Faist_Llop_2012_The Assyrian royal granary (karmu)

The Perfumes of Seven Tamarisks

Studies in Honour of Wilfred G. E. Watson

Edited by

Gregorio del Olmo Lete,

Jordi Vidal and

Nicolas Wyatt

Alter Orient und Altes Testament Veröffentlichungen zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten Orients

und des Alten Testaments

Band 394

Herausgeber

Manfried Dietrich • Oswald Loretz • Hans Neumann

Lektor

Kai A. Metzler

Beratergremium

Rainer Albertz • Joachim Bretschneider

Stefan Maul • Udo Rüterswörden • Walther Sallaberger

Gebhard Selz • Michael P. Streck • Wolfgang Zwickel

2012

Ugarit-Verlag

Münster

The Perfumes of Seven Tamarisks


Edited by

Gregorio del Olmo Lete,

Jordi Vidal and

Nicolas Wyatt

2012

Ugarit-Verlag

Münster

The Perfumes of Seven Tamarisks.


Edited by Gregorio del Olmo Lete, Jordi Vidal and Nicolas Wyatt

Alter Orient und Altes Testament, Band 394

© 2012 Ugarit-Verlag, Münster

www.ugarit-verlag.de

Alle Rechte vorbehalten

All rights preserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,

electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,

without the prior permission of the publisher.

Herstellung: Hubert & Co, Göttingen

Printed in Germany

ISBN 978-3-86835-068-5

Printed on acid-free paper

The Assyrian Royal Granary (karmu)*

Betina Faist / Jaume Llop

Introduction

There is no doubt that civilisation is based, among other things, on the possibility of

being able to rely on stored food for periods in which a bad harvest endangers

survival. Moreover, in complex societies like the Assyrian, the mobilization of

numerous people for state service (in the civil as well as military sphere) requires a

well-organised administration that ensure the supply of these people. In this article,

one of the most important storage facilities for grain in the Assyrian Kingdom, the so

called royal granary, karmu, will be discussed.

Attestations for the royal granary are scarce in the standard Akkadian dictio-

naries.1 The royal granary does not seem to be attested in the Old Assyrian period.

However, G. J. Dercksen has suggested that the granary of Ashur was under the

supervision of the “eponym of barley” (līmum ša še’im) and under the control of the

City Hall (bīt ālim) in that period.2

The evidence for the Middle Assyrian royal granary has increased considerably

in the last years, mostly due to the publication of documentation from Dūr-Katlim-

mu, but also from Ashur, Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta, and elsewhere. This evidence will be

presented in the first part of this article, which is in charge of J. Llop. Additionally,

four aspects of this institution will be discussed: the determinatives accompanying

the word karmu, the cities containing a royal granary, the official status of the

karmu-type granary and finally, the royal granary and other storage facilities. The

second part, in charge of B. Faist, deals with the evidence in the Neo-Assyrian time

focusing upon a new text from Ashur. The authors are very pleased to dedicate this

contribution to W. G. E. Watson.

1. The Middle Assyrian royal granary (karmu) revisited

The following discussion is intended as an update and supplementation of some

recent studies on the topic by S. Jakob,3 J. Llop,

4 and W. Röllig.

5

*The abbreviations used in this article can be found in Streck 2006–2008, III–XLIV. Further

abbreviations not listed there are the following:

KAN 4 = Faist, B. I., Neuassyrische Rechtsurkunden IV. Mit einem Beitrag von Evelyn

Klengel-Brandt. Wiesbaden, 2010.

MVA = Llop, J., Mittelassyrische Verwaltungsurkunden aus Assur. Texte aus den „grossen

Speichern“ und dem Ubru-Archiv. Wiesbaden, 2009. 1 AHw. 449b, CAD K, 200–201. 2 Dercksen 2004, 60–61. 3 Jakob 2003, 323–325.


20

1.1. The attestations

The Middle Assyrian (hereafter MA) royal granary (karmu) is attested in the

following texts, arranged according to their archaeological find spots:6

Ashur (Qalat Šerqat)

A 3200:7 12

URU

kar-me (among other cities).

KAJ 133: 12

(barley) i+na É ú-uš-še 13

ša SUḪUR Ékar-mi

14ša

URU.da-šur

15ta-ad-na-

áš-šu, “(barley) is given to him in the reed(?)-storehouse next to the granary of

the city of Ashur”.8

MARV 1, 47: 55

… pa-ḫa-ta ŠE.UM a-na kar-me {ta-ba} 56

ta-ba-ki PN na-še, “PN

carries the responsibility for storing the barley in the granary”.

MARV 2, 23: r. 10'

(barley) [a-n]a tar-ba-[ṣi] 11'

[š]a Ékar-mi i+na e-ra-be a-na e[-m]i-

i[t-te] 12'

[i+n]a Ékar-mi ša qa-an-ni ša U[DU]N pa-pi-[ri], “(barley) piled up

(ka[rim], line 17') in the courtyard of the granary, at the entrance to the right,

(and?) in the granary which (is) close to the oven of the beer bread”.9

MARV 2, 23: r. 18'

(barley) a-na tar-ba-ṣi ša É[kar-mi]

19'ša be-ta-nu i+na e-ra-be a-na

šu-me-[li] 20'

i+na Ékar-mi ša SUḪUR si-mi-il-t[e]

21'ša ma-šar-tu-šu a-na tar-⌈ba⌉-

ṣi ša-⌈ak-nu-tu-ni⌉, “(barley) stored (tabik, line 24') in the courtyard of the inner

granary, at the entrance to the left, in the granary which (is) next to the staircase,

whose point where the grain was extracted is directed to the courtyard.”

MARV 3, 4: 9(barley) [g]ab-bu-šu i+na

Ékar-me i+na ad-ri É.GAL-lì

10i+na qu-BE-

te ta-bi-ik kat-tu-um, “all the (barley) is stored (and) covered in the granary, on

the threshing-floor of the palace, in the qubtu”.10

MARV 5, 60: 30

PAP.NÍGIN 49 ÉRIN.MEŠ [ ] 31

ša Ék[ar

?-me

?...] (Temple of

Aššur), “Altogether 49 workers of the granary (??)”.11

MVA 5: 23

(barley) i+na kar-me, “(barley) … in the granary”.

MVA 9: r. 2

DUB.SAR.MEŠ [x x] 3i+na

Ékar-me [x x]

4ta-[din], “(the barley) is

given (?) to the scribes in the granary”.

r. 5

i+na Ékar-mi …[…].

MVA 20: r. 1'

(barley) [i+na (É)

kar-m]e ša i+na pi-[i KÁ.GAL] 2'[ta-bi-ra i]m-⌈ḫu-ru-ú-

ni⌉, “(barley) … [which] they received in the granary, which is at the entrance of

the Tabīra gate”.

MVA 21: r. 7'

(barley) ...i+na Ékar-me ..., “(barley) … in the granary …”.

MVA 25: r. 4'

(barley) [... i+]na kar-me ..., “(barley) … in the granary …”.

MVA 32: r. 12'

(barley?) [... i+n]a

? ⌈ka-ar-me⌉ [GAL

?]-ú-te ša pi-i K[Á.GAL tabīra (?)],

“(barley) from the big granaries at the entrance [of the Tabīra (?)] gate”.

MVA 34: r. 7

(barley) [i+n]a?

Ékar-me GAL.MEŠ, “(barley) [coming from] the big

granaries”.

4 Llop 2005. 5 Röllig 2008, 25–26. 6 Interestingly, this kind of granary does not seem to be attested in the Middle Babylonian

documentation. See Sassmannshausen 2001, 173ff. 7 Donbaz 1998, 185 8 Postgate 1988, no. 59. 9 See Deller 1987, 65b and Freydank 1994, 16ff. 10 See below under 1.2. 11 See below under 1.2.

