Search

The city of Khorsabad (ancient Dūr-Šarrukīn), the newly built capital of Sargon II of Assyria, contained multiple instances of a sequence of five images or symbols (lion, bird, bull, tree, plow) which also appeared shortened to three (lion, tree, plow). What did they mean? There is currently no consensus. This paper proposes a new solution, suggesting that the images a) symbolize specific constellations and b) represent Babylonian/Assyrian words whose sounds "spell out" Sargon's name (this works for both the long and the short version). Combining these two traits, the effect of the symbols was to assert that Sargon's name was written in the heavens, for all eternity, and also to associate him with the gods Anu and Enlil, to whom the constellations in question were linked. It is further suggested that Sargon's name was elsewhere symbolized by a lion passant (pacing lion), through a bilingual pun. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lipographies (accidental omissions of signs) are, it has several times been observed, legion in Babylonian and Assyrian writings. But signs could also be omitted intentionally, to abbreviate the spelling of words. This latter phenomenon has again been remarked on (usually in ad hoc comments by editors), but never subjected to wide-ranging scrutiny and systematisation. Such is the aim of this paper. Drawing on examples from multiple periods and textual typologies ('genres'), we will distinguish abbreviation at the level of spelling from other forms of abbreviation, and enquire after the rationales and practices attaching to abbreviations in spelling. The resulting picture, which both challenges and refines previous statements on the subject, is a first attempt at systematising a phenomenon which offers great potential for the detailed study of individual text corpora. As studies of abbreviation in the Hebrew Bible demonstrate, there may well ultimately be significant implications for textual criticism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explores the uses of the Sumerian expression ser 3 -ku 3 , with a view to clarifying its sense. The paper arises from my study of Babylonian šerkugû, which I argue to have the meaning 'incantation' (see fn. 16). This is a loan from Sumerian * ser 3 -ku 3 -ga. The form with -ga (arising from the addition of the 'adjectival a' to ku 3 .g 'holy, pure') is not currently attested in Sumerian. (I thank Pascal Attinger, pers. comm., for the observation that apparent attestations of ser 3 -ku 3 -ga , e.g. in Martu A 58, are in fact locatives in -a). It does however occur in spellings of Babylonian šerkugû (CAD Š/2, 316b). It argues that there are two main uses, 'incantation' and 'hymn', probably correlating respectively with one-word ('univerbated') and two-word incarnations of the expression. This hypothesis finds support in the phrase's loan and translation into Babylonian. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article, adapted from a paper presented at the July 2007 meeting of the 53rd Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale in Russia, presents a discussion of orthography and phonology patterns found in nouns with monosyllabic stems in a Neo-Assyrian dialect and its association with the Akkadian language.

Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian differ over how (i. e. plene vs. non- plene) they spell contracted u before ventive/allative - nim (and its allomorphs) in III-weak verbal forms. This difference is demonstrated quantitatively, using large assemblages of sources. It emerges that the principles governing the distribution of plene spellings in Neo-Assyrian are not simply ‘watered down’ (i. e. orthographically economical) equivalents of the corresponding principles in Babylonian. This situation argues for a phonological difference or differences between Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian over and above those currently recognised. Several possibilities arise for the nature of the difference(s). There are signs that the difference(s) also apply to earlier periods of Assyrian. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Talbot who emerges from Diekmann's pages is an energetic and engaging figure: virtually predestined by the range of his previous interests to concern himself with cuneiform studies, he was eager to assist the emerging field, which became his longest-lasting intellectual interest. Most of these points were briefly prefigured in a contribution by Eleanor Robson to the edited volume William Henry Fox Talbot: Beyond Photography (Yale University Press, 2013), but Diekmann has the space to develop and support them much further, and also to refine them. In which connection it is worth highlight that, according to a letter to Talbot from Edwin Norris (cited on Diekmann's p. 25), Edward Hincks used no written notes at all!. [Extracted from the article]