Names AffÖr

2, 30

BÊbu 114, 211 BÏl 114 InÖrta

116

Nabû 114, 116 Nafuh 29 Ninurta see InÖrta SÒn 28, 61, 82 eamaf 76 ZabÊba

114, 211, 344

III. INDEX OF TERMS

Akkadian and Sumerian Terms A see mar’u abu 200, 204 AD see abu adi 12, 93, 144, 234, 246, 254, 344 a-di qi-ni-ti-gú ha-am-gú hu-Éa-bu 87 ahÊtu 201, 230, 236, 239, 249 ahu 52, 91, 122, 201, 212, 247–248, 253–254 Êlittu, lÊ 308 AMA see ummu amtu/antu 8, 10, 73–74, 189–193, 198, 202–204, 228–240, 243–244, 254–256, 343 ana LÚ qatinnÖte 114, 212, 246, 344 ana magkanÖti gakÊnu 91, 245 ana urdÊnÖti 114, 212, 344 ana gaparte gakin / kammus 204, 245 Êpiu 197–198, 236, 248 ARAD see urdu ÊrigÖtu 223 A.eÀ see eqlu agkÊpu 198, 238 aglÊku 198 atû 251 batÊku 348 batÖssu 119, 215, 217, 248, 250, 254 (MÍ .ba-tu-la-[te]), 309 bÏlu 189–191, 204–205, 245, 348 bÏt PN 56 bÏt abi 188 bÏt akÒti 115 bÏtu 6, 55–56, 75, 160, 188, 230, 245, 254 danÊnu 225, 253 dÏnu 89, 91, 245, DIL-ma-nu see ÏdumÊnu DUMU see marxu DUMU/LÚ.eÁM see ga gÒme DUMU.MEe-gú la-ág-gú 303, 308 DUMU.MÍ see marxutu DUMU ul iraggi 308

É see bÏtu É–AD see bÏt abi ÏdÏnû 247 ÏdumÊnu 211 EN see bÏlu epÏgu 71, 73 eqlu 205–206, 348 erÊbu (e) 245 ERIM.MEe, LÚ.ERIM.MEe see ÉÊbu errÏgu 222–223 errÏgutu 222 GA see ga zizibi gallÊbu 251 GEMÉ see amtu/antu gimru 52, 60, 70, 73, 77, 81, 85, 91, 134, 189, 205, 218, 246–250, 252, 254–256, 344 GIe.SAR see kiriu halÊqu 221, 245, 251 hubtu 128, 191, 221 habullu 245 hubut qagti 13 IGI see pÊnu ikkÊru 102, 196, 198, 219, 236, 241–242, 245–247, 249–251, 254 ikkÊr garri 198, 241 ilku 213, 344 immeru 246 imittu 11 ina ÊrigÖtu 223 ina qanni . . . 30 ina UGU-(hi) zi-zi 71, 78 issu 52–53, 55, 60, 62, 64, 68, 71, 73, 77, 85, 106, 189, 201, 212, 215, 228–230, 237–239, 243–251, 254–256 igpÊru 197, 220, 232, 236, 247, 249 paxÊÉu