The Assyrian Royal Granary (karmu)

21

MVA 37: r. 9'

(barley) ... i+na (?)] Ékar-me [ša pi-i]

10'[KÁ.GAL] ta-b[i-ra], “(barley)

… [from (?)] the granaries [at the entrance of the] Tabīra [gate]”.

MVA 48: r.? 5'

(barley) ... i+na (?)] ⌈É⌉kar-me ša pi-i KÁ [ta-bi-ra], “(barley)…[from

(?)] the granary at the entrance of the [Tabīra (?)] gate”.

MVA 55: IV 2

(barley) ... i+na ka-ar-me GAL-ú-te 3ša pi KÁ.GAL ta-bi-ra ...,

“(barley) from/in the big granaries at the entrance of the Tabīra gate”.

MVA 62: r.? IV? 2'

(barley) [... i+na (É)

kar]-me GAL.GAL ša pi-i KÁ.GAL ta-bi-ra …

šallumū maḫrū, “they received (the barley) completely [… from/in] the big

granaries at the entrance of the Tabīra gate”.

MVA 66: r. III 5

(barley) ... i+na ⌈Ékar⌉-me [rabi’ūte

?]

6ša pi-i KÁ.GAL ta-bi-[ra ...],

“(barley) from/in the [big] granaries at the entrance of the Tabīra gate”.

MVA 77: obv. II 11'

(barley) i+na Ékar-me GAL.GAL ⌈ša pi⌉ [(KÁ.GAL tabīra (?)],

“(barley) from/in the big granaries at the entrance [of the Tabīra gate (?)]”.

MVA 77: obv. II 21'

(barley) i+na É[kar]-me ša 2 ITI[.UD.MEŠ …]

22'ša pi-i KÁ.GAL

ta-b[i-r]a, “(barley) from/in the big granaries … at the entrance of the Tabīra

gate”.

MVA 77: r.? IV 5'

(barley) [... ina (É)

karmē (rabi’ūte)] 6'ša pi-i KÁ.GAL ta-b[i]-ra

7'[m]a-aḫ-r[u], “They received (the barley) [… from/in the (big) granaries] at the

entrance of the Tabīra gate”.

MVA 78: r.? 2'

(barley) i+na Ékar-me GAL.GAL, “(barley) from/in the big granaries”.

MVA 129: (bīt ḫubburāte ??) obv. 8

ša Ékar-me G[AL?]

9ša pi-i KÁ ta-bi-[ra], “… of

the big (?) granaries at the entrance of the Tabīra gate”.

MVA 132: l.e. 9

(barley) i+na Ékar-mi GAL.MEŠ

10ša KA-i KÁ.G[A]L ta-bi-r[a]

…12

im-ta-ḫar, “he has received (the barley) in the big granaries at the entrance of

the Tabīra gate”.

Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta (Tulul al ‘Aqr)

MARV 1, 1: IV 50

(barley) ša IŠ-TU URU

ša-1d

30-GAL URU.É

kar-me ša 1ki-din-

dEN.LÍL

51⌈na⌉-ṣa-an-ni, “(barley) which was brought from the city of Sîn-rabi (and) the

city-granary of Kidin-Enlil”.

MARV 1, 26 +: (kibtu) 5ša kar-me

6ša

URUkar-

1GIŠTUKUL-ti-

dMAŠ, “(wheat) from

the granary of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta”.

MARV 1, 26: 17

GIG ki-i-mu a-bu-uḫ!-ri

18a-na kar-me i-ma-da-ad, “he will measure

wheat instead of abuḫru-flour for the granary”.

MARV 4, 47: 22'

(barley) [x x] x a-na kar-me 1 ME ANŠE ŠE a [x] 23'

[x x] ANŠE URU

kar-mu 40 ANŠE a-na ṭé-a-ni, “(barley) … for/to the granary, one hundred

homer barley … [n] homer (in?) the granary, forty homer to grind (into flour)”.

MARV 4, 58: 5'(barley) ša

Ékar-me

6'ša

URUkar-

1GIŠTUKUL-ti-[

dNIN.URTA] (…)

12ta-[din], “(barley) is given from the granary of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta (…)”.

MARV 4, 60: 13

(barley) ša Ékar-me

14ša

UR[

Uk]ar-

1GIŠTUKUL-ti-

dNI[N.UR]TA (…)

21… ta-[din], “(barley) is given from the granary of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta (…)”.

MARV 4, 98: 10'

(barley) […(É)

ka]r-me 11'

[ša URU

kar-1GIŠ

]TUKUL-ti-dNIN.URTA

12'

(x x x)] ta-b[i]-ik, “(barley) is stored [in the] granary of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta”.

MARV 4, 105: 2(barley) ša

Ékar-me

3ša

URUkar-

GIŠTUKUL-ti-

dNIN.URTA (…)

7(…)

ta?-din

?, “(barley) is given (?) from the granary of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta”.

MARV 4, 106: 6(seed and barley) ša

Ékar-me (…)

8ša

URUkar-

1GIŠKIM-MAŠ (…)

15ta-ad-na-áš-šu (dated the same day as MARV 9, 62 below

), “(seed and barley)

from the granary (…) of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta are given to him”.


22

MARV 9, 53: 3(flour) [ša] ⌈

É⌉kar-me ša URU

ka[r-tukultī-Ninurta], “(flour) [from] the

granary of Kā[r-Tukultī-Ninurta]”.

MARV 9, 62: 6(seed and barley) ša

Ékar-me (…)

8ša

URUkar-GIŠKIM-MAŠ (…)

14[ta-a]d-na-áš-šu (dated the same day as MARV 4, 106 above), “(seed and

barley) from the granary (…) of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta (…) are given to him”.

VAT 18070: 5'(barley

?) ša

Ékar-mi ša

URU.1GIŠKIM-MAŠ,

12 “(barley

?) from the

granary of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta”.

Dūr-Katlimmu (Tell Šeḫ Ḥamad)

Cited according to the text number in Röllig 2008:

No. 60 (DeZ 3834): 24

(barley) a-na 1 kar-me ta-bi-ik, “(barely) is stored in one

granary”. 35

(barley) a-[na (É)

karme ] ta-bi-ik, “(barley) is stored in the [granary]”.

No. 63 (DeZ 3825+): 22

(barley) a-n[a] É?

[kar-me tabik (?)], “(barley) [is stored in the

granary (?)]”.

No. 64 (DeZ 3821): 28

(barley) a-na Ékar-me ta-bi-[ik], “(barley) is stored in the

granary”.

No. 69 (DeZ 2494): 29

… ŠE … a-na Ékar-me

30ša ri

!-bi-t[e] i+na e-ra-bi a-na šu-ma-

la 31

ta-bi-ik, “barley is stored in the granary of the main street at the entrance to

the left”.

No. 74 (DeZ 2507): 24

(barley) i+na Ékar-me ša ŠE SUMUN ša-im a-ṣa-me re-ḫat

25ša SUḪUR

URUa-sa-i-te na-áš-ra …, “(barley) is removed … from the granary

of the old barley … which is (situated) next to the city tower”.

No. 75 (DeZ 3848/15): 22

(barley) … i+na 2 Ékar-ma-ni tab-ki

!, “(barley) is stored in

two granaries”. 30

… ŠE i+na kar!-me ša 15

Ékar-me TUR

?

31URU

?.DU-PI tab-ki x, “(barley) is

stored in the granary on the right, the little granary, …”. 36

(barley) i+na kar-me tab-ki, “(barley) is stored in the granary”.

No. 76 (DeZ 3328): 20

… ŠE … i+na Ékar-me

21ša SUḪUR É ša Ì ta-bi-ik, “barley is

stored in the granary, which (is situated) next to the oil-house”.

No. 77 (DeZ 3097): 15

… ŠE … i+na Ékar-me

16[x x x š]a SUḪUR É.Ì ta-bi-ik,

“barley is stored in the granary […] which (is situated) next to the oil-house”.

