Change language
English Deutsch
Change currency
€ EUR £ GBP $ USD
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter February 25, 2021

The Descendants of the Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī during the Late Achaemenid and Early Hellenistic Periods – A Family of Priests, Scribes and Scholars and Their Archival and Learned Texts

  • Johannes Hackl EMAIL logo and Joachim Oelsner
From the journal Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History
https://doi.org/10.1515/janeh-2020-0016

Abstract

It is by now well established that authors and copyists of scholarly works also drafted legal documents, if only occasionally. This article examines newly available prosopographical information concerning the scribal activities of the Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī during the mid to late fourth century BCE. It offers new datings of learned texts that have been known to academic circles for a long time and argues that the extant archival texts from Early Hellenistic Uruk mainly belonged to the archives of the Aḫûtu and Ekur-zakir families. In addition, it presents cases of transference of linguistic items peculiar to one or the other genre, giving rise to some general remarks on cross-genre imprints.

Keywords: Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī; Babylonian learned texts; family relationships; scribal practices at Late Achaemenid and Hellenistic Uruk
Corresponding author: Johannes Hackl, Universität Leipzig Altorientalisches Institut, Leipzig, Germany, E-mail:

We are indebted to Uri Gabbay, Hermann Hunger, Manfred Krebernik and Christopher B. F. Walker for factual information, discussion and suggestions; to Juliane Eule, Jeanette C. Fincke and Elizabeth E. Payne for photographs of texts from the Vorderasiatisches Museum, the British Museum and the Yale Babylonian Collection, respectively; to Marie-Christine Ludwig for collations of texts in the Ashmolean Museum; to the peer reviewers for comments and criticism. Responsibility for errors is ours. Unpublished texts from the British Museum are cited with the kind permission of the Trustees of the British Museum. Abbreviations are those of the Archiv für Orientforschung 48/49 (2001/2002: 311–505) and Jursa 2005: 153–55; note furthermore: ADART = Abraham J. Sachs & Herrmann Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia I–VII (Vienna 1988–); Ant = Antigonus (I Monophthalmus); Antichistica 16 = Paola Corò, Seleucid Tablets from Uruk in the British Museum. Text Editions and Commentary (Antichistica 16, Studi orientali 6, Venice 2018); Art = Artaxerxes; Dar = Darius; Phi = Philip (III Arrhidaeus); SbB 1 = Johannes Hackl, Michael Jursa & Martina Schmidl, Spätbabylonische Privatbriefe. Spätbabylonische Briefe I (AOAT 414/1, Münster 2014); SE = Seleucid Era. Conversion from Babylonian to Julian dates follows Parker and Dubberstein 1956. Note that only (regnal) years are cited (e.g., Art I 10.1.31 = 22.4.434 BCE > Art I 31 = 434 BCE).

Appendix 1 The scribes of the Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī family (c. 340–245 BCE)

The asterisk indicates that the text’s attribution is conjectural. The column labelled “parties” contains the family names of the parties surrendering rights or incurring debts (left) and those of the parties acquiring rights or granting loans (right). In our sample these are: A = Aḫûtu; AṬ = Abu-ṭāb; E = Ekur-zakir; Ḫ = Ḫunzu; K = Kurī; KM = Kidin-Marduk; L = Luštammar-Adad; O = Other; S = Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī; Š = Šumāte. Restorations of regnal years of the kind represented by SE [7–17/18], [17/18–31] or [31/32–45] are based on the royal names preserved in the date-formulae (see Oelsner 1986: 271–72).

A. The scribes of the Itti-Anu-nuḫšu branch

1.a.

Nidinti-Anu / Itti-Anu-nuḫšu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (Art III 21–Phi 2? = 338–322? BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
TCL 6 56aArt III 15.4.21Emesal tablet containing parts of a Balaĝ directed to Enlil (Balaĝ dutu-gin7 è-ta)—PN/PN//FN, kalû Anu
TCL 6 57—Emesal tablet containing a Balaĝ directed to Ninurta (Balaĝ nir-ĝál lú è-NE)—PN/PN//FN, kalû Anu
BaM Beih. 2 17*Phi? 8+.4.2bEmesal tablet containing a Balaĝ directed to Gula (Balaĝ úru ḫul-a-ke4)—[PN]/PN/[FN], kalû […]
VS 17 58*—Tablet containing a ritual associated with the profession of the kalû—[P]N/PN/[FN]c

  1. aOn this and the following two texts of group A.1, see Gabbay 2014a: 263+374 and 267–68 and Gabbay 2014b: 132.

    bSee note 36.

    cBut note that a professional designation appears at the end of line r16’, that is, the line preceding the colophon in which the phrase [né-pe-ši šá šuIIlúg]ala is probably to be restored. See also Gabbay 2014a: 1569.

1.b.

Anu-uballiṭ / Nidinti-Anu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (c. SE 11–27 = 301–285 BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
OECT 9 2*SE 3?.8.11Service contractO+KPN/PN//(FN)
OECT 9 4SE 12.11.23Dowry gift of slaveAṬ+ AṬaPN/PN//FN
YOS 20 13SE 8.4.2[5]–2[7]Sale of real estateK+OPN/PN//FN

  1. aThe husband of the donor is a member of the Ḫunzû family, the groom of the donee a member of the Luštammar-Adad family.

2.a.

Anu-aḫḫē-iddin / Itti-Anu-nuḫšu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (Art IV 1–Phi 8 = 337–316 BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
Or. 86, 91–92 no. 7 (VAT 16476)Art IV 10+.9.1Quitclaim concerning prior sales and deposits(?)?aPN/PN//(FN)
TCL 13 249Phi 20.5.8Receipt concerning a sale of arable landK+APN/PN//FN
CLAM 810–811 (MLC 1862)—Emesal tablet containing a Balaĝ directed to Ninurta (Balaĝ ušum-gin7 ní si-a)—PN/P[N]//FN

  1. aLike many other Late Achaemenid (and Early Hellenistic) texts from Uruk, this one gives no family names. See also note 20.

2.b.

