Position in chronology
Ashurbanipal 218
Translation — scholar edition
RINAP 5(1') (No translation possible) (5') [... S]halmaneser (III), s[on of ...] ... [... Ashurba]nipal, great king, stron[g] king, [...] of Nineveh [...]
Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period, volume 5 — scholar edition (ORACC).
Spotted an error? Suggest a correction — confirmed corrections feed the engine's knowledge base.
Why it matters
Fragmentary Sargonid royal inscription invoking a lineage from Shalmaneser III to Ashurbanipal: one of dozens of RINAP 5 witnesses reconstructing how late Assyrian kings crafted dynastic legitimacy in monumental text.
Transliteration
[...] x x [...] / [...] LU SI [...] / [...] x AD AN x [...] / [...] x-e šá uš-[...] / [... md]⸢sál⸣-ma-nu-MAŠ ⸢DUMU⸣ [...] / [...] ⸢NU⸣ NUMUN? MA ṢI x x [...] / [... mAN.ŠÁR]-⸢DÙ⸣-A LUGAL GAL LUGAL ⸢dan-nu⸣ [...] / [...] ⸢šá⸣ NINA.⸢KI⸣ [...] / [...] x [...]
Scholarly note
Royal inscription of Ashurbanipal or a late Sargonid successor, edited by Jamie Novotny & Joshua Jeffers (RINAP 5, 2018–). ORACC text Q007626.
Attribution
Image: BM — (British Museum, London, UK) — from Nineveh (mod. Kuyunjik) — Photo via Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (cdli.earth/artifacts, P425056). source
Translation excerpted from Novotny, J. & Jeffers, J. 2018–. The Royal Inscriptions of Ashurbanipal (668–631 BC), Aššur-etel-ilāni (630–627 BC) and Sîn-šarra-iškun (626–612 BC), Kings of Assyria. RINAP 5. University Park, PA: Eisenbrauns. https://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap5/Q007626/.
Related tablets
Related sources
An early example of administrative writing from Uruk. Its fragmentary numerical entries and commodity signs document record-keeping during the formative period of writing.
An early witness to systematic administrative notation at Kish. Its signs and numerals can be catalogued, but that does not establish a full translation or prove that it is the world's first writing.
An early surviving historical monument that joins named rulers, a territorial dispute and religious oaths. It shows how a city-state turned victory into a lasting public claim, without establishing that this was the first recorded conflict.