No.78 (DeZ 3364): 21

[barley]… i+na kar-me a-na šu!-mi-la

! (or e

!-mi-te) t[a-bi-ik],

“[barley] is stored in the granary to the left (or: the right)”.

No. 81 (DeZ 2489): 19

… ŠE … a-na Ékar-mi

20ta-bi-ik, “barley … is stored in the

granary”. 27

… ŠE … a-na Ékar-mi ta-bi-ik, “barley … is stored in the granary”.

No. 84 (Arnaud 1991, no. 106; see Llop 2006): 3(barley) i+na

Ékar-mi ša tar-ṣi KÁ

4ta-bi-ik, “(barley) is stored in the granary,

which (is located) in front of the gate”. 6(barley) i+na

Ékar-mi ša e-mi-ta

7[i+n]a

Éa

!-si-te

8ta-bi-ik, “barley is stored in

the granary of/to the right [in] the tower”. 10

(barley) [i+na] Ékar-mi

11ina

? qa-bu-te ta-bi-ik, “(barley) is stored in the granary

(and) in? the stable”.

No. 86 (DeZ 3428): 3(barley) [i+na

Éka]r-mi ša tam-le-e

4[i+na e-ra]-be a-na šu-mi-

la ta-bi-ik, “(barley) is stored in the granary of the terrace, [at] the entrance to the

left”.

12 Cited by Freydank 1991, 103.


23

7… ŠE … i+na

Ékar-mi

8[ša tam-l]e-e ša tar

!(NU)-ṣi LA ta-bi-ik, “barley is

(not??) stored in the granary [of the] terrace opposite /close to …(?)”. 9 […] ŠE i+na

Ékar-mi

10[i+na e-ra-b]e KÁ ša

Éa-sa-i-te, “barley (is stored) in

the granary entering the gate of the tower building”. 11

(barley) i+na Ékar-m[e]

12[( )] ša

Éa-sa-i-ti ša pa-ni KÁ

13ta-bi-ik, “(barley) is

stored in the granary of the tower building, which (is located) in front of the

gate”.

No. 87 (DeZ 2492): 8(barley) i+na

Ékar-me ša ta-am-le-e

9ša pi-i KÁ ša a-na

10ta-

am-le GAL … 15

ta-bi-i[k], “(barley) is stored in the granary of the terrace, at the

entrance of the gate, which (leads?) to the big terrace …”.

No. 88 (DeZ 2491): 13

(barley) i+na Ékar-me ta-bi-ik, “barley is stored in the

granary”. 19

(barley) i+na Ékar-me ta-bi-ki, “(barley) is stored in the granary”.

No. 89 (DeZ 3830): 14

(barley) i+na Ékar-me ša tar-ṣi

15 Érug-bì ša a-na e-ra-be

16a-

na šu-mi-la-a-ni i-na imi-ta 17

a-na UGU SUMUN ta-bi-ik, “(the barley) is stored

to the right against the old (barley?), in the granary which (is found) near the loft

building which (is found) at the entrance to the left”.

No. 90 (DeZ 2513): 2(barley) i+na 2

Ékar-ma-ni

3i+na É

1ḫu-la-lu,

13 “(barley is

stored) in two granaries at Hulālu’s house”. 5(barley) a-na 1

Ékar-me

6a-na

1ḫu

?-ub

?-re-e-ni, “(barley is stored) in one granary

at Hubrenu’s”. 8(barley) i+na 1

Ékar-me

9ša É

10

1dEN.LÍL-ŠEŠ-KAM …

12ÌR É.GAL-lì,

“(barley) is stored in one granary of the house of Enlil-aha-ēriš …, the servant of

the king”.


Ékar-me a-na tar-ṣi

3 ÉKÁ.GAL ša

Éša-ḫu-ri,

“(barley is stored) in the granary close to the gate of the šaḫūru-building”. 5(barley) i+na

Ékar-me i+na

Étam-le-e

6a-na

Ée-ra-be

7a-na šu-me-la-ni, “(barley

is stored) in the granary in the terrace, at the entrance (or entering) to the left”. 9(barley) i+na

Ékar-me

10ša e-ra-be

11a-na e-mi-ta-ni, “(barley is stored) in the

granary of the entrance to the right”.


Ékar-me

9ša e-ra-be

10a-na e-me-ta

11ta-bi-ik,

“(barley) is stored in the granary of the entrance to the right”.

Unclear attestations from DKL are:

No. 67 (DeZ 2208+): line 32 (?). This attestation is according to Röllig, BATSH 9,

p. 192b; but because of parallel BATSH 9, 82: 30 possibly not a karmu; see the

transliteration by Röllig: NINDA ta-ḫal-ta {ŠE} a-na e-p[a-e ta-din].

No.78 (DeZ 3364): 32

(barley) a-di ḫu-ṣa-ni-šu [ta-din g]a-mur? a-na ⌈

É⌉[karme? …],

14

but the traces of the signs are not clear.

No. 80 (DeZ 3365): 26

(barley) re-eḫ-tu i+na 27

šul-mu ú-šat-bi BE 28

a-na li-x-me ú-

šat-te

According to Freydank 2010, 98 a better reading would be: 26

re-eḫ-tu-šu!?/ša

!? 27ki-mu-ú ŠE

?!.NUMUN

?! SUMUN

28a-na x x x

?-me ta

!-bi

!-ik

!

If Freydank’s reading is correct, a further reading 28

a-na x ka[r]-me cannot be

ruled out.

13 Because of a parallelism with lines 6 and 10, it is highly possible that this is not a place

name but a personal name, cf. Röllig 2008, 169. A personal name Hulālu is attested in Neo-

Assyrian, PNA 2/I, 476b. 14 S. Röllig 2008, 150 ad line 32.


24

Uššukanni (Tell Fekheriya)

OIP 79 pl. 85 no. 11: 6'(barley and bread) i+na ŠU PN

7'i+na

URUkar-me

8'maḫ

!-ru,

“(barley and bread) have been received from the hand of PN at the granary”.15

Tell Sabi Abyad

TSA T 97-26: (barley) ana ṭeāni and ŠE.aršu IŠTU Ékar-me na-aš-ra

16 “(barley) to

grind and wheat (?) removed from the granary”.

1.2. Discussion

Four aspects in reference to the royal granary (karmu) will be treated here: a) some

morphological aspects of the word and its accompanying determinatives, b) the cities

containing a royal granary, c) the official status of the karmu-type of granary and d)

the royal granary and other storage facilities. For further information on this type of

storage facility, the reader is referred to the previous studies cited under point 1.

a) Morphology and writing

With the publication of the documentation from Dūr-Katlimmu,17

two masculine

plural forms are now attested for this substantive: karmū and karmānu. This noun

can be written with or without an accompanying determinative. The most usual

determinative attested is É indicating a type of building, but it is also written with the

determinative URU, which usually precedes names of cities.18

We find a similar case

in the substantive asittu “tower”19

and dunnu “fortified agricultural centre”.20

Both of

them are usually written without a determinative, but may also appear with a deter-

minative É or URU in MA. Other nouns such as ḫaribtu “waste land” are also attes-

ted in MA with determinative URU,21

although possibly not indicating the name of a

specific city. É probably functions as a determinative in MA also when placed before

the following substantives: abullu “gate”,22

abussu “magazine”,23

erābu “entran-

ce”,24

ḫašīmu “granary”,25

ḫuršu “larder”,26

kisallu “courtyard”, nakkamtu “store-

house”,27

nupāru “workhouse, prison”,28

papāḫu “cella, sanctuary”, qarītu “inn”,

15 Reading according to Llop 2004, note 65. 16 Courtesy of F. A. M. Wiggermann. 17 Röllig 2008. 18 See the attestations above and previously Llop 2005, 43. 19 It is written with determinative É in BATSH 9, 84: 7; BATSH 9, 86: 10.12 and with deter-

minative URU in BATSH 9, 74: 25. 20 It is written with determinative É in KAJ 156: 7 and with determinative URU in PIHANS

88, 222, no. 11: 18 and 12: 9.11. 21 Donbaz 2009, 355, l. 13. 22 It is usually written without determinative but with É in BATSH 9, 91: 3. 23 Weidner 1963, 122, ll. 6 and 12 (without É). 24 It is usually written without a determinative but with É in BATSH 9, 91: 6.10. 25 It is usually written with the determinative, but without in KAJ 119: 15. 26 This word is not attested with preceding É in MA. 27 This word is usually written with determinative É, but without in KAJ 310: 65 and MARV

3, 2: 25’. 28 This word is usually written with determinative É, but without in KAJ 254: 18.