Nanāya-iddin / Anu-aḫḫē-iddin // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (Ant 6–SE 14 = 312–297 BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
TCL 13 234Ant 26.8.6Receipt concerning a sale of arable landE+APN/PN//FN
YOS 20 6SE 22.11.14Service contractO+OaPN/PN//(FN)

  1. aOne of the principals, fḪannā, daughter of Tattannu-Nanāya, is also the seller in VDI 1955/4 no. 1 (see below).

2.c.

Anu-uballiṭ / Anu-aḫḫē-iddin // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (c. SE 12–18 = c. 300–294? BCE).a

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
YOS 20 2SE 28.4?.12Sale of slaveO+APN/PN//FN
YOS 20 4//5SE 28.11.12Sale of slaveO+A[P]N/PN//FN
VS 15 51*[SE] 15.1.[7–17/18]bReceipt concerning a sale of real estateO+A[P]N/PN//FNc

  1. aHe also appears as a witness to Antichistica 16 no. 2 (BM 109963, bill of sale, SE 13 = 298 BCE). bThe break at the end of line 34 corresponds fairly well in length to the space required to write the name of one Seleucid king. Since there is not enough space at the beginning of line 35 for restoring the name of a co-regent, the document can be assigned with reasonable certainty to the reign of Seleucus I Nicator (305–281 BCE). Compare Doty 1978: 86–8739. cCollation suggests as another possible reading [Iddiš-s]u. See also note a to table A.3. in Appendix 1.

3.

[…]/ Itti-Anu-nuḫšu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (c. Ant 3–6 = c. 315–311 BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
OECT 9 1*Ant [x.x].3[–6]Quitclaim concerning arable landḪ+[…][P]N/PN/FNa

  1. aBased on collation of the text, a better reading of the name is [I x - (x) ]-˹x* lú*umbisag*˺ I˹ki-d*diš*-ḫé*˺.nun* a Id30-ti-ér. The scribe is therefore also a member of the Itti-Anu-nuḫšu branch. His given name is perhaps to be restored as [Iddiš-tin-i]ṭ or [Iddiš-s]u, but Marie-Christine Ludwig’s collation of the original does not fully support these guesses. See also note 28.

4.a.

Anu-bēlšunu / Itti-Anu-nuḫšu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (c. SE 9–18 = c. 303–294 BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
YOS 20 1SE 6.2.9Record of decision concerning a legal dispute over shares in a slaveE+EaPN/PN//(FN)
BRM 2 2SE 12.5.9Sale of slavesA+OPN/PN//FN
VS 15 3SE 12.8.14Sale of slavesO+APN/PN//(FN)
VDI 1955/4 no. 1//BaM Beih. 2 119+bSE 10.6.15Sale of slaveO+APN/P[N]//(FN)
YOS 20 7SE 23.5.16Promissory note for datesO+APN/PN//(FN)
CM 12 1[SE x.x.12–17/18]Sale of share in a slaveA+APN/[P[N]//[FN]
YOS 20 9*SE 3.1.17Sale of slaveA+A[PN]/[P]N//(FN)c

  1. aOn the family ties between the plaintiff and the defendants, see the discussion in Doty 1977: 19–20. bBaM Beih. 2 119 joins with BaM Beih. 2 120 and 121 and fragment 27. cLine r12 is perhaps to be read [Iddiš-en-šú-nulúumbisag dumu šáIki-d60-ḫé.n]un, on the strength of the sign NUN.

4.b.

Itti-Anu-nuḫšu / Anu-bēlšunu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (c. SE 12–49 = c. 300–263 BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
YOS 20 3SE 4.7.12Service contract concerning beer brewingO+APN/PN//(FN)
BiMes 24 39[SE x.x.12–37]aSale of slave[…]PN/PN//(FN)
OECT 9 3SE 20.12.13Promissory note for silverA+KPN/PN//(FN)
YOS 20 8SE 16.8.16Sale of slaveO+APN/PN//(FN)
YOS 20 11//12SE 8.2.[7–17/18]Sale of slaveA+A[P]N/PN//(FN)
BRM 2 25SE 12.9.[7–17/18]bSale of slaveA+A[P]N/PN//(FN)
YOS 20 14SE 23.3.26Sale of real estateO+APN/PN//(FN)
BRM 2 4SE 20.4.29Sale of shares in a kirû ḫallatu prebendO+EPN/PN//FN
OECT 9 6SE [x].3.[17/18–31]Sale of real estateS+OPN/P[N]//(FN)
BiMes 24 36*SE 1.3.[20–31]Sale of real estate[…]c[PN]/[P]N//(FN)d
BRM 2 5SE 10.9.31Dowry gift of slaveK+KPN/PN//(FN)
OECT 9 8[SE x.x.31/32–45]Sale of shares in a brewer’s prebend[…]+Š[PN]/PN//FN
OECT 9 65*S[E] [x].1.[32–45]Sale of shares in a brewer’s prebendḪ+Š[PN]/P[N]//FN
YOS 20 21SE 2.5.[32–45]Sale of real estateO+OPN/PN//FN
OECT 9 7SE 24.9.32Sale of real estateK+LPN/PN//FN
BRM 2 6//7SE 21.11.35Gift of slaveK+KPN/PN//(FN)
VS 15 4SE 12.1.36Sale of shares in a kirû ḫallatu prebendḪ+LPN/PN//FN
BiMes 24 14SE 20.11.36Sale of real estateL+OPN/PN//FN
BRM 2 10SE 2.6.37Sale of slaveO+OPN/PN//(FN)
OECT 9 9SE 28.1.40Service contract concerning duties attached to a brewer’s prebendḪ+ŠPN/PN//(FN)
OECT 9 10SE 30.3.41Contract concerning dividing wallŠ+ŠPN/PN//(FN)
OECT 9 11SE 17.9.43Sale of shares in an oil presser’s prebendK+ḪPN/PN//FN
Antichistica 16 no. 22 (BM 109936)*SE 28.1.4[7–4[9]Sale of shares in a gerseqqûtu prebendK+K[PN]/PN//(FN)

  1. aThe latest known slave sale, BRM 2 10 (see below), was drafted in SE 37 = 275 BCE, hence the dating. bThe preserved traces do not allow a reading of the regnal year. cNote that several members of the Aḫûtu family served as witnesses to the contract. dIn line r8’, traces of the sign NUN suggest a reading [Iddiš-en-šú-nulúumbisag dumu šáIki-d60-ḫé.nu]n. See also note c to table A.4.a. of Appendix 1.