220, 249

KALAG see danÊnu kammusu 204

index of terms karkadinnu 248, 255 kÊÉiru 197, 236, 238 kiriu 205, 219 kigittu 13 KUG.UD see Éarpu kÖm 93, 204, 245 LAL see mu¢ê LÚ.AeGAB see agkÊpu LÚ*.ENGAR see ikkÊru LÚ.er-re-ge-e 223 LUGAL see garru LÚ*.GIe.APIN see ga epinni LÚ.ka-Éir see kÊÉiru LÚ*.ma-Éar (GIe) qab-li see maÉÉar qabli LÚ*.MUeEN.DÚ see ugandû LÚ*.NAR see nuÊru LÚ*.NINDA see Êpiu LÚ*.NU.GIe.SAR see nukaribbu LÚ.QÀL see qallu LÚ.SAG see ga rÏgi LÚ*.SIPA ANeE see rÊxiu imÊru LÚ*.SIPA GUD.MEe see rÊxiu alpu LÚ*.SIPA ÙZ.MEe see rÊ’iu enzu LÚ.ga NUNDUN see ga ziqni LÚ* fá - SAGeU.MEe-fú see fa-kubfifu LÚ.gá - U.SAG.MEe-gú see ga-kubgigu LÚ.eÁM, LÚ.gi-me see ga gÒme LÚ.eU.I see gallÊbu LÚ*.TÚG-KA.KÉe see kÊÉiru LÚ*.TÚG.UD see aglÊku LÚ.Ue.ANeE.[MEe] see rÊdi imÊri LÚ.Ue.BAR see igpÊru LÚ.Ue.BAR—bir-me see igpÊru LÚ*.Ue.BAR—TÚG-Éip-rat see igpÊru [LÚ.Ue.g]am.mal.MEe; LÚ.Ue.ANeE. -AB.[BA.MEe] see rÊdi gammali madbar 30 mÊr amat ekalli 189 mar’u 28, 52, 59–60, 62, 64, 71, 77, 81–82, 85, 91, 97, 134, 136, 200, 212, 215, 218, 235, 238, 240, 245, 247–252, 254–256 mar’utu 53, 55, 59, 74, 77, 79, 85, 106, 201, 216, 231–234, 237, 247–250, 253, 255–256 maÉÉar qabli 219, 249–250 MA.NA see manû manû 93 mÏtu see muÊtu MÍ see issu MÍ.QÀL see qallutu MÍ.TUR see Éahurtu

395

muÊtu 245 muhhu 204, 244–245 munutukû 308 MU.AN.NA see gattu MU.NU.TUKU illak 308 munutukûtu 308 mu¢ê 255 nadÊnu see tadÊnu nappÊhu parzillu 198, 230 napgutu 60, 70–71, 73, 77, 81, 84–85, 91, 93, 95, 105–106, 139, 189–192, 204–205, 211, 224–225, 228–236, 238, 243–250, 253–255, 343 NIN see ahÊtu nÒgÒ 12,13, 89, 189–192, 204–205, 228–236, 238, 241–245, 256, 343–344 nuÊru 220 nuhatummÖ 248 nukaribbu 102, 196, 198, 219, 237, 241–242, 246–251, 256 PAB see ahu PAB see gimru pa’ÊÉu 220 pÊhutu 348 palÊhu 90, 93, 245 pÊnu 204 pirsu, pir, parsu; par(su) 71, 79, 159–161, 184, 211, 216, 246, 250, 254, 256, 309 pÖÉÊiu 251 qû 152–155 qallu 189 qallutu 189 qanni 30 qatinnu 114, 211–212, 220–221, 247, 251 qinnu 6, 56, 87, 254, 344 rab gÊqê 22, 45, 103, 342 rÊdi gammali 198, 235–236, 247, 251 rÊdi imÊri 198, 220, 234 rÊ’iu 246–247, 249, 251, 256 rÊ’iu alpu 219, 249, 251 rÊ’iu enzu 219, 249 rÊ’iu imÊru 249 rÊ’iu immeru 212, 247–248, 250–251 raksu 63 riÊqu 214, 222, 250, 343 rubê 93 ru¢u 216, 231, 233–234, 254

396

index of terms

sartinnu 30 sekret ekalli 87 SIMUG AN.BAR see nappÊhu parzillu SUM-an see tadÊnu sÖtu 11, 153 Éa see Éahurtu ÉÊbu 123, 135, 141, 189, 220, 225, 253, 254 Éabtu 59 ÉahÊru; Éahurtu 61–62 (MÍ.TUR), 79 (MÍ.TUR), 88 (MÍ.TUR), 99 (MÍ.TUR), 119 (Éahurtu), 147 (TUR), 161 (MÍ.TUR), 174 (Éahurtu), 182 (Éahurtu), 184 (Éahurtu), 189 (LÚ*.TUR), 203 (MÍ.TUR), 211 (Éahurtu), 215 (Éahurtu), 217 (Éahurtu), 225 (TUR), 228 (MÍ.TUR), 229–230 (MÍ.TUR; LÚ*. TUR), 234 (TUR), 236 (TUR), 237 (MÍ.TUR), 247–250 (Éahurtu), 252 (Éahurtu), 254 (Éahurtu), 309 (Éahurtu) Éarpu 93 Éipratu 197 ga BAD-HAL see ga-pÏthalli ga epinni 198, 241 gakÊnu 204 gakinu 57 gakintu 56, 60 gaknu ga ekalli 51, 63 ga-kubgigu 197–198, 236, 250 gallatu 13 ganiu 254 ga-pÏthalli 254 gapartu see ana gaparte gakin/kammus ga qurbÖti 69, 71–72 ga ramanigu/ga ramannigunu 30, 97, 118 ga rÏgi 48, 139, 224, 236, 256 garru 191

