Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- tasmetu-sarrat [2014/08/07 09:41] – dahl
+++ tasmetu-sarrat [2014/10/23 17:18] (current) – hawkins
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==== Tašmētu-šarrat ====
-Tašmētu-šarrat was probably Sennacherib’s second wife. According to Reade, it is likely that she overlaps with Naqī’a and is possibly the mother of Aššur-nadin-šumi. She is known from an inscription on a votive vase, which merely states her name and position as Sennacherib’s queen (MI<sub>2</sub>.E<sub>2</sub>.GAL). The existence of an inscription of her own is significant on its own-not anyone could do that. She is also known from Sennacherib’s building inscription where she is called “the queen” (MI<sub>2</sub>.E<sub>2</sub>.GAL) and a “beloved wife” (Teppo 2005: 38). Sennacherib built a palace in Nineveh for his “beloved wife” (Macgregor 2012: 85). The inscription found on a lion colossus from the South-West Palace at Nineveh in unique in that it seems to reflect the genuine feeling of the king towards his wife. Sennacherib records here how he built a palace for “the queen, my beloved wife, whose features Belet-ili has made perfect above all women” (Svärd 2012: 106).
+Tašmētu-šarrat was probably Sennacherib’s second wife. According to Reade, it is likely that she overlapped with Naqī’a and is possibly the mother of Aššur-nadin-šumi. She is known from an inscription on a votive vase, which merely states her name and position as Sennacherib’s queen (MI<sub>2</sub>.E<sub>2</sub>.GAL). The existence of an inscription of her own is significant on its own-not anyone could do that. She is also known from Sennacherib’s building inscription where she is called “the queen” (MI<sub>2</sub>.E<sub>2</sub>.GAL) and a “beloved wife” (Teppo 2005: 38). Sennacherib built a palace in Nineveh for his “beloved wife” (Macgregor 2012: 85). The inscription found on a lion colossus from the South-West Palace at Nineveh in unique in that it seems to reflect the genuine feeling of the king towards his wife. Sennacherib records here how he built a palace for “the queen, my beloved wife, whose features Belet-ili has made perfect above all women” (Svärd 2012: 106).
 Reade writes that visual evidence suggests that both Naqī’a and Tašmētu-šarrat contributed to the policies characteristic of Sennacherib’s rule (Teppo 2005: 39). Indeed, by the beginning of the 7th century BC, the queen was invested with more and wider-reaching authority than ever before. The textual and archaeological record suggests that, by the time of Sennacherib, the nature and responsibilities of the queen had undergone a deep change. Most significantly perhaps, the queen now commanded her own standing army (SAA 06, [[http://cdli.ucla.edu/P335529|164]], reverse 4-5, 11-12: LÚ.GAL-ki-ṣir ša MI<sub>2</sub>.E<sub>2</sub>.GAL; LU<sub>2</sub>.GAL-ki-ṣir KI.MIN; LU<sub>2</sub>-3-šu<sub>2</sub> ša MI<sub>2</sub>.E<sub>2</sub>.GAL, from the reign of Sennacherib, 686 BC. See Radner 2012: 692, fn 5), as did also the crown prince. This seems to have been a strategy inspired by the king’s desire to shift power away from the magnates to members of his immediate family (Radner 2012: 692, 693).