4.c.

Anu-uballiṭ / Itti-Anu-nuḫšu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (c. SE 40–68 = c. 272–244 BCE).

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
Antichistica 16 no. 21 (BM 109961)*[SE] 27.[x].4[0]–4[9]Sale of real estate[…]+EPN/[PN//FN]
HANE/M 8, 202–203 (BM 105189) = Antichistica 16 no. 18SE 30.11.44 (or 54*)aSale of shares in a gerseqqûtu prebendL+EPN/P[N]//FN
Antichistica 16 no. 25 (BM 78967)*SE 2.9.[46–50]Sale of shares in a kirû ḫallatu prebendO+Ḫ[PN/P]N//FN
Antichistica 16 no. 26 (BM 116687)*SE 7.12.[46–50]Sale of shares in a temple enterer’s prebendL+E[PN]/PN//F[N]
BRM 2 11SE 21.12a.47Sale of shares in a butcher’s prebendS+EPN/PN//FN
YOS 20 22SE 14.[x].47Sale of shares in a butcher’s prebendK+EPN/PN//FN
BRM 2 12SE 6.1.48Sale of shares in a kirû ḫallatu prebendE+EPN/PN//FN
BRM 2 13SE 21.9.49Sale of shares in a rab-banûtu prebendO+EPN/PN//FN
HANE/M 8, 203–205 (BM 105203) = Antichistica 16 no. 23*SE 4.9.50Sale of shares in an exorcist’s prebendK+EPN/[PN]//[FN]
YOS 20 23//24SE 2.11.50Sale of real estateKM+EPN/PN//FN
TCL 13 236SE 18.12.50Sale of shares in a butcher’s prebendL+EPN/[PN]//FN
HANE/M 8, 177–79 (BM 105181) = Antichistica 16 no. 24SE 28.8.51Sale of shares in a temple enterer’s prebendE+EPN/PN//FN
BRM 2 14SE 15.11.51Sale of real estateK+OPN/PN//FN
YOS 20 25SE 28.1.52Sale of shares in a butcher’s prebendL+E[P]N/PN/FN
YOS 20 26SE 6.8.53Sale of real estateAṬ+OPN/PN//FN
VDI 1955/4 no. 2SE 16.4.54Sale of real estateE+EPN/PN//FN
HANE/M 8, 179–80 (BM 105170) = Antichistica 16 no. 28SE 1.4.55Sale of shares in a temple enterer’s prebendK+EPN/PN//FN
HANE/M 8, 323–24 (BM 105197)//HANE/M 8, 325–26 (BM 109960) = Antichistica 16 no. 29// Antichistica 16 no. 30*SE 17.9.55Sale of shares in a butcher’s prebendKM+EPN/[PN]//[FN]
HANE/M 8, 149–51 (BM 109946) = Antichistica 16 no. 31SE 13.3.57Sale of shares in an exorcist’s prebendE+EPN/[P]N//FN
Antichistica 16 no. 32 (BM 109938)SE 16.3.57Quitclaim concerning real estate[…]+EPN/PN//FN
Antichistica 16 no. 34 (BM 109959)*SE [x.x].[5]9Sale of shares in a prebend concerning malītu offeringsb[…]+E[PN]/PN//F[N]
Antichistica 16 no. 43 (BM 116689)SE 16.8.6[1]–6[6]Sale of shares in a temple enterer’s and butcher’s prebendḪ+EPN/PN//FN
BRM 2 18SE 20.7.68Contract concerning the disposition of earlier legal documents attesting the sale of propertycA+SPN/PN//FN

  1. aOn the date, see Hackl 2020: 56516. bOn this type of prebend, see Corò 2018: 75 with further references. cOn this type of contract, see preliminarily Oelsner 2009: 54.

B. Other scribes of the Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī family[100]

1.

Ubār / Širki-Anu (//Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī)a (SE 8 = 304 BCE).b

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
BRM 2 1SE 5.4.8Lease of real estateO+APN/PN

  1. aDespite the absence of the family name, the patronym favours the scribe’s attribution to the Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī family. Like the name Itti-Anu-nuḫšu, it is almost exclusively borne by descendants of Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (see note 21). bSee note 51 .

2.

Šullumu / Širki-Anu // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (c. SE 18–32 = 295–279 BCE).a

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
YOS 20 15SE 11.8.27Schenkungskauf of slaveKM+KMPN/PN

  1. aFor further references, see note 51.

3.

Anu-aḫḫē-iddin / Anu-uballiṭ // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (SE 33–35 = 279–276 BCE).a

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
VS 15 23SE 10.7.33Sale of real estate and […] prebendS+AbPN/PN//FN
BRM 2 8SE 3.10.35Sale of shares in a brewer’s prebendS+SPN/PN//FN

  1. aAnu-aḫḫē-iddin is the seller both in VS 15 23 and BRM 2 8. The buyer in BRM 2 8 is his wife. For further references, see fig. 2 (c) in Appendix 2. The floruit dates assigned by Gabbay 2014a: 270 (following Pearce and Doty 2000: 33421) rest on the assumption that Anu-aḫḫē-iddin was still alive when BRM 2 18 (SE 68 = 244 BCE) was drafted. However, the reconstruction of the transaction’s background offered by Doty 1977: 183–86 and Doty 1978: 72–77 renders such a scenario unlikely. On his family archive, see preliminarily Doty 1977: 179–86+303 and Doty 1978: 72–77 (note that BRM 2 27//CM 12 3 [HSM 913.1.6] and OECT 9 18 [not cited by Doty] do not belong here, but to a collateral branch of the same family, see fig. 3 in Appendix 2). On Anu-aḫḫē-iddin’s relations to other Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī, see note 24. bThe document can be attributed to the Nanāya-iddin (Aḫûtu) family archive, despite the absence of the buyer’s family name (see Doty 1978: 86).