25

qaqquru “ground”,29

*qubtu/qubutu “granary”, qabuttu “stable”, rugbu “loft”,30

šaḫūru and tamlû “terrace”.31

This phenomenon has recently been discussed for the

Neo-Assyrian language by S. Parpola.32

b) Cities with a royal granary

According to the find spots of the tablets quoted above, there were royal granaries in

Ashur (the “big granaries”), Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta (hereafter KTN), Dūr-Katlimmu

(hereafter DKL), Duara, Uššukanni and Tell Sabi Abyad (hereafter TSA).33

It is

likely that the provincial capitals Rēš-nēberi, Hiššutu, Nēmad-Ištar and Kurda also

possessed karmu-type granaries,34

as well as other non-capital cities such as Duara

and TSA (old name still not known, unclear if a provincial capital). Strangely, the

documentation from Harbu (Tell Chuera) does not mention a karmu-granary,

although this outpost served as a supply point for caravans going to and returning

from Ashur.35

The storage facilities mentioned in the texts there are the qub/p(u)tu-

installation36

and the ḫašīmu.37

It is also probable that royal granaries existed in cities such as Tille (Tell Rumei-

lan?) and the city of Sîn-rabi. Expeditions to fetch grain from both these cities are

known during the reign of Tukultī-Ninurta.38

This grain would have been stored in

these cities previously to be taken to the Assyrian heartland, either to the city of

Ashur or to KTN.

c) The official status of the karmu

In all the attestations listed above, the royal granary is linked to agricultural products

(mainly barley) belonging to the palace. Moreover, as the majority of the documents

cited above belong to the royal administration, the official character of this instal-

lation seems undeniable.39

However, there are two points that seem to challenge this

assumption. First, in one of the DKL texts, these granaries are related to individuals

29 It is usually written without a determinative but with É in BATSH 4, 2: 14. 30 It is written with determinative in BATSH 9, 89: 15. 31 It is usually written without a determinative but with É in BATSH 9, 91: 5. 32 Parpola 2008 pub. 2009, 70. 33 F. A. M. Wiggermann thinks that the karmu in TSA was located in front of the central tower

of the settlement (personal communication). 34 Llop 2005, 44f. 35 Jakob 2009, nos. 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 54, 56. 36 This type of granary was attested first in MARV 3, 4: 10 and MARV 5, 83: 19´. Freydank

1994, 21 note 24 and 1997, 132f. supposed that this noun was derived from quppu “basket,

box” and therefore he read quppātu, as plural feminine; previously AHw. 928b, 2 (for Nuzi)

and later Radner 2004, 77 ad 14 “quppu-Behälter”. CAD Q, 307ff. distinguishes between a

quppu A “basket, chest, box” and quppu B (a building). In front of the writings qu-UB-te and

qu-BE-te, Jakob proposed a reading qupatte and rejected a derivation from quppu “basket,

box” (Jakob 2003, 325–327; now qu-bat-te, Jakob 2009, nos. 62: 3 and 81: 4). If Jakob’s

assumption is correct, then the etymology of this substantive remains to be explained.

Assuming that qu-UB-te in MARV 5, 83: 19’ is the sing. (fem.) in genitive of the noun, then a

lemma *qub/ptu is lacking in the dictionaries. 37 Jakob 2009, no. 49: 16. 38 Freydank 1991, 62f. and Llop 2010. 39 Llop 2005, 46f.


26

and are reported to be located in the houses of these individuals.40

However, at least

one of these persons is directly linked to the royal administration. Enlil-aha-ēriš

bears the title of servant of the palace (urad ekalli). In the case of Hulālu and

Hubrēnu (?), there is no indication that they were officials. But, since the document

in which they are attested presumably belonged to the archive of the governor of

DKL, these people would have had some connection with that administrative body.

In MARV 1, 1 IV 50 grain is said to be fetched from the city of Sîn-rabi and the city-

karmu of Kidin-Enlil. Kidin-Enlil may have been a former masennu in the reign of

Shalmaneser41

and therefore would also have been connected with the royal admi-

nistration.

The second point that may argue against the karmu as being an official granary is

the fact that a karmu-installation might be now attested for the Aššur-temple

(MARV 5, 60: 31).42

The attestation in MARV 5, 60 is not completely reliable

because the word is almost completely restored and there are no parallels.43

So the

presence of the karmu-installation in the temple area in the MA period is not clear.

However, at least one karmu is attested in the sphere of the temple of Nabû in Kalhu

in the Neo-Assyrian period.44

Another granary is said to be in the house of the crafts-

men (É LÚ*

um-ma-nu), which according to S. Parpola might have belonged to the

temple of Ištar in Tušhan (Ziyaret Tepe).45

The presence of the karmu-installation in

the temple area does not necessarily rule out the possibility that this granary had

official status, because the temple was supplied by the palace (i.e. the royal

administration) and in this respect fell under the jurisdiction of the royal adminis-

tration.46

d) The royal granary and other storage facilities

The karmu was not the only type of granary in operation during the Middle Assyrian

period. Other facilities used for this purpose were the ḫašīmu, the nakkamtu, and the

qub/p(u)tu.47

These buildings differed from each other in terms of their construction

technique and their form. As previous studies have noted (see point 1), the royal

granary’s distinctive structure set it apart from other types of building, comprising a

double set of long rooms to the right and the left of a middle long corridor. Fortu-

nately, the philological and archaeological evidence coincide in this case and allow

the identification of part of Building P of Dūr-Katlimmu and Andrae’s “Poternen” in

Ashur as royal granaries.48

40 BATSH 9, 90: 2–3.5–6.8–10; see above under 1.1. 41 Llop 2010, 107 and note 17 following Freydank, personal communication. 42 See Freydank / Feller 2004, p. 13a ad 60; following Freydank and accepting his recons-

truction Röllig 2008, 26b. 43 The damaged traces on the tablet mean that the reading k[ar-mu] on MARV 5, 60: 31 is

only a guess (collated, 6th September 2010). 44 ND 5457 (Iraq 19 pl. 27) 13–14: … ŠE.PAD.MEŠ TA* kar-me ša dPA, cited by Parpola

2008 pub. 2009, 78 note 141. 45 Parpola 2008 pub. 2009, no. 13 and see the commentary to line 9 (page 75). 46 As an example, the provincial governors were responsible for the sending of the ginā’u-

offerings for the temple of Aššur, Jakob 2003, 131. 47 See Harrak 1989, Jakob 2003, 321–328, and Röllig 2008, 25f. For qarītu, CAD Q, 133

“storeroom, granary”, see Deller 1989, 260 “inn, Kneipe”. 48 For an identification of some rooms of the South Palace of KTN with a royal granary see

Llop 2005, 49.


27

On the other hand, whereas the karmu, the ḫašīmu, and the qub/ptu served almost

exclusively as granaries,49

this was not the case of the nakkamtu.50

Thus, a further

distinction between these granaries may have been the intended use of the barley

stored in these places. According to C. Johnson in his recent paper at the 56th RAI of

Barcelona, the barley used for production expenses was stored in a qub/p(u)tu,

whereas the grain remaining after these deductions was stored in a karmu. Some new

attestations for the nakkamtu as a place for storing flour are now known from TSA.

