Some Letters from Sennacherib

by Damien F. Mackey “If the "king, my lord," was Shalmaneser, we must conclude that Sargon built the city of Dur-Sharrukin, ("Sargon's Fortress"), when he was still a prince, i.e., before 721 B.C.”. Brazilian correspondent A Brazilian researcher has written to me concerning a series of letters of Sennacherib that are generally thought to constitute his correspondence, as Crown Prince, with the Assyrian king, Sargon II. If this were to prove true, then it would completely shatter my thesis, as argued in various articles, that Sennacherib was Sargon II. For example: Sargon II and Sennacherib: More than just an overlap (7) Sargon II and Sennacherib: More than just an overlap | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu The Book of Tobit gives the neo-Assyrian succession for this period as “Shalmaneser”, “Sennacherib”, and “Esarhaddon” (1: 15, 21), with no mention whatsoever of a Sargon. And that is the sequence that I firmly follow. Surely Tobit himself would have known the correct neo-Assyrian order. Had he not served Shalmaneser at a high official level?: Tobit may have been King Shalmaneser’s Rab Ekalli (11) Tobit may have been King Shalmaneser's Rab Ekalli | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu And had he not been hounded from his home by a vengeful Sennacherib (Tobit 1:19-20) – but was later “allowed” to resume his normal existence by Esarhaddon (1:22)? The Brazilian researcher opened the correspondence with this e-mail (26th February, 2024): …. I was conducting research on Assyrian correspondence on the website https://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/saa01/corpus/ and came across a series of letters from Crown Prince Sennacherib addressed to King Sargon, including mentions of Dur-Sharruken, (see letter SAA 01 039). I imagine you are already familiar with these letters and could help me understand how to interpret them. …. At the time I was researching the Tudors: Henry VIII’s palaces missing (DOC) Henry VIII's palaces missing | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu and my response that same day was admittedly somewhat knee-jerk and hasty, I not taking due cognizance of the mention here of “Dur-Sharruken”. I wrote back: …. These letters are like the El Amarna letters, supposedly addressed to pharaohs, but not mentioning any pharaohs - or even Egypt sometimes. They are addressed to "the king my lord", who could be Shalmaneser, or some other potentate. …. To which the correspondent sensibly replied: …. Thanks for the clarification. It's always nice to talk to you. However, one question remains. If the "king, my lord," was Shalmaneser, we must conclude that Sargon built the city of Dur-Sharrukin, ("Sargon's Fortress"), when he was still a prince, i.e., before 721 B.C. And if he was a prince, don't you think it would be too daring to build it and give it his own name, or even to build a gigantic palace? …. This time around I was a little more circumspect: .... I said, or some other potentate. How do we know that Sennacherib was then Crown Prince? And, that he was actually writing to an Assyrian monarch? …. [End of e-mail exchanges] The intriguing question (for me, at least) now arises: TO WHOM WAS SENNACHERIB WRITING? The Letters There are twelve (12) letters in this “series of letters”: They typically open with the greeting [029]: [To] the king, my lord: [your servant] Sin-ahhe-riba [Sennacherib]. Good health to the king, my lord! [Assyri]a is well,[the temp]les are well, all [the king's forts] are well. The king, my lord, can be glad indeed. Some, though, e.g. [030] do not: "[...... I have] appointed your [major]-domo in [my] palace." Same with [040]. Some thoughts Firstly, I now think it most unlikely that Sennacherib was addressing an Assyrian king. Why then say: “[Assyri]a is well …”? Neither Shalmaneser, nor Sargon (if he were not Sennacherib), would need to be told that! Secondly, with the mention of Dur-Sharruken [-kin] [039], completed in Sargon’s Year 16/17, according to my estimation (thesis, 2007, p. 393), then - presuming that these 12 letters are basically contemporaneous - Shalmaneser becomes irrelevant. Sennacherib, though, does not, if he is (as I believe) Sargon II. My tentative conclusion: Sargon II/Sennacherib was writing, as King of Assyria, to a contemporary foreign brother-king of equal power with whom he shared a treaty.