ga gÏpi 73 ga gÒme 189, 191–193, 231, 237, 343 gaggugu 118 gattu 93 ga ziqni 139, 224 ga zizibi, ga GA, GA, GAB 74, 77, 106, 122, 135, 159, 180, 183–184, 211, 216, 247–250, 252–256, 309 gelapÊiu 254 gÏlûtu 189 eEe see ahu gaggugu 118 gumma 93, 204, 348 tadÊnu 93, 190–191, 204–205, 245 talmÒdu 135 tamkÊru 73, 93 taglÒgu 254 TUR see ÉahÊru turtÊnu 68 UD see pirsu, pir UDU see immeru UGU see muhhu ummu 212, 248, 255–256 Ömu 245 UN.MEe see nÒgÒ unzarhu 189 urdu 8, 10, 49, 52, 58, 60, 70, 73, 85, 91, 98, 114, 145, 188–193, 198, 203–206, 228–245, 254, 343 uÉû (e) 204, 245 ugandû 198, 241, 253 ZÁH see halÊqu zarip laqi 93, 189–190, 205, 243, 245 ZI see napgutu

Aramaic xmt, xmtx, xmt PN 71, 158 ’ng 171, 191 xg 203 xgt g PN 75 br 71, 97

brh brt brth dnt zy

62, 157 62 62 158 191

Hebrew {aqar 308

{aqara 308

IV. INDEX OF SUBJECTS*

abandoning of a land see land, abandoning of a abandoning of a wife see wife, abandoning of a adoption 213, 302–303 —— of a son 302–303 —— of a daughter 302–303 adoptive families/parents 302–303 administration, Assyrian 2–3, 118, 133, 139, 143, 145, 225, 271, 346, 350 administrative standing 4 Africa 309–310 Akitu Temple 116 amulet 116 apprentice 135, 259 Aramaic caption 6–7, 25, 45, 54, 60, 62–63, 67, 69, 71, 75, 103, 156–160, 190 architect 49, 146, 225 Asia 307, 309 attaché 133, 179–180, 218, 259 baker 49, 75, 79, 111, 197–198, 212 Bangladesh 307 barber 221 barley 19, 90, 153–154 barnyard 102–103, 107 barren 307–308 bas-reliefs 323 bastards see illegitimate child bear (children) 301, 308, 322 bearded men 137, 139, 224 bed 65 bigamy see polygamous biological afnity 5 birth 265, 310, 322 blankets 65 blood ties 5, 118, 121, 259 bodyguard, (royal) 51, 69, 71–72, 74, 78, 150 breastfeeding 309

bride 321 bronze 48–49 bronzesmith(s) see smith(s), bronze brother 4–7, 30, 52–53, 56–57, 59, 61, 66–69, 72, 75–76, 80, 83–84, 87–88, 91–92, 94, 96–97, 102, 111, 113, 117, 119–123, 125–127, 130–131, 133, 135–136, 140, 142–143, 148–149, 151, 157, 159–162, 164, 166, 170, 174, 176–177, 179–180, 182, 185, 192, 201–202, 204, 212, 214–218, 225–227, 259–260, 265–267, 269–272, 293, 297–299, 304, 311, 321, 324–325, 332, 335, 337–340, 348, 350–351 brother’s wife 57, 127, 131, 271–272, 298–299 bureaucracy, senior 1 ——, Assyrian 13, 346 business(es), businessmen 1, 50–51, 54–55, 62, 77 camel(s) 88, 145 —— driver 111, 198, 212, 221 Cameroon 307 cap-man 75 captives 79, 128, 138, 191 carpenter 129, 221 castes 2 cattle 87–88, 118–119, 221 ——, herder of 221 cavalryman 145, 225 census, Harran see Harran census chaff and twinge 87 chair(s) 65, 308 chamberlain 67 chariot 49 —— driver 21, 50–51, 54, 59, 62, 66, 95, 99 ——, chief 66, 89, 102–104 chariotry 102