Two documents from this site mention flour being removed (našer) from a

nakkamtu.51

Other structures are attested in the MA documentation as being used for storing

purposes, although this was probably not their original function. This was the case of

towers (sing. asittu) used to store barley and fat.52

We find wool stored (?) at the

entrance of the courtyard (kisallu) of a building in a document possibly coming from

KTN.53

In fact, a ḫašīmu54

and a nakkamtu55

are said to be in a courtyard, and a

šaḫūru-house is attested as storing old sesame in DKL.56

Röllig assumes that this

šaḫūru-building belonged to a temple, but this type of building is also attested in the

palace area,57

which might be also the case here. The presence of royal granaries

next to an oil-house (É.Ì, É ša Ì)58

and on/in a terrace (tamliu)59

in DKL was attested

only very recently.

2. The Neo-Assyrian karmu

The karmu as (royal) granary continues to exist in Neo-Assyrian times. It is attested

in legal and administrative texts as well as in letters. In most instances it occurs—as

in the Middle Assyrian period—in a context of state administration. After a brief

49 A ḫašīmu is used once to store bronze vases, KAJ 303: 15 (Freydank / Saporetti 1989, 44

and 82), cited by CAD Ḫ, 141a. 50 The nakkamtu is used mainly to store precious metals, textiles, tools, and equipment (CAD

N/I, 183), but also sesame (MARV 3, 9: 5.12; MARV 3, 50: 5), barley (MARV 5, 51: 2.9.13;

MARV 7, 53: 5.9; MARV 8, 66: 6'), and flour (MARV 9, 20: 11'; TSA T 93-47 and TSA T

98-36, courtesy of F. A. M. Wiggermann). 51 TSA T 98-36 and T 93-47, both courtesy of F. A. M. Wiggermann. 52 A karmu is located in and next to a tower: BATSH 9, 74: 25; 84: 7; 86: 10.12. Towers are

mentioned as storerooms in BATSH 9, 83: 13 and DeZ 4022: 3; see already Jakob 2003, 328

and note 121 as well as Röllig 2008, 26b. A tower is also mentioned in a fragmentary context

in a list of rations from Ashur, MVA 53: 12. 53 MARV 1, 27 + 3, 54: 25–26: (SÍG.MEŠ)… i+na né-re-be ša ki-sa-li É d[(x)]UTU, Jakob

2003, 459 reads the name of the building (in line 30) as the temple of Marduk; cf. Llop 2003

pub. 2007, 121 and note 64. 54 MARV 7, 86: 15–16. The ḫašīmu granary is also often linked to members of the royal

administration, for instance the governor of the land (šakin māti): MARV 5, 41: 6–7; MARV

5, 44: 6–7; MARV 7, 76: 6–7; MARV 7, 89: 2–3, r. 4'–5'. 55 KAJ 178: 5–6 (Freydank / Saporetti 1989, 40 and 79). 56 BATSH 9, 83: 1–5; see Röllig 2008, 26b. 57 Pedde / Lundström 2008, 168–176, in the Old Palace of the city of Ashur. The šaḫūru

attested in KAJ 310: 66 (Postgate 1988, no. 50) may not be in a temple area, Postgate 1988,

115 ad 66. See also Meinhold 2009, 27f. 58 BATSH 9, 76: 20f. and BATSH 9, 77: 15f. 59 BATSH 9, 86: 3.7–8, BATSH 9, 87: 8, and BATSH 9, 91: 5 (the last one cited already by

Jakob 2003, 323).


28

presentation of the data already known, the special focus of this second part will be

on a recently published text coming from a private archive in Ashur.

2.1. A brief overview

Information furnished by documentary evidence about the Neo-Assyrian karmu is

scarce and scattered. Therefore, many aspects remain obscure. What can be ascer-

tained is that the karmu served as a store for corn and straw60

and that it is still

attested in Assyria proper as well as in (some of) the Western and Northern provin-

ces.61

The corn and straw stored in a karmu seems to have grown on crown land, the

official in charge was the rab karmāni “chief of the granaries”.62

There were many

rab karmāni in the empire and it is not clear how their particular areas of respon-

sibility were defined.63

It is also unclear whether they were under direct control of

the king or under the authority of the governors.64

As would be expected, the karmu-

granaries supplied the state apparatus (royal court, army, travelling missions).65

A

60 See Postgate 1974, 402. The remarks in this work are still the main reference to the subject. 61 For Assyria proper see note below, note 63 on the diverse origins of the official called rab

karmāni. For the Western provinces see SAA I, 181: 18; SAA I, 210: rev. 10; eventually SAA

I, 264: rev. 3.8. For the Northern provinces see above, note 45. 62 The available evidence is provided by three debt-notes from Kalḫu dating to the post-

canonical period, according to which the barley (CTN III, 14) and straw (CTN III 15–16)

administered by the rab karmāni had their origin in taxes (nusāḫu and šibšu respectively)

raised on royal land “lent” to government servants as their means of livelihood. For this

interpretation see Postgate 1974, 180–181 and 191–192. According to this author, the texts are

assessments for taxes which have not been paid. A different opinion is held by S. Dalley in the

commentary to CTN III, 14 (p. 67), who understands the transactions as provisions for food

processing or for consumption. This, however, does not affect the provenance of the commo-

dities. 63 Postgate 1974, 198. Most of the texts mentioned there have been re-edited: SAA XII, 72:

rev. 12 (chief of the granaries of Nineveh), SAA VI, 37: 2 (chief of the granaries of Maganuba

at Dūr-Šarrukēn). In the letter SAA X, 96 (= ABL 43 = LAS 309 = Postgate 1974, 247),

Akkullānu, priest of the temple of Aššur at Ashur, informs the king (most likely Assurbanipal)

about the cities that have failed to send the regular offering (ginû) of barley and emmer to the

temple of Aššur. The only exception is represented by the mention of a rab karmāni among

the cities (the rab karmāni is followed by a personal name, which nevertheless also refers to a

city; see PNA 1/II, 367b s.v. Daiān-Adad no. 3). The explanation to this may be that

Akkullānu was referring to his own city, so that he felt free to omit its name and instead

pointed to the official responsible for the failure. 64 Postgate 1974, 231–232. Cf. also SAA I, 181, a letter of a provincial governor (probably

Bēl-liqbi from Ṣūpat) to the king (Sargon II), complaining about the undue behaviour of an

official apparently sent by the king. Inter alia he opened the king’s granaries (kar-me ša

LUGAL) without permission by the deputy (governor). It is noteworthy that no rab karmāni is

mentioned here. Moreover, another storage facility for grain is mentioned, which seems to be

under direct control of the governor: padakku, translated as “silo” by Parpola and as “grain

bin(?)” by CAD P, 2b. Cf. also CTN II, 135: 1, a note of stored grain, where a padakku is

mentioned beside a karmu (and two villages). 65 See esp. CTN III, 14 (supply of barley for preparing aṣūdu-food for the king), CTN V, p. 3

(= Postgate 1974, 395: supply of fodder for horses of a delegation on journey), SAA I, 181

(supply of fodder for horses of chariot troops). A special case is represented by SAA X, 96,

according to which the rab karmāni (of Ashur?, see above, note 63) was supposed to deliver

ginû-offerings to the temple of Aššur at Ashur, i.e. he was involved in the day to day


29

karmu could also be attached to a temple, but due to the paucity of evidence all

interpretation of this aspect remains speculative.66

2.2. The karmu at Assur

The tablet presented below contains the first certain attestation of a karmu in Neo-

Assyrian Ashur. It was unearthed on April 2nd 1906 during the excavations of the

Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft at Ashur and is kept at the Vorderasiatisches Museum

in Berlin. Selected words and lines of the text have already been quoted in the litera-

ture. Following the recent publication of a hand copy of the tablet it is now possible

to present a complete transliteration and translation of the text.

