CHIEFLY FROM NIPPUR. 43 



5. The second king of the Pashe dynasty, according to List b, reigned only six 

 years. And indeed, while the titles and conquests of Nebuchadrezzar I in his "Frei- 

 brief " imply a comjDaratively long reign, there are indications that his immediate 

 successor, Belnadinaplu, ruled but a short time. This does not necessarily follow 

 from the circumstance that the document on Plates 30 and 31 is dated in the fourth 

 year of his reign ; but from the fact that Tab-ash ap-Marduk, 1 son of Esagil- 

 zer, 2 already mentioned under Nebuchadrezzar I as governor of Halwan, appears 

 again as sukallu in the first year of Marduk-nadin-ahe, i. e., about twenty years later ; 

 for it is very unlikely that the same person occupied a high and responsible position 

 under three successive kings, if both of the former two had reigned a long period. 



6. Finally this assumption enables us in the simplest way to dispose of certain 

 chronological difficulties, upon which 1 cannot enter into details here (cf. e. g. Z. A. 

 Ill, p. 269). 



The statement of Sennacherib 3 furnishes us with a definite datum for the chronol- 

 ogy of the Pashe dynasty. As it seems most natural to connect the carrying off of the 

 images of the gods of Ekallati, with Marduknadinahe's victory over Assyria, in the 

 tenth year of his reign/ we obtain 1107 B. C. as the tenth year of that king's rule, 

 and 1116 B. C. as the year of his accession to the throne. In accordance with what 

 has been said above, Nebuchadrezzar I reigned 1139-1123 B. C., 5 and Bel-nadin- 

 aplu in 1122-1117 B. C. 



A word remains to be said as to the length of the period covered by the Pashe 

 dynasty. That the reading of seventy -two years which have been generally assigned to 

 it is impossible, Peiser has shown beyond question by a very simple calculation. 6 

 The number of twelve years for the seventh king of this dynasty, assumed by Tiele 



1 The reading Tabu-ri'eu-AIaruduk, "A beneficent king is Marduk," preferred by Tiele (Gesch., p. 161, note 1), 

 instead of that given above (and first proposed by Oppert and Menaut in Documents Juridiques), needs no refutation. 

 Tab-ashap- Marduk is the only possible one and means "Good is the exorcism of Marduk." The Oaillou de Michaux 

 upon which Tab-ashap-Marduk, apparently not so far advanced in years, likewise appears, belongs to the reign of 

 Nebuchadrezzar I or of Belnadinaplu (cf. Tiele, I. c, p. 161, and Hommel, Gesch., pp. 454, 459). 



2 That Esagilzer is identical with the Ina- Esagilzer of the Za'aleh stone (col. II, 12), was shown in my commen- 

 tary on the " Freibrief Nebukadnezar's I," in 1882, which at the time was not printed because of a two years' illness. 

 At present the proof of their identity is unnecessary. Cf. Eulbar-shurki-iddina, III R. 43, col. I, 29, and Ina-Eulbar- 

 shurki-iddina, V R. 60, col. I, 29. Cf. also Delitzsch, Koss'der, p. 15 (cf. however Gesch., " tlbersicht "). To a dif- 

 ferent effect Jeremias in B. A. I, pp. 270, 280 ; and Peiser in Schrader's K. B. Ill, Part 1, p. 177. 



3 Bavian, 48-50. " Ramman and Sala, the gods of the city of Ekallati, which Marduknadinahe", king of Akkad, 

 at the time of Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, carried off and brought to Babylon, 1 carried out of Babylon 418 years 

 later, and brought them back to Ekallati, to their place, " i. e., in the year B. C. 689, when Sanherib conquered Babylon. 



4 Cf. Ill, R. 43, col. 'I, 5, 27, 28. 



6 This calculation confirms strikingly the year 1130 B. C, which I gave as the approximate date of his "Frei- 

 brief" in 1883. 



6 Z. A. VI, p. 268 seq. 