4.

Nidinti-Anu / Anu-uballiṭ // Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī (SE 33–84 = 279–228 BCE).a

TextDateDescriptionPartiesName formula
HANE/M 8 148–49 (BM 105200) = Antichistica 16 no. 20SE 25.8.47Sale of shares in an exorcist’s prebendE+EPN/PN//FN
HANE/M 8 235–37 (BM 109965) = Antichistica 16 no. 41SE [x.x].[5]4Sale of a share in a baker’s prebendK+E[P]N/PN//[FN]

  1. aFor further references, see fig. 2 (c) in Appendix 2. On his relations to other Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī, see note 24. Note that Corò 2018, 84 assigns the references found in the texts from the British Museum (including the duplicate YOS 20 37) to a different Nidinti-Anu, that is, to a presumed son of Anu-uballiṭ, son of Itti-Anu-nuḫšu (see table A.4.c in Appendix 1). On Dumqi-Anu, son of Anu-uballiṭ, see note 100.

Appendix 2 Additional family trees

Fig. 2: Descendants of Anu-uballiṭ with floruit dates (first two generations only).101
Fig. 2:

Descendants of Anu-uballiṭ with floruit dates (first two generations only).101

Figure 3: Descendants of Tattannu with floruit dates.116
Figure 3:

Descendants of Tattannu with floruit dates.116

References (Not Exhaustive)

  1. VS 15 23 (SE 33 = 279 BCE, principal), BRM 2 8 (SE 35 = 276 BCE, principal), BRM 2 18 (SE 68 = 244 BCE, co-owner)

  2. VS 15 23 (SE 33 = 279 BCE, co-owner), BRM 2 8 (SE 35 = 276 BCE, co-owner), VAT 7826[101][102] (Emesal prayer, […],[103] scribe), BaM Beih. 2 109 (genre uncertain,[104] SE 66 = c. 246/245 BCE, tablet owner?), VAT 7824[105] (Emesal prayer, SE 67 = 245 BCE, tablet owner), BRM 2 18 (SE 68 = 244 BCE, co-owner), YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224 BCE, patronym only), YOS 20 93 ([…], patronym only)

  3. VS 15 23 (SE 33 = 279 BCE, co-owner), BRM 2 8 (SE 35 = 276 BCE, co-owner), HANE/M 8, 148–49 = Antichistica 16 no. 20 (BM 105200, SE 47 = 265 BCE, scribe), HANE/M 8, 235–37 (BM 109965) = Antichistica 16 no. 41 (SE [5]4 = c. 258/257 BCE, scribe), YOS 20 30 (SE 65 = 247 BCE, witness), BRM 2 18 (SE 68 = 244 BCE, principal), YOS 20 32 (SE [68] = 244 BCE, witness), BRM 2 19 (SE 71 = 241 BCE, scribe), OECT 9 16 (SE 73 = 239 BCE, witness), YOS 20 36 (SE 77 = 235 BCE, scribe), HANE/M 8, 186–88 (BM 109939) = Antichistica 16 no. 49//YOS 20 37 (SE 77 = 235 BCE, scribe), HANE/M 8, 180–83 (BM 109940)//HANE/M 8, 160–61 (BM 93003) = Antichistica 16 no. 54//Antichistica 16 no. 55 (SE 78 = 234 BCE, scribe), HANE/M 8, 275–77 (BM 105205) = Antichistica 16 no. 56 (SE 78 = c. 234/233 BCE, scribe), TCL 6 46 (kalû building ritual, SE 81 = 231 BCE, tablet owner), VS 15 11 (SE 83 = 229 BCE, patronym only), TCL 6 32 (“Esaĝil tablet”, SE 83 = 229 BCE, patronym only), BRM 4 21 (šumma ālu omen text, SE 84 = 228 BCE, tablet owner), Antichistica 16 no. 60 (BM 105169, SE 84 = c. 228/227 BCE, patronym only), YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224, patronym only), VS 15 34 (SE [9]3 = 218 BCE, patronym only), YOS 20 46 ([c. SE 98] = c. 214/213 BCE, patronym only), TCL 13 242 (SE 99 = c. 213/212 BCE, patronym only), Antichistica 16 no. 70 (BM 109973, SE 101 = 211 BCE, patronym only), OECT 9 57 (SE 1[02]–1[19] = c. 210–193 BCE, patronym only), BRM 4 11 (Emesal prayer, SE 108 = 204 BCE, patronym only), ACT 400 (synodic table, [c. SE 111–135] = c. 201–176 BCE, patronym only), BaM Beih. 2 12 (Šuila, SE 112 = 200 BCE, patronym only), YOS 20 55//BaM Beih. 2 132+BiMes 24 3 (SE 116 = 196 BCE, patronym only), BRM 2 31 (SE 118 = 194 BCE, patronym only), ACT 601 (synodic table, SE 118 = c. 194/193 BCE, patronym only), ACT 640 (procedure text, SE 119 = c. 193/192 BCE, patronym only), VS 15 32//CM 12 6 (SE 119 = 192 BCE, patronym only), VAT 7815[106] (calendar text, SE 120 = 191 BCE, patronym only), ACT 102 (synodic table, SE 120 = 191 BCE, patronym only), ACT 135 (eclipse table, SE 12[1?][107] = 191? BCE, patronym only), OECT 9 53 (SE 126 = 186 BCE, patronym only), Antichistica 16 no. 95 (SE 137 = c. 174/175 BCE, scribe), BiMes 24 9 ([…], patronym only), BiMes 24 17 ([…], patronym only)

  4. VAT 7824[108] (Emesal prayer, SE 67 = BCE 245, scribe), BaM Beih. 2 16 (maqlû ritual, SE 85 = 227 BCE, scribe), Or. 64, 192–93 (MLC 1890, theological composition, SE 87 = 225 BCE, tablet owner), YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224, principal and scribe), YOS 20 93 ([…], principal)

  5. YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224, principal), YOS 20 46 ([c. SE 98] = c. 214/213 BCE, principal), BRM 2 31 (SE 118 = 194 BCE, witness), BiMes 24 9 ([…], principal), BiMes 24 17 ([…], principal).