KAN 4, 62 (VAT 20391)

T.E. 1 [NA4

KIŠIB mx-x-x]-⌈’a⌉

Obv. cylinder seal impression

2 [É ep-šú a-di GIŠ.Ù]R.MEŠ-šú GIŠ

IG.MEŠ-šú

[Éku-u]r

?-⌈ḫú

?! É⌉ [ŠU

?]-⌈a⌉-te

⌈É ub⌉-sa-a-te É KÁ te-nu-ri

5 ⌈ša⌉ mman-nu-⌈ki⌉-LÚ

tú.MEŠ

ú-piš-ma [m]⌈ŠEŠ

!⌉-u-a-a-a

ina ŠÀ-b[i] ⌈40+x⌉ [MA.N]A URUDU.MEŠ

a-na mman-[nu-ki-LÚ]⌈

tú⌉.⌈MEŠ⌉

i-š[im kas-pu gam-mur ta-din]

10 ⌈É⌉ [za-rip la-qi tú-a-ru]

DU11.D[U11 la-áš-šú]

man-nu š[a i-na ur-kiš ina ma-te-ma]

l[ú-ú mman-nu-ki-LÚ

tú.MEŠ]

14 ⌈lu⌉-[ú DUMU.MEŠ-šú]

B.E. [TA*] [m]

Š[EŠ-u-a-a-a]

Rev. [l]u-⌈ú DUMU.MEŠ⌉-šú de-⌈e⌉-n[u]

DU11.DU11 ub-ta-u-ni

1 MA.NA KÙ.BABBAR 1 <MA.NA> KÙ.GI

ina bur-ki dNIN.LÍL i-šá-kan

20 ina de-<ni>-šú i-da-bu-<ub>-ma

la-a i-la-qí

SUḪUR É mku-ta-ki

SUḪUR su-qa-qu

SUḪUR ka-ár-mu

25 IGI mqa-ti-nu

IGI md

XXX-KAR-ir

IGI mḫu-ḫu-te-’e

IGI ma-bat-aš+šur-NU-te-ni

provisioning of this institution. On the royal provisions for temples see Postgate 1974, 213–

216. 66 See above, notes 44 and 45.


30

IGI maš+šur-KAR-⌈ir⌉

LÚ*KA.KEŠDA

30 IGI m⌈tar⌉-di-tú-aš+šur

[I]GI mu-zu-ma-lu

[IGI] maš+šur-A-AŠ

LÚ*ḫu-du-<ra>-a-a

[ITI]⌈x⌉ U4.22 lim-mu

[mEN-IGI.L]AL-an-ni

35 [LÚ*]

[tur-t]a-nu

L.S. two fingernail impressions ṣu-pur mman-nu-ki-LÚ

tú.MEŠ [EN É]

1[Seal of ...].

(Cylinder seal impression) 2[A built house with its be]ams (and) its doors,

3[(including) a work]shop

?, [a win]g

?,

4a storehouse (and) a bakery,

5belonging to Mannu-kī-amēlūtu—

6Aḫū’āia has treated

(it as object of purchase) and thus 7assign[ed] (it) for 40+x [min]as of copper

8to

Man[nu-kī-amēl]ūtu. 9[The price has been paid completely].

10The house [is legally

acquired. Any revocation (or)] 11

litiga[tion is void]. 12

Whoever [in the future, at any

time] 13

—be [it Mannu-kī-amēlūtu] 14

or [his children]—16–17

seeks a lawsuit or

litigation 15

[against] A[ḫū’āia 16

o]r his children, 18

shall place one mina of silver (and)

one (mina) of gold 19

in the lap of Mullissu. 20

He shall contest in his lawsuit 21

and not

succeed. 22

(The purchased house) adjoins the house of Kutaki, 23

an alley, 24

(and) a

granary.25

Witness: Qatinnu. 26

Witness: Sīn-ēṭir. 27

Witness: Ḫuḫute’. 28

Witness:

Abat-Aššūr-lā-tenni. 29

Witness: Aššūr-ēṭir, tailor. 30

Witness: Tardītu-Aššūr. 31

[Wi]tness: Uzumalu. 32

[Witness]: Aššūr-aplu-iddina, ḫundurāiu. 33

[Month of ...],

22nd

day, eponym year of 34

[Bēl-ēmu]ranni, 35

[commander-in]-chief.

(Two fingernail impressions) 36

Fingernail of Mannu-kī-amēlūtu [owner of the

house].

The text records the sale of a house in the year 686 BC (reign of Sennacherib).67

It

follows the wording of Neo-Assyrian conveyance tablets, but at the same time shows

some peculiarities concerning both formulation and content. Therefore, some general

comments will be made before going on with the main subject. The text is written

from the point of view of the seller (ex latere venditoris), which is rather infrequent

in Neo-Assyrian times,68

and the price is paid in copper, the metal most often used as

currency in the eighth century, but largely substituted by silver in the seventh centu-

ry.69

More remarkable is the fact that the buyer Mannu-kī-amēlūtu (l. 8) seems to be

also the owner of the purchased house (cf. ll. 5 and 36).70

If we reject the easy solu-

tion of assuming a scribal mistake, this apparent contradiction may be solved by

considering the house as a pledge that is redeemed by the debtor and owner from the

possession of the creditor.71

Documents that record the redemption of a pledge are

67 The eponym’s name was read in a different way by Klengel-Brandt / Radner 1997, 144 and

PNA 1/I, 222b s.v. Aššūr-šimanni no. 2d: [maš+šur]-ḪAL-an-ni. Accordingly, the text has

been dated to the year 724, but this seems to be too high (see below). 68 See Radner 1997, 346–348. 69 See Radner 1999, 129. 70 PNA 2/II, 683 s.v. Mannu-kī-aḫḫē no. 5 reads mman-nu-ki-ŠEŠ.MEŠ in ll. 5 and 8 (line

numbering is different there) and mman-nu-ki-LÚ-tú.MEŠ in l. 36. However, the name is the

same in all three cases. 71 The Neo-Assyrian pledge was a security for loans and other debts that the creditor took into

his possession (“Besitzpfand”). When the debtor repaid the loan, he received back his


31

rarely attested in Neo-Assyrian times. They are phrased like an ordinary conveyance

but usually add the verb paṭāru “to release”.72

This, however, does not seem to be

the case in the present text, perhaps because the operative section is written—as

already mentioned—from the point of view of the seller/creditor. In addition, the

penalties for litigation are normally addressed to the seller and his (male) descen-

dants, whereas in our document it is probably the buyer/debtor who is thought liable

to lay claim to the agreement. Accordingly, but anew against the current practice, the

buyer/debtor (not the seller) seals the tablet with his fingernails on the left side. All

these observations strongly support the assumption that the tablet was drawn up on

behalf of the seller/creditor and not, as usual, of the buyer, perhaps as a consequence

of a legal dispute concerning the pledge. The cylinder seal impression on the obverse

should belong to a municipal authority, even if the seal identification does not seem

to include an official title.73

The description of the purchased house is not completely preserved.74

In any case

it includes a storehouse and a bakery,75

the latter being rarely attested.76

The boun-

daries of the house are mentioned in an unexpected part of the text, namely before

the witnesses, as if the scribe had forgotten to insert them at the usual place after the

description of the house. It adjoins the house of an otherwise unknown Kutaki,77

an

alley, and a karmu. This term had been interpreted by K. Radner as denoting a ruin.78

Nevertheless, given that this would be the only attestation for such a meaning in the

Neo-Assyrian legal corpus, that there exists another Neo-Assyrian word for ruin

(ḫarbānu)79

, and that the institution of the (royal) granary is certainly documented

for the Neo-Assyrian period (see under 2.1), we may confidently understand karmu

in the present text as referring to a granary.80

The meaning “ruin” seems to be prima-

rily attested in royal inscriptions, which are not written in the Assyrian language but

in Standard Babylonian.81

property. If this is the case in our text, then the price paid for the house should be the amount

owed to the creditor. There are some examples of contracts in which a debt is secured by the

pledge of a house; see Radner 1997, 383–384. On the character of the Neo-Assyrian pledge

see Postgate 1976, 52–54. 72 See Postgate 1976, 29. 73 For this sealing practice, which is so far attested only in Ashur, see Klengel-Brandt/Radner