* The following items are not listed in the index of subjects since they appear frequently in the book: adolescent, child/children, (a child of ) “2”/“3”/“4”/“5”/“6” spans’ height, couple, daughter(s), family’s head, father, female, girl(s), male, man/men, mother (of a family child, not of the family’s head), person(s), son(s), suckling, weaned, wife/wives, woman/women

398

index of subjects

chattel 8 chief eunuch see eunuch, chief chief judge see judge, chief chief physician see physician, chief childless families see family, childless class, master(s) 2 ——, middle 1–2 ——, lower 1–2 ——, ruling 2 ——, serf 2 ——, upper 1, 3, 232 clauses, guarantee 10, 105, 191, 194–195, 207, 228–242, 343 —— of penalties for litigation 48, 50, 54, 59, 66, 88, 194, 206 ——, redemption 199–200, 204, 206, 223 ——, risk 200–204, 242 cohort commander of the palace (guard) 73 commander-in-chief 68, 76 commander-of-fty 76, 86 conceive 308 concubine 264–265 ——, palace 87 Confectioner 117, 147–148 conspiracy 350 conveyance, restricted 8, 90 cook 30, 117, 131, 219, 348 ——, chief 30, 131 copper 13, 48–49, 83–84, 116 corrupt ofcial(s) 13, 86, 141, 224, 323, 345–346 corvée 213, 344 court decision(s) 19–21, 23–24, 44, 342 cowherd 117, 219, 221, 267 craftsman, craftsmen 1–3 creditor 8, 75, 89–94, 208 crop(s) 10–11, 219–222, 345 crown prince 223 ——, cohort commander of the 69, 74–75 ——, ofcial of the 70 ——, “third man” of the 94 ——, treasurer of the 30 ——, village manager of the 57, 61, 99 cultivate, cultivation, cultivator(s) 30, 88, 97–98, 118–119, 121–124, 128, 133, 208, 212, 219–224, 345, 348–350 cultivators, tied 7 cupbearer, chief 30, 103 currency 13

daughter-in-law 7, 56, 120, 122, 126, 130–131, 216, 267, 270, 272, 292, 295–298, 334–335, 340 day-laborer(s) see laborer(s), daydeath, father’s 57, 75–76, 78, 88–89, 118, 217, 265, 267, 321–322, 348 —— in childbirth 321–322 —— through illness 321, 323 ——, wife’s 127, 149, 264, 321–322, 351 debt 8, 19–20, 23–24, 40, 90, 93, 201, 222–223 ——, security for 8, 11, 87–88, 199, 208, 222 debt-note 19–21, 23–24 debtor 91–92, 200–201, 203–204, 223 decrees, personal 11–12, 211, 344 dependence 215, 224, 309, 345 dependent people see people, dependent deportees, deportation(s), displaced people 12–13, 20, 22–24, 30, 136–152, 181–185, 224–226, 253–256, 261–263, 265–266, 268–269, 272, 286–291, 298–300, 306–307, 315–318, 320, 323, 325, 327–330, 342, 345–347, 351 divide et impera 350 division of inheritance/property 4, 19–20, 23–24, 39, 48, 76–77 divorce, divorced 127, 149, 217, 259–260, 264–265, 302, 313, 322, 325, 351 donation(s) 19–20, 21–23, 45, 109, 113, 116, 172, 280 donkey(s) 145, 221 —— driver 198 ——, herder of 121–122, 220 drought 224, 345 economic difculties 90 —— independence 224, 345 Egypt 310 Egyptian Aramaic 62 —— deportees 21, 145 elderly 15 elegy 322 employees, temple see temple employees employer(s) 3, 7 England 347 eponym ofcial 53, 61, 68, 76, 91 Eshnunna, laws of 349 estate(s) 86, 88, 90, 94–97, 99–100,