  6. TCL 6 46 (kalû building ritual, SE 81 = 231 BCE, scribe),[109] MLC 2204[110] (excerpt from the Enmeduranki composition,[111] SE 83 = 229 BCE, scribe), TCL 6 32 (“Esaĝil tablet”, SE 83 = 229 BCE, scribe), VS 15 11 (SE 83 = 229 BCE, scribe), BRM 4 21 (šumma ālu omen text, SE 84 = 228 BCE, scribe), Antichistica 16 no. 60 (BM 105169, SE 84 = c. 228/227 BCE, scribe) YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224, principal), VS 15 34 (SE [9]3 = 218 BCE, scribe), YOS 20 46 ([c. SE 98] = c. 214/213 BCE, principal), TCL 13 242 (SE 99 = c. 213/212 BCE, witness), Antichistica 16 no. 70 (BM 109973, SE 101 = 211 BCE, scribe), OECT 9 57 (SE 1[02]–1[19] = c. 210–193 BCE, witness), BRM 4 11 (Emesal prayer, SE 108 = 204 BCE, tablet owner), ACT 400 (synodic table, [c. SE 111–135] = c. 201–176 BCE, tablet owner), BaM Beih. 2 12 (Šuila, SE 112 = 200 BCE, tablet owner), YOS 20 55//BaM Beih. 2 132+BiMes 24 3 (SE 116 = 196 BCE, principal), ACT 601 (synodic table, SE 118 = c. 194/193 BCE, patronym only), ACT 640 (procedure text, SE 119 = c. 193/192 BCE, tablet owner), VS 15 32//CM 12 6 (SE 119 = 192 BCE, principal), VAT 7815[112] (calendar text, SE 120 = 191 BCE, tablet owner), ACT 102 (synodic table, SE 120 = 191 BCE, tablet owner), ACT 135 (eclipse table, SE 12[1?][113] = 191? BCE, tablet owner), ACT 620 (synodic table, […], tablet owner?), BiMes 24 9 ([…], principal), VAT 7847+TCL 6 12 (hypsomata tablet, […],[114] tablet owner)[115][116]

  7. YOS 20 46 ([c. SE 98] = c. 214/213 BCE, principal)

References (Not Exhaustive)

  1. BRM 2 27//CM 12 3 (SE 87 = 225 BCE, patronym only), YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224 BCE, patronym only)

  2. OECT 9 18 (SE 76 = 236 BCE, patronym only), Or. 64, 192–93 (MLC 1890, theological composition, SE 87 = 225, patronym only)

  3. BRM 2 27//CM 12 3 (SE 87 = 225 BCE, patronym only), YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224 BCE, patronym only)

  4. OECT 9 18 (SE 76 = 236 BCE, witness), Or. 64, 192–93 (MLC 1890, theological composition, SE 87 = 225 BCE, patronym only), BiMes 24 2 (SE 108 = 204 BCE, patronym only), OECT 9 49 (SE 122 = 189 BCE, patronym only), OECT 9 53 (SE 126 = 186 BCE, patronym only), OECT 9 54//55 (c. SE 12[7]–12[9] = c. 185–183 BCE, patronym only), BiMes 24 10 (SE 141 = c. 171/170 BCE, patronym only), VS 15 33 (SE 145 = 166 BCE, patronym only), HANE/M 8, 53–55[117] = Antichistica 16 no. 98 (BM 116692, SE 146 = 166 BCE, scribe), YOS 20 73 (SE 147 = 165 BCE, patronym only)

  5. BRM 2 27//CM 12 3 (SE 87 = 225 BCE, principal), YOS 20 43//BiMes 24 53 (SE 88 = 224 BCE, witness)

  6. Or. 64, 192–93 (MLC 1890, theological composition, SE 87 = 225 BCE, scribe), BiMes 24 2 (SE 108 = 204, scribe), OECT 9 49 (SE 122 = 189 BCE, scribe), OECT 9 53 (SE 126 = 186 BCE, scribe), OECT 9 54//55 (c. SE 12[7]–12[9] = c. 185–183 BCE, scribe), BiMes 24 10 (SE 141 = c. 171/170 BCE, scribe), YOS 20 70 (SE 144 = 168 BCE, scribe), VS 15 33 (SE 145 = 166 BCE, scribe), HANE/M 8, 53–55[118] = Antichistica 16 no. 98 (BM 116692, SE 146 = 166 BCE, scribe), YOS 20 73 (SE 147 = 165 BCE, scribe)

References

Beaulieu, P.-A. 1989. “Textes administratifs inédits d’époque hellénistique provenant des archives du.” Bīt Rēš. RA 83: 53–78.Search in Google Scholar

Beaulieu, P.-A. and F. Rochberg. 1996. “The Horoscope of Anu-bēlšunu.” JCS 48: 89–94.10.2307/1359772Search in Google Scholar

Beaulieu, P-A. 2000. “The Descendants of Sîn-lēqi-unninni.” In Assyriologica et Semitica. Festschrift für Joachim Oelsner anläßlich seines 65. Geburtstages am 18. Februar 1997, edited by J. Marzahn and H. Neumann, 1–16. Münster: Ugarit. AOAT 252.Search in Google Scholar

Beaulieu, P-A. 2006. “Official and Vernacular Languages: The Shifting Sands of Imperial and Cultural Identities in First-Millennium B.C. Mesopotamia.” In Margins of Writing, Origins of Cultures, edited by S. L. Sanders, 187–216. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Oriental Institute Seminars 2.Search in Google Scholar

Beaulieu, P.-A. 2010. “The Afterlife of Assyrian Scholarship in Hellenistic Babylonia.” In Gazing on the Deep. Ancient Near Eastern and Other Studies in Honor of Zvi Abusch, edited by J. Stackert, B. N. Porter and D. P. Wright, 1–18. Bethesda, Maryland: CDL Press.Search in Google Scholar

