Teʾumman in the Neo-Assyrian Correspondence

Waters, Matt

doi:10.2307/605938

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ashurbanipal had given sanctuary to members of the Elamite royal family displaced by Teumman's usurpation (he is the third of three brothers to take the Elamite throne; see Waters 1999Waters : 474, 2013. The aggressive and 'insulting messages' (šipir mēreḫti) asking for their return had been sent monthly by the hands of a certain Umbadarâ and Nabû-damiq, who will appear later on in Prism Edition B as well as in epigraphs and reliefs, suffering for this act (RINAP 5/1 3 vi 48-56).…”

Section: Sennacheribmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For epigraphs on reliefs and the related, so-called 'epigraph tablets', seeWeidner 1932Weidner -1933Gerardi 1988; Barnett et al 1998: 94-100; Russell 1999: 158-164; RINAP 5/1 24-58. 24 On the historical background to the conflict with Teumman, and the tension between Assyria and Elam in this period, seeGerardi 1987: 120-157;Waters 1999Waters , 2002; Novotny and Jeffers 2018 (RINAP 5/1): 20-25. Crime and Testament…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Crime and Testament: Enemy Direct Speech in Inscriptions of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal

Miller

2019

Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions are always narrated in the first-person voice of the king. Within this framing narrative, the device that we would call ‘direct speech’ is used only rarely, and judiciously. The texts that make the greatest use of this literary device both come from a period of particular innovation and experimentation in royal text forms: Esarhaddon’s Nineveh A and Ashurbanipal’s narratives about his campaign against Elamite king Teumman. In these examples, and in other texts of the time including Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty, the words of enemies stand out as particularly threatening – and yet also particularly useful, as a literary device employed to further Assyrian agendas. Royal narratives use enemy speech for one of two purposes: either to document criminality, or to show enemies, in defeat and despair, testifying to the might and rightness of their Assyrian conquerors. Looking at all examples of speech – from enemies, gods, and the Assyrian king – I distinguish between ‘direct speech’ (as a literary device) and ‘quotation’ (as a practice). Most, though not all, direct speech in the sources considered here is also quotation, in that it seeks to document and preserve speech made in some other prior form (a verbal statement, a letter, an omen on an animal’s liver). Quotations demonstrate royal legitimacy and enemy culpability, while literary invention allows enemy voices to be turned to new purposes, as forced testament to Assyrian supremacy.

show abstract

Section: Sennacheribmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%