index of subjects 102–103, 105, 107, 109, 111, 116, 131, 209, 349 eunuch, royal eunuch 48, 50, 65–66, 70, 72, 89–90, 101–102, 109, 137, 139, 152, 182, 224, 259, 303, 325 —— of the queen see queen, eunuch of ——, chief 63, 111–112 ——, ofcial of the 105 ——, village manager of the 49 Europe 310 exile(s) see deportees ex ofcio 88 exorcists 12, 22, 186 exploitation of labor see labor, exploitation of extended family see family, extended family, childless 14, 83–84, 98, 107, 259–260, 264, 266, 292, 297, 301, 302–308, 351 ——, efcient 347 ——, extended 259–262, 266, 269–270, 350 ——, monogamous 149, 292–295, 298, 300, 319–320, 350 ——, multiple- kinship group 7, 118–119, 127, 259–262, 267, 271, 296–297, 341, 350 “——, no” 6, 98, 140, 149, 152, 218 ——, nuclear 7, 48–49, 72, 80, 98, 104, 106, 118, 126, 131, 202, 259–262, 267, 269–271, 323, 347, 350 ——, patriarchal 350 ——, polygamous 105, 125, 130, 142, 145, 264, 270, 272, 292–300, 319–320, 350 ——, single-parent 12, 14, 62, 64, 67, 70–72, 74, 78–79, 87, 89–90, 98, 100, 106, 127, 148–149, 152, 155, 200, 262, 264–265, 294–295, 298, 302, 319–326, 350 ——, size 5, 14, 157–187, 273–291, 346–347 —— type(s) 47, 157–187, 259–272 farm(s) 89–90, 97, 118–119, 121–122, 124, 207, 214, 219–224, 345, 348–349 farmer(s) 4, 10–11, 30, 94, 100, 102–104, 108, 110–111, 116, 118, 120–131, 134, 136, 146, 151, 196, 198, 206, 209–210, 212, 219–223, 225, 343, 345 ——, free 1–2

399

——, palace 94 farming seasons 11 “fathers and sons” 29, 132–136, 179–180, 214, 217, 252, 280, 282, 284, 286, 310, 315, 318, 340 father’s house 75, 217, 301, 349 eld(s) 87, 99, 104, 106, 199, 210, 221, 223, 348 elds’ corn 345, 212 ——, sown 88 ngernail, sealing with 13 forts 349 fowl 96 fowler 198 France 310, 347 freedom, degree of 7, 8 frérèches 260, 267, 271, 324, 336 fugitive 144, 221 fuller 75, 198 garden(s) 87–88, 97, 99–100, 104, 135 gardener(s) 4, 10, 78–79, 94–98, 101, 110, 117–131, 151, 196, 198, 209–210, 212, 219–223, 226, 343, 345 gate-guard 129, 221 generations in the family 14, 27, 119, 266, 334–341, 351–352 gift(s) 19–21, 23–24, 40 glebae adscripti 8, 209 goat 118 goatherd 118, 219 goldsmith(s) 2, 90 governess 56, 60, 63, 86, 98 governor 30, 52–53, 58, 86–88, 98, 107, 131, 141, 143, 206, 223, 349–350 ——, deputy 52, 88 ——, ofcial of 58 ——, subordinate of 107 grace, period of 87 grain 2, 153–155 granaries, chief of the 95 grandchild(ren) 7, 335–336, 352 granddaughter 120, 270, 296 grandfather 48, 336, 352 grandson 48, 50, 59, 88, 119–120, 173, 214–216, 267, 296, 314, 334, 340, 351 grant see royal grant grantee 110 groom 321 guild 2 guarantee 208 guarantee clause see clause, guarantee

