Position in chronology
Esarhaddon 048
Translation — scholar edition
RINAP 4(1) When the god Aššur, king of the Igīgū and Anunnakū gods, father of the gods, lord of the lands; the god Anu, the powerful, the foremost, whose spoken order no god can alter; the god Enlil, greatest lord, the one who decrees the fates of heaven and netherworld (and) makes the dwellings secure; the god Ea, the wise, lord of wisdom, creator of (all) creatures, the one who fashions everything, whatever its name; (5) the god Sîn, the one who constantly renews himself, the pure god, the one who determines decisions (and) reveals signs; the god Šamaš, the great judge of the gods, the one who…
Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period, volume 4 — scholar edition (ORACC).
Spotted an error? Suggest a correction — confirmed corrections feed the engine's knowledge base.
Why it matters
Opens with a seven-god invocation — Aššur through Šamaš — that maps the full Assyrian divine hierarchy, anchoring royal authority in cosmic order at the height of Esarhaddon's empire.
Scholarly note
Royal inscription of Esarhaddon, edited by Erle Leichty (RINAP 4, 2011). ORACC text Q003277.
Attribution
Image: BM — (British Museum, London, UK) — from Nineveh (mod. Kuyunjik) — Photo via Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (cdli.earth/artifacts, P393794). source
Translation excerpted from Leichty, E. 2011. The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria (680–669 BC). RINAP 4. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. https://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/rinap4/Q003277/.
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.