Die assyrischen Konigstitel und -epitheta vom Anfang bis Tukulti-Ninurta I. und seinen Nachfolgern.

• Author: Hess, Christian W.
• Position: Book review

Die assyrischen Konigstitel und -epitheta vom Anfang bis Tukulti-Ninurta I. und seinen Nachfolgern. By VLADIMIR SAZONOV. State Archives of Assyria Studies, vol. 25. Helsinki: THE NEO-ASSYRIAN TEXT CORPUS PROJECT, 2016. Pp. xiii + 139. $59 (paper). [Distributed by EISENBRAUNS, Winona Lake, IN]

This short volume treats the royal titles and epithets from the first rulers of Assur to the end of the reign of Tukulti-Ninurta I, with particular emphasis on the historical development of titles which imply claims of universal rule. The work continues Cifola's Analysis of Variants (1995), which had already covered much of the same ground.

Following an introduction (pp. 1-5) and brief sketch of Old and Middle Assyrian history and royal ideology (pp. 7-18), the individual chapters provide an overview of the titles used in succeeding periods: from the Old Akkadian to the end of the Old Assyrian period (chapter 2, pp. 19-36), from Assur-uballit I to Shalmaneser I (chapter 3, pp. 37-62) and Tukulti-Ninurta I (chapter 4, pp. 63-100). The last section offers the longest excursus into other periods and regions in sketching the history of the titles sar sarrani "king of kings" and sar kissati "king of the universe" up to the Achaemenids. The study ends with the immediate successors of Tukulti-Ninurta I up to Assur-resa-isi I (chapter 5, pp. 101-4).

The main argument re-affirms the presumption that the titulary reflects political status and royal ideology. The modest titles of the earliest rulers, largely borrowed from southern Mesopotamia, are interrupted only by the grander pretensions of Samsi-Addu I's short-lived Kingdom of Upper Mesopotamia. Middle Assyrian changes are already perceptible under Assur-uballit I, gain pace with Adad-nerari I's campaigns, and culminate in the adoption of traditional Babylonian titles following Tukulti-Ninurta I's Babylonian conquest. The subsequent abandonment of most of these reflects the presumed collapse of the Middle Assyrian state.

The author's work redirects focus onto the importance of the earlier periods of Assyrian history in shaping Neo-Assyrian ideology. Unfortunately, the work seldom goes beyond the superficial observations noted above. While Cifola herself (1995: 5) had pointed to the need for a more detailed analysis of the relationship between Assyrian and Babylonian royal titulary, Sazonov's comparison is mostly relegated to general assertions of Hurrian, Hittite, and Babylonian influence (e.g., pp. 17, 19)...