Jump To:
Cross-Checking the Eponym Lists
Limmu Lists
In Assyria, calendar years were recorded using a system by which each individual year was named after a prominent figure in the royal court. Several lists of these eponyms have been found at Nineveh, Assur, and Sultantepe, all of which fall into two basic formats:
- Assyrian Eponym List (9 manuscripts): These documents simply list the names of the eponymous individuals in order, without any extraneous information given.
- Assyrian Eponym Chronicle (10 manuscripts): Although still rather sparse, these lists represent a development of the eponym style. The names of the eponyms are once again listed in order, but additional details about the eponym’s title and major events also accompany each year’s entry. The large majority of these events are simply recorded as “to PN,” usually interpreted as a significant military campaign directed against the given place name.
For the neo-Assyrian period, the earliest entries begin in 910 BCE (in the reign of Adad-Nirari II) and cover a span of 261 years (for the use of eponyms in the final decades of the neo-Assyrian empire, see Dating the End of the Assyrian Empire). The high degree of agreement between these manuscripts, in combination with a reliable dating anchor, thus allows us to reconstruct neo-Assyrian history with a relatively high degree of precision.
Bibliography:
Finkel, I. L., and J. E. Reade. “Lots of Eponyms.” Iraq 57 (1995): 167–172.
Glassner, Jean-Jacques. Mesopotamian Chronicles. Translated by Benjamin R. Foster. Writings from the Ancient World 19. Atlanta, GA: SBL Press, 2004.
Millard, A. R. (Alan Ralph), and Robert M. Whiting. The Eponyms of the Assyrian Empire 910-612 BC. State Archives of Assyria Studies 2. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 1994.
Cross-Checking the Eponym Lists
One of the ways that scholars are able to critically assess the accuracy of the Limmu Lists is by cross-referencing the duration of kings’ reigns recorded in the Limmu lists with the numbers provided in the Assyrian Kings List and, in later periods, Ptolemy’s Canon. In both cases, the degree of correspondence is remarkable. This agreement has been variously interpreted, either as an indication of historical accuracy or of literary dependence. In either case, the coordination of these documents bespeaks a thoroughgoing interest in the creation and preservation of chronological records during this period.
Assyrian Kings List
The Assyrian Kings list is a continuous list of the names of Assyrian kings with the length of their reigns. It is attested in three incomplete copies (The Khorsabad King’s List being the most complete) and a few fragments, and it seems to have borrowed its format from earlier such lists, dating to the Middle Bronze Age. The lists from Assyria extend into the 8th century BCE, ending with Shalmaneser V, and has likely been rewritten and updated. Significantly, the durations of the reigns of the kings provided in this list very closely follows the durations given in the Limmu Lists and, later, Ptolemy’s Canon. Although the various witnesses to the Kings List show some discrepancies in the Middle Assyrian period, the numbers in the neo-Assyrian period are remarkably stable.
Ptolemy’s Canon
This canon is a list of ANE kings, preserved by the Greek astronomer Ptolemy, meant to provide a chronological framework for records of astronomical data. The kings listed date back to 747 BCE, overlapping with the Limmu Lists by almost 100 years. By synchronizing the astronomical observations in the canon with modern calculations, we are able to date the accession year of Sargon to the eponymity of Mannu-ki-Assur-li in 709 BCE. Tablets from the reign of Sargon (K 5280 and K 2688) synchronize the events of his life with eponyms, and the absolute dating of these eponyms line up with the dates provided by the Bur-Sagalê Eclipse. Thus, we have an additional witness to the accuracy of the absolute dates assigned to the Limmu Lists.
Bibliography:
Depuydt, Leo. “‘More Valuable than All Gold’: Ptolemy’s Royal Canon and Babylonian Chronology.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 47 (1995): 97–117.
Glassner, Jean-Jacques. Mesopotamian Chronicles. Translated by Benjamin R. Foster. Writings from the Ancient World 19. Atlanta, GA: SBL Press, 2004.
Hagens, Graham. “The Assyrian King List and Chronology: A Critique.” Orientalia 74.1 (2005): 23–41.
Valk, Jonathan. “The Origins of the Assyrian King List.” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History 6.1 (2019): 1–17.
Yamada, Shigeo. “The Editorial History of the Assyrian King List.” Zeitschrift Für Assyriologie Und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 84.1 (1994): 11–37.
The Neo-Assyrian Calendar
The Mesopotamians recorded time through a luni-solar system, meaning that they measured months using the lunar phase cycle (29.5 days, beginning every new moon), and years using the solar year (365.25 days). The discrepancies between these two systems created a deficit of 11.25 days each solar year. This deficit was overcome in Babylon by the addition of an extra month at a specific interval (7 times every 19 years). The placement of the “leap” month within the calendar seems to have depended on the date when Jupiter first appeared on the horizon with the rising sun, but letters between Assyrian astronomers and the kings indicate that the process of intercalation was somewhat ad hoc (Porpola 45).
Bibliography:
Parpola, Simo. Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. 2 vols. Alter Orient Und Altes Testament 5. Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1983.
Cohen, Mark E. The Cultic Calendars of the Ancient Near East. Bethesda, MD: CDL Press, 1993.