1997, 137–138. E. Klengel-Brandt has published the corresponding seal impression in KAN 4,

p. 65 and pl. 3. 74 Line 3 is read by Radner 1997, 288: [É ma-a-a]-li É ⌈NIM?⌉. Cf. also Villard 2006, 521: “[un

bēt mayā]li / un [bēt kisal]li, un étage? (é nim?)”. Admittedly, the current spelling for bēt qāti

is É ŠU.2.MEŠ, not É ŠU-a-te, but see StAssT 3 69: 7: É ŠU.2-[t]e. The word kurḫu is usually

written Ékur-ḫu, but see CTN III, 2: 3: Éku-ur-ḫu. 75 Presumably, a separate room for baking bread, not directly integrated into the cooking area,

is meant here; cf. Miglus 1999, 197 (referring to Neo-Babylonian houses): “Es könnte sich [...]

um von der Küche unabhängige Brotbackzimmer handeln, wie es sie noch heute oft im Orient

gibt”. 76 See Radner 1997, 265 for an unpublished text from Ashur kept in a private collection and

eventually SAAB 9, 73: 6 with commentary on p. 36 (the line is read differently by Radner

1997, 285 ad VAT 9359). 77 Cf. PNA 2/II, 644b. 78 Radner 1997, 255. 79 See Deller / Millard 1985, 48b and Radner (preceding note). 80 Note, however, that the spelling of the word is uncommon. It is normally written kar-

mu/me, but this, as we have seen, is not the only peculiarity in the text. 81 Cf. Parpola 2007, 47a.


32

Is it possible to say something about the location of the granary in the light of the

find spot of the text? The tablet was unearthed together with other documents in a

private house, called house n° 67 by the excavators, in the north-western corner of

the city.82

The house was built directly next to the city wall and had two courtyards

with at least four chambers and a narrow room connecting the courtyards.83

If the

interpretation of our text is correct, i.e. if the tablet was made up for the seller /

creditor and was kept by him, we would not expect the purchased house to be

identical with the excavated house.84

Anyway, a look at the archival context may be

worthwhile. Our sale document was found together with other tablets, most of them

loans and work contracts dating to the second-half of the 7th century (post-canonical

period). The best attested person is Aššūr-erība, who is supposed to be the owner of

the archive and the head of the family living in house n° 67 in the late Assyrian

period.85

Aššūr-erība was a ḫundurāiu like his neighbour Mudammiq-Aššūr of house

n° 66 and like many of the persons attested in their respective archives.86

The exact

meaning of the term ḫundurāiu is still a matter of debate, but the suggestion by J. N.

Postgate taking them as professional transporters best reflects the commercial cha-

racter of their activities.87

It seems that they constituted a distinctive group among

the population of Ashur, linked by their private businesses, which included the wine

trade, and probably also by a common residential area.

It has been argued that the owner of our document was the seller/creditor

Aḫū’āia. In all probability he was identical with the father of the ḫundurāiu Sākip-

Aššūr, who was a contemporary of Aššūr-erība and a close associate of Mudammiq-

Aššūr.88

It is likely that Aḫū’āia was also a ḫundurāiu. In a document from the year

668, Aḫū’āia acts as first witness for Dād-aḫḫē, the father of Mudammiq-Aššūr, thus

82 The area is also known as “Außenhaken” according to the denomination by the excavators

(see Andrae 1913, 108–118). In this case the term is a little bit misleading, since the “Außen-

haken” was part of the fortification system in the reign of Shalmaneser III (858–824), but was

dilapidated in the 7th century, when the excavated houses were built there. The “Außenhaken”

was a walled area that had an outer gate at the Northwest front (“unteres Tor”) and an inner

gate (“oberes Tor”) at 110 metres to the South. After the reign of Shalmaneser III the two

gates were blocked and the area became a residential quarter that probably extended to the

East and South beyond the former fortification wall (Andrae 1913, esp. pp. 114 and 116, and

Miglus 1997, 77; differently Castel 1992, 156: “dans un quartier cerné d’une muraille”). 83 Preusser 1954, 53–55, pl. 24–25; Castel 1992, 156–158, pl. 60, 78; Miglus 1999, 149;

Åkerman, 1999–2001, 250–254. 84 Radner 1997, 286 suggested that the conveyance SAAB 9, 33 (VAT 9369) found in the

adjacent house 66 (on the find spot see Pedersén 1998, 137 note 15, correcting previous

statements) documented indeed the sale of house 67. On the significance of house descriptions

in sale documents, also in view of the archaeological record, see the critical remarks by

Villard 2006, 523–524. 85 Pedersén 1986, 93–96; Åkerman, 1999–2001, 230–231 and 254–256. Given that other

groups of tablets concerning the same persons were unearthed in the immediate surroundings

of house n° 67 it is likely that Aššūr-erība owned one or two more houses nearby. Pedersén,

op. cit. considered all these groups as belonging to one archive, which he called N 10. The

bulk of the texts has been published by Fales / Jakob-Rost 1991, 120–133. 86 For the archive of Mudammiq-Aššūr s. Pedersén 1986, 85–93 (N 9); Fales / Jakob-Rost

1991, 3–120 with appendix 1–2 on pp. 133–137; Åkerman, 1999–2001, 222–230. 87 Postgate 1995. Cf. also Fales / Jakob-Rost 1991, 25–26. If Postgate is correct, it is perhaps

not a mere coincidence that the ḫundurāiu-families lived in a quarter near to the Tabīra gate,

the main entrance to the city. 88 See PNA 1/I, 71a s.v. Aḫū’āia n° 5 and PNA 3/1, 1066a s.v. Sākip-Aššūr n° 4.


33

confirming his affiliation with the older generation of the ḫundurāiu-families.89

Unfortunately, it is not possible to say what kind of relationship Aḫū’āia had to

Aššūr-erība, who apparently kept the former’s deed in his archive.90

Almost nothing

can be definitely said about Mannu-kī-amēlūtu, the other contracting party in our

text, who is attested only here. Nevertheless, if we assume that he belonged some-

how to the circle of the ḫundurāiu-families and that the house he redeemed lay so-

mewhere in the neighbourhood, the adjoining karmu should be located in this part of

the city, too. This assumption becomes interesting in view of the fact that a location

of the Middle Assyrian karmu has been proposed north of the Tabīra gate, close to

the residential quarter where our tablet has been found.91

It is clear from the archaeo-

logical record that the structure identified as the Middle Assyrian karmu did not exist

anymore in the Neo-Assyrian period.92

Unfortunately, the late Assyrian remains in

this part of the city have been destroyed to a great extent by a wadi.93

Anyway, a

new building serving the same function is likely to have been constructed in this

area, revealing continuity both institutional and topographical.94

References

Åkerman, K., 1999–2001: The “Aussenhaken Area” in the City of Assur during the

Second Half of the 7th

Century BC. A Study of a Neo-Assyrian City Quarter and

Its Demography. SAAB 13, 217–272.

Andrae, W., 1913: Die Festungswerke von Assur. Berlin.

― 1972: Das wiedererstandene Assur. München.

Arnaud, D., 1991: Textes syriens de l’âge du Bronze Récent. Barcelona.

Castel, C., 1992: Habitat urbain néo-assyrien et néo-babylonien. De l’espace bâti ... à

l’espace vécu. Paris (2 vol.).

Deller, K., 1987: Review of Freydank, MARV 2 (1982). AfO 34, 58–66.

― 1989: Review of CAD Q (1982). Orientalia 58, 255–282.

Deller, K. / Millard, A. R., 1985: Zwei Rechtsurkunden aus Aššur im British

Museum. AfO 32, 38–52.