Beaulieu, P.-A. 2018. “Uruk Before and After Xerxes: The Onomastic and Institutional Rise of the God Anu.” In Xerxes and Babylonia. The Cuneiform Evidence, edited by C. Waerzeggers and M. Seire, 189–206. Leuven, Paris, and Bristol, Connecticut: Peeters. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 277.10.2307/j.ctv1q26v46.12Search in Google Scholar

Boiy, T. 2005. “The Fifth and Sixth Generation of the Nikarchos Anu-uballit Family.” RA 99: 105–10.10.3917/assy.099.0105Search in Google Scholar

Clancier, P. 2009. Les bibliothèques en Babylonie dans la deuxième moitié de 1er millénaire av. J.-C. AOAT 363. Münster: Ugarit.Search in Google Scholar

Clancier, P. 2011. “Cuneiform Culture’s Last Guardians: The Old Urban Notability of Hellenistic Uruk.” In The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture, edited by K. Radner and E. Robson, 752–73. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199557301.013.0035Search in Google Scholar

Corò, P. 2018. Seleucid Tablets from Uruk in the British Museum. Antichistica (and Studi orientali) 16 (and 6). Venice: Edizioni Ca’Foscari.10.30687/978-88-6969-246-8Search in Google Scholar

Doty, T. L. 1977. Cuneiform Archives from Hellenistic Uruk. Dissertation Yale University.Search in Google Scholar

Doty, T. L. 1978. “The Archive of the Nanâ-iddin Family from Uruk.” JCS 30: 65–90.10.2307/1359967Search in Google Scholar

Doty, T. L. 1988. “Nikarchos and Kephalon.” In A Scientific Humanist. Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs, edited by E. Leichty, M. J. Ellis and P. Gerardi, 95–118. Philadelphia: University Museum. Occasional Publications of the Noah Kramer Fund 9.Search in Google Scholar

Finkel, I. L. 2000. “On Late Babylonian Medical Training.” In Wisdom, Gods and Literature: Studies in Assyriology in Honour of W. G. Lambert, edited by A. R. George and I. L. Finkel, 137–223. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.Search in Google Scholar

Frahm, E. and M. Jursa. 2011. Neo-Babylonian Letters and Contracts From the Eanna Archive. Yale Oriental Series 21. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Frazer, M. 2013. “Nazi-Maruttaš in Later Mesopotamian Tradition.” Kaskal 10: 187–220.Search in Google Scholar

Gabbay, U. 2014a. Pacifying the Hearts of the Gods. Sumerian Emesal Prayers of the First Millennium BC. Heidelberger Emesal-Studien 1. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Search in Google Scholar

Gabbay, U. 2014b. “The Kalû Priest and Kalûtu Literature in Assyria.” Orient 49: 115–44.10.5356/orient.49.115Search in Google Scholar

Gabbay, U. 2017. ““Veiled, she Circles the City”: A Late Babylonian Variation on an Eršema to Inana (VAT 7826).” JNES 76: 275–91.10.1086/693015Search in Google Scholar

Gabbay, U. and E. Jiménez. 2019. “Cultural Imports and Local Products in the Commentaries from Uruk: The Case of the Gimil-Sîn Family.” In Scholars and Scholarship in Late Babylonian Uruk, edited by C. Proust and J. M. Steele, 53–88. Cham: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-04176-2_2Search in Google Scholar

George, A. R. 1991. “Babylonian Texts from the Folios of Sidney Smith, Part Two: Prognostic and Diagnostic Omens, Tablet I.” RA 85: 137–63.Search in Google Scholar

George, A. R. 2003. The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform Texts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Giles, H., R. Y. Bourhis, and D. M. Taylor. 1977. “Towards a Theory of Language in Ethnic Group Relations.” In Contexts of Accommodation: Developments in Applied Sociolinguistics, edited by H. Giles, J. Coupland and N. Coupland, 1–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hackl, J. 2017. “Additions to the Late Achaemenid Textual Record, Part I: Texts from Uruk.” In Collaboration with J. Oelsner. Orientalia 86: 42–95.Search in Google Scholar

Hackl, J. 2018. “Zur Sprachsituation im Babylonien des ersten Jahrtausends v. Chr. Ein Beitrag zur Sprachgeschichte des jüngeren Akkadischen.” In Mehrsprachigkeit. Vom Alten Orient bis zum Esperanto, edited by S. Fink, M. Lang and M. Schretter, 209–38. Münster: Zaphon. Dubsar 2.Search in Google Scholar

Hackl, J. 2020. “Bemerkungen zur Chronologie der Seleukidenzeit: Die Koregentschaft von Seleukos I. Nikator und Antiochos (I. Soter).” Klio 102.10.1515/klio-2019-1006Search in Google Scholar

Hackl, J. 2021. “The Death of Akkadian as a Written and Spoken Language.” In A History of the Akkadian Language, edited by V. Juan-Pablo, 1459152–77. Leiden: Brill. Handbuch der Orientalistik/2.Search in Google Scholar

Hackl, J. (in press). The Artaxerxes Conundrum – Diplomatics and its Contribution to Dating Late Achaemenid Legal Documents from Babylonia. AfO 54.Search in Google Scholar

Hunger, H. 1968. Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone. AOAT 2. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer.Search in Google Scholar

Joannès, F. 1992. “Les archives de Ninurta-aḫḫê-bulliṭ.” In Nippur at the Centennial. Papers Read at the 35e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Philadelphia 1988, edited by M. deJong Ellis, 87–100. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum. Occasional Publications of the Noah Kramer Fund 14.Search in Google Scholar

Jursa, M. 1999. Das Archiv des Bel-remanni. PIHANS 86. Istanbul: NINO.Search in Google Scholar

Jursa, M. 2004. “Auftragsmord, Veruntreuung und Falschaussagen: Neues von Gimillu.” WZKM 94: 109–32.Search in Google Scholar

Jursa, M. 2005. Neo-Babylonian Legal and Administrative Documents: Typology, Contents and Archives. GMTR 1. Münster: Ugarit.Search in Google Scholar