400

index of subjects

guarantor 92 guardian of a grove 118, 120, 122, 219–220, 223, 345 —— of poplars 132, 223 Hammurabi, laws of 11, 219, 222, 348–349 Harran census 10, 13–14, 19–20, 22–25, 28–31, 42, 117–136, 173–180, 214–224, 248–252, 261–266, 268–271, 280–286, 288–291, 295–298, 300, 305–307, 313–315, 317–318, 320–321, 325, 327–330, 332–334, 339–343, 345–347, 350–351 harvest 11, 222–223 hatter 66, 197–198, 221 hectares 86, 88, 94–100, 102–103, 105–107, 109, 111, 118–119, 122, 128, 133, 206–208, 220–221, 223, 345 helots (in Sparta) 7, 223 herald, palace 30, 138 herd(s) 119 herder of donkeys see donkeys, herder of —— of cattle see cattle, herder of Hittite(s), Hittite kingdom 12–13, 348 Homer(s) 90, 135 horse(s) 118–119, 135, 199, 207, 210, 223 —— trainer 91–92, 102, 110 house(s) 8, 12, 15, 22, 56, 64, 69, 75–76, 87–88, 91, 97–101, 103–105, 107, 116, 134, 189, 198–199, 207–208, 210, 217, 259–260, 301, 349 —— of PN 142, 146 household(s) 56, 124, 230 hunger 224, 345 illegitimate child 265, 322, 351 India 2, 307 infant mortality 306, 310 infertility 302–303, 307, 351 inheritance by widows 89–90, 124 inheritance, division of see division of inheritance interest 8, 10, 87, 90–93, 209, 223 iron 107 ironsmith(s) see smith(s), iron Israelite(s) 60–61, 138, 293 Janitor 198, 231 Judah 335

judge, chief

73

king of Assyria 101, 144, 150, 191, 212 kinship group(s) 5–7, 118–119, 127, 259–262, 267, 271, 296–297, 341, 350 labor, exploitation of 1, 3 ——, organization of 1, 3 ——, productive 1, 3 laborer(s) 209, 220 ——, day- 1, 11, 212–213, 220, 343–345 ——, hired 13 ——, wage 3 land 1–3, 9, 11, 30–31, 86, 88, 94–95, 97, 99–105 ——, abandoning of 348 ——, accumulation of 223, 345, 350 “—— and people” 9–10, 13–14, 19–24, 37, 39, 45–47, 65, 88, 94–109, 116, 164–166, 205–210, 261–266, 268–269, 277–280, 288–291, 294, 300, 304–305, 307, 312–313, 318–320, 325–330, 332–334, 338–339, 341–343, 346–347 ——, grants 23, 350 ——, ownership of 13, 30 ——, plundered/ravaged 24 ——, small holders of 349 ——, state 88 ——, surplus of 348 landowners 1–2, 10–11, 15, 30, 131, 210, 347–349 latifundization 349 laws of Eshnunna see Eshnunna, laws of laws of Hammurabi see Hammurabi, laws of leader, leadership 141, 267 leasing contract(s) 11 lessees 11 letter(s) 4, 15, 19–24, 26–27, 44, 64, 116, 141–142, 144, 150, 223, 225, 272, 299, 342, 348–349 lifespan 335–336, 352 loan(s) 8, 19–21, 23–24, 40, 87–88, 90–93, 199 longevity 335, 352 manpower, planning of 347 ——, shortage of 348 marriage 36, 124 ——, age at 307, 312, 315, 317, 351

index of subjects —— agreements/contracts 292, 300–301, 307 ——, dissolution of 292, 300, 322 —— pattern(s) 5, 14, 47, 292–301 —— pattern, “eastern” 336, 352 ——, penalties for dissolution of 322 ——, previous 53, 63, 70 ——, second 75, 349 married, just 74–75 Marx, K., Marxist 1, 3 master(s) 1–3, 6–8, 189, 191, 198, 213, 224, 227, 265, 308, 322, 344–345, 351 means of production 2, 4, 10 ——, accumulation of 223, 345, 350 ——, ownership of 1, 3 merchandise 77 merchant(s) 1, 73, 87, 93–94 ——, private 73 Middle East 307 military administration 19, 41 mina(s) 48–50, 52–54, 56–57, 59, 61–63, 66–80, 82–93, 95, 98–101, 104, 106–107, 109, 208, 301 —— of Carchemish 57, 62–63, 67–68, 70, 85, 87–89, 101, 208 —— of the king 67, 98–99 —— of the merchant 87 miscarriage(s) 307 mistress 71, 74, 76, 78 monogamous see family, monogamous mortality see infant mortality mother (of the family’s head) 5–7, 30, 56, 58, 87–88, 97, 102, 113, 117–119, 125, 130, 143, 148–149, 157–158, 160–162, 164, 170, 173, 182, 184, 192, 212, 214, 216, 226, 259, 265–272, 293, 290–295, 303, 305, 324–325, 329, 334–335, 337–338, 341, 348, 351 multiple-family see family, multiple Nepal 307, 310 nobleman 148 ofcial(s) 3–4, 11–13, 30, 54, 86, 88, 109, 112, 133, 138–141, 149, 198, 206, 211, 224, 280, 344, 346, 350 ——, high rank/senior 11, 30, 139, 349 ——, low rank 3, 30 ——, middle rank 30, 349 operative section 47, 53, 82, 210

