Nabû-zuqup-kēnu, das Gilgameš-Epos und der Tod Sargons II

Frahm, Eckart

doi:10.2307/1359731

Cited by 42 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10 Steiner (1997: 322-27 (replacing the earlier translation in Steiner and Nims (1985): 63-65), Dietrich (2016: 132-34). The Aramaic version was "probably recorded in writing, after some time of oral transmission, in the sixth century BCE in southern Syria and known from a later papyrus in Demotic script found at Elephantine," according to Frahm (2003): 38-39. The most recent translation of Papyrus Amherst 63 can be found in Van der Toorn (2018): 217-37.…”

Section: Act I: the Silence Of Assyrian Royal Deathmentioning

confidence: 99%

My Brother’s Keeper: Assurbanipal versus Šamaš-šuma-ukīn

Zaia

2018

Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When Esarhaddon named his successors, he split the empire between two of his sons, with Assurbanipal as king of Assyria and Šamaš-šuma-ukīn as king of Babylonia. This arrangement functioned until 652 BCE, at which point a civil war began between the brothers. The war ended with Assurbanipal’s victory and Šamaš-šuma-ukīn’s death in 648 BCE. While Šamaš-šuma-ukīn’s death is mentioned in several of Assurbanipal’s inscriptions, it is still unclear how the king of Babylon met his end, and scholars have suggested theories ranging from suicide, assassination, execution, and accidental death. By offering a reexamination of the evidence for royal death in general and Šamaš-šuma-ukīn’s demise in particular, this article explores how possibly taboo topics such as fratricide, regicide, and suicide were depicted in Neo-Assyrian state texts and how Assurbanipal appears to have coped with his brother’s rebellion and death, especially as compared to Assyrian treatments of belligerent and rebellious foreign kings. This article argues that the relative silence around Šamaššuma- ukīn’s death is due to the fact that, while he was an enemy combatant, he was nonetheless a member of the Assyrian royal family and a legitimately-installed king. Overall, this article concludes that Assurbanipal uses several rhetorical strategies to distance himself from Šamaš-šuma-ukīn, especially invoking deus ex machina as a way to avoid even the potential accusation of fratricide and ultimately erasing his brother from the written record and Assyrian history.

show abstract

Section: Act I: the Silence Of Assyrian Royal Deathmentioning

confidence: 99%

My Brother’s Keeper: Assurbanipal versus Šamaš-šuma-ukīn

Zaia

2018

Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…for example Nabû-zuqupkēna's copy of Gilg. 12 (see Frahm 1999;George 2003, 54;Frahm 2005). Following Frahm 1999 (passim) and Frahm 2005 (passim), the respective tablet was written on the 27th of Duʾuzu (VI) 705B.C., presumably very shortly after Nabû-zuqup-kēna had learned about the death of Sargon II on the battlefield in Anatolia.…”

Section: B)mentioning

confidence: 99%