Assyrian chronology is restorable with probable year-exact precision to almost two centuries earlier than Hammurabi’s first year (1792 BCE). Šamši-Adad I (Assyrian King List [AKL] #39) was a contemporary and ally of that Babylonian Amorite monarch. The triple astronomical anchoring of his reign makes it possible to determine that his first official year of rule as king of Assyria began in the second half of 1809 BCE. (Before Šamši-Adad I imposed the Ekallātum calendar on them, the Assyrians began their calendar years in mid-autumn, whereas under Šamši-Adad, the calendar year started in mid to late summer.)
The combined Kültepe Eponym Lists (KEL) and the Mari Eponym Chronicle (MEC) contain nearly the complete number of eponyms, dating back to the reign of Erišum I (AKL #33). Distanzangabens (anciently recorded long-term interval calculations) put the start of that twentieth-century-BCE ruling period 166 years earlier in 1975 BCE. Based on the number of eponyms (limmu) in the KEL, many scholars place Erišum I’s first year in 1973 BCE. This minor discrepancy of two years is not too difficult to resolve:
One eponym is missing from the KEL. The eponym lists recorded in Kültepe were dependent on Assyrian business people traveling to Anatolia and bringing news of the latest limmu within months after the calendar year had begun in their homeland. However, what would have happened if warfare was so severe in northern Mesopotamia (Assyria’s area) that the merchants could not make that trip for an entire year? Such a circumstance almost certainly occurred in the Assyrian calendar year of 1810/09 BCE. Šamši-Adad and his sons were at war as they vied for control of the kingdom of Assyria. The MEC and AKL both have an eponym not recorded in the KEL, “Atamar-Ištar,” which is also known as “warki Munawwirum” (the year following the eponymy of Munawwirum). The AKL states explicitly, “In the eponymy of Atamar-Ištar, Šamši-Adad went up from Ekallātum. He overthrew the rule of Erišum [II], son of Naram-Sin [AKL #37], and took the throne.” That accounts for one of the missing eponymies. What about the other one?
The AKL notes that the six kings just before Erišum I had unknown numbers of limmu-officials, and no regnal periods appear on the AKL before Erišum. Thus, he was the first king on the list with a recorded reign length. It is certainly no coincidence that year-names or eponyms also began in his reign. Nevertheless, their initial purpose for naming years after Assyrian officials was probably not for ensuring long-term chronological accuracy. That arrangement was likely to honor his faithful subjects and to inspire their loyalty.
Erišum’s recorded 40-year reign was likely a rounded figure based on the number of years from his coronation to his death. Moreover, he probably did not begin his rule with the eponym arrangement already in place. He and his officials probably conceived of that idea during his first year as king, and they likely implemented it at the start of the following calendar year.
If this scenario is correct, the 40 eponyms associated with his name were from his second year through his forty-first. Because he apparently died in the first half of that 41st year, the Assyrians counted it as the first year of his successor, Ikūnum. Thus, Erišum’s reign was from 1975/74 through 1935/34 BCE, and the approximate dates of his coronation and death were plausibly in late autumn 1975 and late winter or early spring 1934 BCE. Thus, his reign must have lasted a few months longer than 40 years.
These explanations account for both missing eponymies. Therefore, the Venus Tablets Middle Chronology model of the Babylonian Amorite Dynasty is precisely extendable back to the year 1975/74 BCE in the Assyrian timeline via the Hammurabi-Šamši-Adad-I synchronism.
One comment