401

orchard(s) 97–98, 107, 206, 219–221 ox(en) 30, 88, 90, 97, 122, 128, 223, 345 palace concubine see concubine, palace palace herald see herald, palace palace sector 3–4 Paris Basin 310 patronage 224, 345 patronymics 28, 30, 126, 128, 134, 214 peasant(s) 3, 118, 223 peasantry, free 2–3 penalties for litigation see clauses of penalties for litigation —— for late payment 90, 92 —— for dissolution of marriage see marriage, penalties for dissolution of people, dependent 2, 7 ——, free 1, 7 ——, freed 148–149 ——, semi-free 1, 7, 9–10, 209 ——, single; bachelor(s) 6, 14, 50, 69, 71, 73, 105, 107, 109, 114–115, 121, 144, 150–152, 191, 202, 211, 259 petition(s) 19–20, 23–24, 44, 64–65, 86, 224, 345 physician, chief 89 pledge(s), pledged people 4, 8–9, 14, 24, 86–94, 162–163, 199–205, 241–242, 245, 261–266, 268–269, 277, 288–291, 294, 304, 307, 318–320, 324, 327–328, 330, 332, 334, 337–338, 341–342, 346–347 plow 90 plowman 95, 198 polygamy see family, polygamous population control, means/measures of 310 —— management 19, 41 populazione servile 7 possessive sufx 52, 121, 143, 214–216 prefect(s), palace 51, 55 —— of the Harranians 57 pre-industrial societies see societies, pre-industrial priest(s) 4, 48–49, 74, 116 princess 100 prisoner(s) 59, 138, 143 —— of war 13, 115, 138, 346 profession(s) 5, 30, 47, 55, 94, 100, 107, 121, 128, 130–131, 142, 148, 191, 196–198, 211–212, 214–215, 219–223, 226, 228–242, 343–344

402

index of subjects

professional 66, 196, 198, 222 “professional, non” 196, 198, 222, 343 province 22, 45, 87, 101, 103–104, 342, 348, 350 pseudo-sklaven 7 queen, eunuch of the 65–66, 101–102 ——, scribe of the 100 ——, town manager of the 68 ——, village manager of the 98, 206 rations 12, 20–21, 43 ——, recipients of 13, 152–155, 186–187, 261–263, 264–265, 288–289, 291, 300, 302, 320, 326, 328, 332–334, 341–342, 347 receipt 19–21, 23–24, 40 recruit 63 redeemed person 203 redemption from pledge 19–21, 23–24, 39, 93, 199, 203–204, 206 reproduction, motivation of 307, 347 restricted conveyance(s) see conveyance(s), restricted risk, risky 11, 92, 213, 307, 344 royal grants 11–13, 19–21, 24, 42, 109–116, 168–172, 211–214, 245–248, 261–266, 268–269, 280, 288–291, 294, 305, 307, 313, 318, 320, 325, 327, 332–334, 339, 341–342, 344–346, 351 run away, runaway(s) 128, 200, 213, 221, 344 schedule of “Land and People” 20, 22–24, 41, 108–109, 167 scribe 4, 6, 47–48, 53, 70, 91, 101, 114, 133, 143, 190, 200, 211, 214, 216–217, 292–293, 297, 305 ——, palace 48 scribal error 79, 97, 102, 119, 125 seah(s) 152–155 security for debt see debt, security for Senegal 307, 310 serfs 7, 213 servile labor force 7 single people see people, single sheep 30, 87–88, 116 shekel(s) 49–51, 53–58, 61, 63, 67, 69, 70–72, 74, 76, 78–80, 82–85, 90–92, 213, 344 shepherd(s) 4, 111, 116, 123–126, 129, 151–152, 212, 220–222