Jursa, M. 2010. Aspects of the Economic History of Babylonia in the First Millennium BC. Economic Geography, Economic Mentalities, Agriculture, the Use of Money. With Contributions by J. Hackl, Jankovic, K. Kleber, E. E. Payne, C. Waerzeggers and M. Weszeli. AOAT 377. Münster: Ugarit.Search in Google Scholar

Jursa, M. 2011. “Cuneiform Writing in Neo-Babylonian Temple Communities.” In The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture, edited by K. Radner and E. Robson, 184–204. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199557301.013.0009Search in Google Scholar

Jursa, M. 2017. “A Babylonian Priestly Martyr, a King-like Priest, and the Nature of Late Babylonian Priestly Literature.” With Contributions by Céline Debourse. WZKM 107: 76–98.Search in Google Scholar

Kessler, K. 2004. “Urukäische Familien versus babylonische Familien. Die Namengebung in Uruk, die Degradierung der Kulte von Eanna und der Aufstieg des Gottes Anu.” AoF 31: 237–62.10.1524/aofo.2004.31.2.237Search in Google Scholar

Koschaker, P. 1911. Babylonisch-assyrisches Bürgschaftsrecht. Ein Beitrag zur Lehre von Schuld und Haftung. Leipzig-Berlin: Teubner.Search in Google Scholar

Kutscher, R. 1975. Oh Angry Sea (a-ab-ba hu-luh-ha): The History of a Sumerian Congregational Lament. Yale Near Eastern Researches 6. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lambert, W. G. 1967. “Enmeduranki and Related Matters.” JCS 21: 126–38.10.2307/1359367Search in Google Scholar

Lambert, W. G. 1998. “The Qualifications of Babylonian Diviners.” In Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24. Mai 1994. tikip santakki mal bašmu, edited by S. M. Maul, 141–58. Groningen: Styx Publications. Cuneiform Monographs 10.Search in Google Scholar

Lindström, G. 2003. Uruk. Siegelabdrücke auf hellenistischen Tonbullen und Tontafeln, Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka Endberichte 20. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern.Search in Google Scholar

McEwan, G. J. P. 1981. Priest and Temple in Hellenistic Babylonia. Freiburger altorientalische Studien 4. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.Search in Google Scholar

Neugebauer, O. 1955. Astronomical Cuneiform Texts. Babylonian Ephemerides of the Seleucid Period for the Motion of the Sun, the Moon, and the Planets. London: Lund Humphries.Search in Google Scholar

Nötscher, F. 1927. Ellil in Sumer und Akkad. Hannover: Lafaire.Search in Google Scholar

Parker, R. A. and W. H. Dubberstein. 1956. Babylonian Chronology. 626 B.C. – A.D. 75. Brown University Studies 19. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 1970. Studien zur babylonischen Kultur und Gesellschaft in hellenistischer Zeit. Habilitation Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 1982. “Spätachämenidische Texte aus Nippur.” RA 76: 94–95.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 1986. Materialien zur babylonischen Gesellschaft und Kultur in hellenistischer Zeit. Assyriologia 7. Budapest: Eötvös University.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 1996. “Siegelung und Archivierung von Dokumenten im Hellenistischen Babylonien.” In Archives et sceaux du monde héllenistique. Archivi e sigilli nel mondo ellenistico, edited by B. Marie-Françoise and A. Invernizzi, 101–12. Athens: Ecole Française d’Athènes. Bulletin de correspondance hellénistique Suppl. 29.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. and Istituto universitario orientale. 2000. “Von Iqīša und einigen anderen spätgeborenen Babyloniern.” In Studi sul Vicino Oriente antico dedicati alla memoria di Luigi Cagni, edited by S. Graziani, 797–814. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Dipartmento di studi asiatici, Series minor 61.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 2001. “Uruk im Planquadrat U 18.” Orientalische Literaturzeitung 96: 478–88.10.1524/olzg.2001.96.45.473Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 2003. “Cuneiform Archives in Hellenistic Babylonia: Aspects of Content and Form.” In Ancient Archives and Archival Traditions. Concepts of Record-Keeping in the Ancient World, edited by M. Brosius, 284–301. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Oxford Studies in Ancient Documents.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 2006. “30 Thesen zum Thema „Aramaisierung – Hellenisierung – Iranisierung Babyloniens.” In Getrennte Wege? Kommunikation, Raum und Wahrnehmung in der Alten Welt, edited by R. Rollinger, A. Luther and J. Wiesehöfer, 218–27. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Antike. Oikumene 2.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 2009. “Bemerkungen zu den neu- und spätbabylonischen Kaufformularen.” Zeitschrift für altorientalische und biblische Rechtsgeschichte 15: 31–55.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 2018. “Gedanken zu den Archiven und Bibliotheken aus dem hellenistischen Uruk.” In Grenzüberschreitungen. Studien zur Kulturgeschichte des Alten Orients. Festschrift für Hans Neumann zum 65. Geburtstag am 9. Mai 2018, edited by K. Kleber, G. Neumann and S. Paulus, 455–75. Münster: Zaphon. Dubsar 5.Search in Google Scholar

Oelsner, J. 2019. “Uruk: Hellenistisches südwestlich von Eana.” In Beiträge zur Kenntnis und Deutung altorientalischer Archivalien. Festschrift für Helmut Freydank zum 80. Geburtstag, edited by D. Prechel and H. Neumann, 217–29. Münster: Zaphon. Dubsar 6.Search in Google Scholar

Oppenheim, A. L. 1960. “Assyriology: Why and how?.” Current Anthropology 1: 409–23.10.1086/200136Search in Google Scholar

Ossendrijver, M. 2011a. “Exzellente Netzwerke: die Astronomen von Uruk.” In The Empirical Dimension of Ancient Near Eastern Studies, edited by G. J. Selz and K. Wagensonner, 631–44. Vienna: LIT-Verlag. Wiener Offene Orientalistik Band 8.Search in Google Scholar

Ossendrijver, M. 2011b. “Science in Action: Networks in Babylonian Astronomy.” In Babylon – Wissenskultur in Orient und Okzident, edited by E. Cancik-Kirschbaum, M. van Ess and J. Marzahn, 213–21. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. TOPOI Berlin Studies of the Ancient World.10.1515/9783110222128.213Search in Google Scholar