89 Among the witnesses of our text, there are two persons who also appear in documents of

Dād-aḫḫē: Qatinnu (l. 25, see PNA 3/I, 1010b) and Aššūr-ēṭir (l. 29, see PNA 1/I, 185a, n° 3).

Furthermore, a ḫundurāiu called Aššūr-aḫu-iddina is attested as witness as well (l. 32). 90 There is no direct filiation, since the father of Aššūr-erība was probably a certain

Kakkullānu (see Fales/Jakob-Rost 1991, 15). 91 Llop 2005, 51–52. W. Andrae, chief excavator of the Ashur expedition of the Deutsche

Orient-Gesellschaft, interpreted the vaulted structures now identified with the Middle

Assyrian royal granaries as part of the city’s fortification (Andrae, 19772, 89–91). He called

them “Poternen” and defined them as “tunnelartige, enge Mauerdurchlässe am Fuße der

Festungsmauern. Sie erlaubten den Verteidigern heimliche Ausfälle und verhinderten das

Nach- und Eindringen des Angreifers durch ihre Enge” (Andrae 19772, 323). This inter-

pretation was questioned in subsequent studies, but without any alternative proposal; see for

example Miglus 1997, pl. 4, where the alleged “Poternen” are not part of the city wall, which

is reconstructed west of them. 92 The structure was cut into by the fortification wall of Shalmaneser III. Between this struc-

ture and house n° 67 there lay a distance of approximately 70 metres. 93 See Miglus 1997, 77. 94 Perhaps the Neo-Assyrian building was less important architecturally, because Ashur was

no more the capital city.


34

Dercksen, J. G., 2004: Old Assyrian Institutions. Leiden.

Donbaz, V., 1998: Assur Collection Housed in Istanbul. General Outlines. In S. Alp /

A. Süel (eds.): Acts of the III International Congress of Hittitology, Çorum, 16–

22 Eylül, 1996. Çorum. Pp. 177–178.

― 2009: Two Middle Assyrian Contracts Housed in Istanbul. In M. Luukko et alii

(eds.): Of God(s), Trees, Kings, and Scholars: Neo-Assyrian and Related Studies

in Honour of Simo Parpola. Helsinki. Pp. 353–360.

Fales, F. M. / Jakob-Rost, L., 1991: Neo-Assyrian Texts from Assur. Private

Archives in the Vorderasiatisches Museum of Berlin. Part 1. SAAB 5, 3–157.

Freydank, H., 1991: Beiträge zur mittelassyrischen Chronologie und Geschichte.

Berlin.

― 1994: Drei Tafeln aus der Verwaltung des mittelassyrischen Kronlandes. AoF 21,

13–30.

― 1997: Noch einmal zum Vorgang pišerti karū’e. In B. Pongratz-Leisten et alii

(eds.): Ana šadî Labnāni lū allik. Beiträge zu altorientalischen und mittel-

meerischen Kulturen. Münster. Pp. 129–143.

― 2010: Betrachtungen zur Weidewirtschaft in Dūr-Katlimmu. In H. Kühne (ed.):

Dur-Katlimmu 2008 and Beyond. Wiesbaden. Pp. 87–100.

Freydank, H. / Feller, B., 2004: Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungs-

texte V. Saarbrücken.

Freydank, H. / Saporetti, Cl., 1989: Bābu-aḫa-iddina. Die Texte. Rome.

Harrak, A., 1989: Middle Assyrian bīt hašīmi. ZA 79, 61–72.

Jakob, J., 2003: Mittelassyrische Verwaltung und Sozialstruktur. Untersuchungen.

Leiden / Boston.

― 2009: Die mittelassyrische Texte aus Tell Chuēra in Nordost-Syrien. Wiesbaden.

Klengel-Brandt, E. / Radner, K., 1997: Die Stadtbeamten von Assur und ihre Siegel.

In S. Parpola / R. M. Whiting (eds.): Assyria 1995. Helsinki. Pp. 137–159.

Llop, J., 2003 pub. 2007: Das Wort rīmuttu „Geschenk“ in der mittelassyrischen

Dokumentation. Isimu 6, 115–128.

― 2004: Karmu-ša-Ištar oder Speicher in Tall Faḫarīja. NABU note 65.

― 2005: Die königlichen „grossen Speicher“ (karmū rabiūtu) der Stadt Assur in der

Regierungszeit Salmanassars I. und Tukultī-Ninurta I. MDOG 137, 39–53.

― 2006: Eine Bearbeitung der mittelassyrischen Urkunde Aula Orientalis Supple-

menta 1, Nr. 106. In G. Olmo Lete et alii (eds.): Šapal tibnim mû illakū. Studies

Presented to Joaquín Sanmartín on the Occasion of His 65th

Birthday. Barcelona.

Pp. 275–280.

― 2010: Barley from Ālu-ša-Sîn-rabi. Chronological Reflections on an Expedition

in the Time of Tukultī-Ninurta I (1233–1197 BC). In J. Vidal (ed.): Studies on

War in the Ancient Near East. Collected Essays on Military History. Münster.

Pp. 105–116.

Meinhold, W., 2009: Ištar in Aššur. Untersuchung eines Lokalkultes von ca. 2500

bis 614 v. Chr. Münster.

Miglus, P. A., 1997: Das Wohngebiet von Assur. Berlin.

― 1999: Städtische Wohnarchitektur in Babylonien und Assyrien. Mainz am Rhein.

Parpola, S., 2007 (ed.): Assyrian-English-Assyrian Dictionary. Helsinki.

― 2008 pub. 2009: Cuneiform Texts from Ziyaret Tepe (Tušhan), 2002–2003.

SAAB 17, 1–113.


35

Pedde, F. / Lundström, S., 2008: Der alte Palast in Assur. Architektur und

Baugeschichte. Wiesbaden.

Pedersén, O., 1986: Archives and Libraries in the City of Assur. Part II. Uppsala.

― 1998: Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East, 1500–300 B.C. Bethesda,

Maryland.

Postgate, J. N., 1974: Taxation and Conscription in the Assyrian Empire. Rome.

― 1976: Fifty Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents. Oxford.

― 1988: The Archive of Urad-Šerūa and His Family. A Middle Assyrian Household

in Government Service. Rome.

― 1995: Some Latter-Day Merchants of Aššur. In M. Dietrich / O. Loretz (eds.):

Vom Alten Orient zum Alten Testament. Festschrift für Wolfram Freiherrn von

Soden zum 85. Geburtstag am 19. Juni 1993. Neukirchen-Vluyn. Pp. 403–406.

Preusser, C., 1954: Die Wohnhäuser in Assur. Berlin.

Radner, K., 1997: Die neuassyrischen Privatrechtsurkunden als Quelle für Mensch

und Umwelt. Helsinki.

― 1999: Money in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In J. G. Dercksen (ed.): Trade and

Finance in Ancient Mesopotamia. Istanbul. Pp. 127–157.

― 2004: Das mittelassyrische Tontafelarchiv von Giricano / Dunnu-Ša-Uzibi.

Turnhout.

Röllig, W., 2008: Land- und Viehwirtschaft am unteren Ḫābūr in mittelassyrischer

Zeit. Wiesbaden.

Sassmannshausen, L., 2001: Beiträge zur Verwaltung und Gesellschaft Babyloniens

in der Kassitenzeit. Mainz am Rhein.

Villard, P., 2006: Les descriptions des maisons néo-assyriennes. In P. Butterlin et

alii (eds.): Les espaces syro-mésopotamiens. Dimension de l’expérience humaine

au Proche-Orient ancien. Volume d’hommage offert à Jean-Claude Margueron.

Brepols. Pp. 521–528.

Weidner, E., 1963: Eine Erbteilung in mittelassyrischer Zeit. AfO 20, 121–124.

Faist_Llop_2012_The Assyrian royal granary (karmu)

Documents

Transcript of Faist_Llop_2012_The Assyrian royal granary (karmu)