silver 19–20, 23–24, 40, 48–59, 61–63, 66–80, 82–93, 95, 98–101, 104, 106–107, 109, 207–208, 222, 301 singer 220 ——, chief 68 single(s), single people see people, single single-parent family see family, single-parent sister(s) 4–7, 30, 56–57, 59, 101, 119, 121–122, 125, 130, 140–142, 145, 148–149, 157, 160–161, 164, 182, 184, 192, 214, 216, 225–226, 259–260, 267, 269–272, 293–299, 305, 328–329, 334–335, 341, 351 slave(s) 1–4, 7–10, 12–13, 15, 23–24, 47–86, 105, 107, 157–161, 188–198, 212–213, 228–240, 243–244, 260–263, 265, 268–269, 273–277, 288–291, 293, 303, 307, 311–312, 318–319, 323–324, 327–330, 332–334, 336–337, 342–343, 346–347, 349–350 —— trading 50, 54, 57–58, 73 smith(s), bronze 134, 222 ——, iron 69, 75, 134–135, 197–198, 222 society stratication 1, 3 —— structure 1 societies, pre-industrial 259, 347 sociological afnity 5 soldier(s) 138, 348 status 2, 5, 7–10, 12–14, 87, 90, 93, 98, 114, 125, 188, 200, 205, 207, 209–210, 212, 219, 223, 226–227, 263, 308, 320–321, 323, 342–347 stone wall(s) 103 stratum, lower 3–4, 7, 9–10, 13, 47, 288, 302, 342, 347–348 ——, middle 3–4, 225, 288, 302, 335, 342, 345, 346, 347, 349, 352 ——, upper 3–4, 288, 302, 335, 342, 345, 346, 347, 349, 352 table 65 tailor 68, 80, 197, 219 ——, chief- 105 talent 100, 107, 109 tanner 72–73, 197 tax exemption 11–12, 31, 109, 112, 211–213, 289, 344, 350 temple(s) 1, 12–13, 20–21, 24, 113–114, 116, 189, 211–212, 280, 344, 346 ——, Akitu see Akitu Temple —— employees 12, 114, 344

403

index of subjects —— of Affur 2 ——, treasurer of the 30 —— of SÒn in Harran 82 —— of ZabÊba and BÊbu in Affur 114, 221, 344 —— protégés 212, 345 —— sector 3–4 —— staff 212 tenancy 219–220, 223–224, 345, 350 tenant(s) 1, 3–4, 9–13, 133, 207, 209–210, 212–214, 219, 222–224, 227, 320, 342, 344–350 “third man” 105 —— on the chariot 145, 225 threshing oor 97, 102 tied cultivators see cultivators, tied tiller(s) 114, 211, 221, 344 tower 94 trade agent, private see merchant, private —— agent, royal 73 —— enterprise 77 ——, slave- see slave-trading trapper 348 treasurer of the crown prince, see crown prince, treasurer of the —— of the temple of Affur see temple of Affur, treasurer of the Turkey 310 twin 122

vacant lot 96 vegetable garden 97, 104, 111, 210, 219 venereal diseases 307 village manager 49, 57 ——, deputy of a 86 vine(s) 98–99, 104, 119, 124, 128, 208, 215, 220, 221, 226 vineyard(s) 87, 94–95, 100, 102, 104, 106, 108, 111–112, 118, 128, 131, 207–208, 210, 215, 219–222 vizir, grand 61 wage 3, 11 weaver(s) 65, 120, 197, 212, 348 —— of multicolored fabrics 111, 197 ——, scarf 120, 122, 220 West Africa 307 wet nurse 309 whitewasher 129, 221 widow(s) 7, 86, 89–90, 123–124, 151, 215, 259, 265, 321 widower(s) 259–260, 302, 325, 351 wife, abandoning of a 349 wine lists 48 witness(ess) 48, 53, 73, 194 World Fertility Survey (= WFS) 307, 309–310 writing-board 147–148 Yemen

310