Ossendrijver, M. 2012. Babylonian Mathematical Astronomy: Procedure Texts. Sources and Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences. New York-Heidelberg-Dordrecht-London: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4614-3782-6_1Search in Google Scholar

Pearce, L. and T. L. Doty. 2000. “The Activities of Anu-belšunu.” In Assyriologica et Semitica. Festschrift für Joachim Oelsner anläßlich seines 65. Geburtstages am 18. Februar 1997, edited by J. Marzahn and H. Neumann, 331–41. Münster: Ugarit. AOAT 252.Search in Google Scholar

Pedersén, O. 1998. Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East 1500–300 B.C. Bethesda, Maryland: CDL Press.Search in Google Scholar

Rix, H. 1995. “Römische Personennamen.” In Namenforschung. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Onomastik, edited by E. von Eichler, G. Hilty, H. Löffler, H. Steger and L. Zgusta, 724–32. Berlin: De Gruyter. Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 11.1.Search in Google Scholar

Robson, E. 2008. Mathematics in Ancient Iraq. A Social History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691201405Search in Google Scholar

Robson, E. 2011. “The Production and Disseminination of Scholarly Knowledge.” In The Oxford Handbook of Cuneiform Culture, edited by K. Radner and E. Robson, 557–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199557301.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Robson, E. 2017. “The Socio-Economics of Cuneiform Scholarship after the “End of Archives”: Views from Borsippa and Uruk.” In At the Dawn of History: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of J. N. Postgate, edited by Y. Heffron, A. Stone and M. Worthington, 455–70. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.10.5325/j.ctv1bxh3qk.37Search in Google Scholar

Robson, E. 2019. Ancient Knowledge Networks: A Social Geography of Cuneiform Scholarship in First-Millennium Assyria and Babylonia. London: UCL Press.10.2307/j.ctvhn0csnSearch in Google Scholar

San Nicolò, M. 1947. “Zum atru und anderen Nebenleistungen des Käufers beim neubabylonischen Immobiliarkauf.” Orientalia 16: 273–302.Search in Google Scholar

Stevens, K. 2013. “Secrets in the Library: Protected Knowledge and Professional Identity in Late Babylonian Uruk.” Iraq 75: 211–253.10.1017/S0021088900000474Search in Google Scholar

Still, B. 2019. The Social World of the Babylonian Priest. CHANE 103. Leiden and Boston: Brill.10.1163/9789004399969Search in Google Scholar

Stolper, M. W. 1990. “Late Achaemenid Legal Texts from Uruk and Larsa.” BaM 21: 559–622.Search in Google Scholar

Streck, M. P. 2011. “Babylonian and Assyrian.” In The Semitic Languages. An International Handbook, edited by S. Weninger, 359–96. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 36.10.1515/9783110251586.359Search in Google Scholar

van Dijk, J. 1962. “Die Inschriftenfunde.” In XVIII. vorläufiger Bericht über die von dem Deutschen Archäologischen Institut und der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft aus Mitteln der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft unternommenen Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, edited by H. J. Lenzen, M. B. von Arndt von Haller and J. van Dijk und Eva Strommenger, 39–62. Berlin: Gebr: Mann Verlag. Abhandlungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 7.Search in Google Scholar

van Dijk, J. and W. R. Mayer. 1980. Texte aus dem Rēš-Heiligtum in Uruk-Warka. BaM Beih. 2. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Waerzeggers, C. 2002. “Endogamy in Mesopotamia in the Neo-Babylonian Period.” In Mining the Archives. Festschrift for Christopher Walker on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, edited by C. Wunsch, 319–42. Dresden: Islet. Babylonsiche Archive 1.Search in Google Scholar

Waerzeggers, C. 2010. The Ezida Temple of Borsippa. Priesthood, Cult, Archives. Achaemenid History 15. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.Search in Google Scholar

Waerzeggers, C. 2015. “Facts, Propaganda or History? Shaping Political Memory in the Nabonidus Chronicle.” In Political Memory in and after the Persian Empire, edited by J. M. Silverman and C. Waerzeggers, 95–124. Atlanta: SBL Press. Ancient Near Eastern Monographs 13.Search in Google Scholar

Wallenfels, R. 1998. Seleucid Archival Texts in the Harvard Semitic Museum. Text Editions and Catalogue Raisonné of the Seal Impressions. CM 12. Groningen: Styx.Search in Google Scholar

Wallenfels, R. 2001. “Fourth Century Babylonian Sealed Archival Texts.” In Seals and Seal Impressions. Proceedings of the 45e RAI, edited by W. W. Hallo and I. J. Winter, Vol. II. Bethesda, Maryland: CDL Press, 215–38.Search in Google Scholar

Weidner, E. F. 1967. Gestirn-Darstellungen auf babylonischen Tontafeln, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte 254/2. Vienna: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2021-02-25
Published in Print: 2021-06-25

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

From the journal
Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History
Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History
Volume 8 Issue 1-2
Submit manuscript

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same Issue

Frontmatter
Scholars, Priests, and Temples: Babylonian and Egyptian Science in Context. Introduction
Part I. Priests, scholars, and their communities
Charming Snakes (and Kings), from Egypt to Persia
The Descendants of the Sîn-lēqi-unnīnī during the Late Achaemenid and Early Hellenistic Periods – A Family of Priests, Scribes and Scholars and Their Archival and Learned Texts
Priestly Scholars in Late Egypt: The Theoretical Side
Stellar Scientists: The Egyptian Temple Astrologers
Part II. Developments in scholarship
Berossus and the Creation Story
From Tablet to Talmud: Canonised Knowledge in Late Antiquity
The Religious Sciences in Ancient Egypt
Egyptian Scholars, Priests and Temples between Autonomy and State Authority
Weather Prediction in Babylonia
The Continued Relevance of MUL.APIN in Late Babylonian Astronomy
Writing History Under Empire: The Babylonian Chronicle Reconsidered
Downloaded on 7.6.2023 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/janeh-2020-0016/html
Scroll to top button