. 16
( 55 .)


a-[de-e sa MAN ina SU l]u-ba-[™i-u] . . .
ˇ´ ´
lim-m[u . . . ] 13 I AN.SAR.DU.A MA[N kur aˇ +ˇ ur IGI I . . . ]
´ ˇ II sa! [DUMU.MAN]
Lu.GA[L . . . ]
14 15 I
´ IGI a-da-lal LU.DUMU.SU ˇ ´
16 Id
I]M-ba-ba-u lu DUMU.SUII 17 sa DUMU.MAN 18 IGI
aˇ +ˇ ur-DINGIR-a-a IGI [x] [ . . . ] x x [ . . . ]-ri 21 [ . . . ] x
I 19 20
1 “6
It is now mutually agreed:113 the one who shall give Amat-
adimri, the daughter of Attar-qamu, to Shamash-k¯ nu-usur, the son
e .
of Samaku [who was killed] in place of blood [money] and wash
the blood away.114 6 “8 If he does not give the woman, they will kill
him on top of115 Samaku™s grave. 9 “10 Whoever breaches the con-
tract with the other party116 shall pay 10 minas of silver [1,000

113 Literally, “Now that [a hand] has been mutually extended.” Both parties have agreed to the
conditions and the tablet is, then, a statement of the agreement. The form ittatrus is a Gt perfect
of tarasu, which is otherwise unattested (cf. AHw III, 1327). In fact, von Soden, in AHw, reads
i-ta-ru-us, as do Kohler and Ungnad, Assyrische Rechtsurkunden, 388, which would be a simple
G perfect. However, there are a fair number of hapax Gt forms, and the reciprocal meaning is
appropriate here.
114 Kwasman reads lines 2“6 as follows: “Shamash-knu-usur, the son of Attar-qamu, the scribe,
shall give KUR-adimri, the daughter of Attar-qamu, the scribe, in place of blood money for
Samaku [who was murdered] and washes the blood away,” (Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents,
¯ ¯s
393). However, in order to render it this way, Kwasman must separate maruˇ u from the fol-
I sa-ma-ku, posit that it refers back two lines to Attar-qamu and claim that
ˇ ¯
lowing phrase, sa
despite the single occurrence of the personal name Attar-qamu, it is linked to both Shamash-
k¯ nu-usur and KUR-adimri. Furthermore, Kwasman assumes that the ¬rst three signs in line 4
e .
are LU.A.BA, . upˇ arru, “scribe.” These signs, to be sure, are given in C. H. W. Johns™s copy
of ADD 321 (Assyrian Deeds and Documents [2d edition; Cambridge: Deighton, Bell, and Co.,
1924]), but Parpola has collated the line and determined that the third sign is na, thus LU a-na
(“Collations to Neo-Assyrian Legal Texts from Nineveh,” Assur 2/5 [1979], 49).
115 The prepositional phrase ina muhhi is a bit ambiguous since it can mean either “on top of”
or “nearby,” but the sense of it, as translated here, works well in this context.
116 Literally, “whoever transgressed before someone shall pay . . . ,” meaning “to act against

an agreement.” Cf. the numerous attestations in Neo-Assyrian contracts, CAD N/I s.v. na-
balkutu, 13.

shekels]. 10 “11 Assur, Shamash and the oath of the king will call
him to account. 12 “21 Eponym of . . . of Assurbanipal, king of the
land of Assyria. Witness: . . . , the chief . . . Witness: Adalal, the mar
qat¯ of . . . Witness: Adad-Baba™u, the mar qat¯ of the crown prince.
¯e ¯ ¯e
Witness: Assur-ilaya . . .

ADD 321 conforms to the pattern of a court order:
lines 2 “6 : The guilty party is required to discharge his obligation;
lines 6 “8 : The penalty for the guilty party™s failure to comply is given;
lines 9 “10 : The penalties that devolve upon either party for repudiating
the agreement are stated.118
In the process of settling a homicide dispute, this document represents
the intermediate point between the initial claim and the ¬nal disposition.119
A third party, the crown, has mediated a proposed settlement that appears
to be acceptable to both parties. The payment is said to be “in lieu of the
blood” and to “wash the blood away,” alluding to an idea similar to the
Israelite conceptualization that the spilled blood of the homicide victim has
a concrete existence that needs to be remedied. This is also re¬‚ected in the
use of the term b¯ l damˆ to refer to the killer and to the claimant from
e e
the victim™s family.
ADD 164 re¬‚ects the further progress of a case by recording the court™s
con¬rmation of the payment the guilty party must make. In ADD 164, Hani
has killed shepherds in the course of stealing livestock from the crown prince.
The tablet does not record the number of shepherds killed or the number
of animals stolen.120 He was ordered to pay 300 sheep and an unspeci¬ed

117 It ¯ ¯e
is unclear what type of of¬ce is held by the mar qat¯ , since there is no other reference
to it.
118 Cf. Postgate, Fifty Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents, 59f, and Roth, “Homicide in the Neo-
Assyrian Period,” 357. This penalty clause is not in con¬‚ict with that in lines 6 “8 because the
penalty in lines 6 “8 is speci¬c to a killer who would otherwise be subject to the death penalty
if he did not pay compensation for the killing. It would appear that if the killer did not provide
the slave woman, he would be killed as punishment for the killing, and then his kin would have
to pay as well.
119 Roth argues that ADD 321 contains a variation on this pattern. She holds the opinion that

the court order in line 1 is expressed as the protasis of a conditional sentence, “If it is mutually
acceptable” (“Homicide in the Neo-Assyrian Period,” 357). According to Roth, this raises the
possibility that the settlement is dependent upon the agreement of the victim™s family, who may
choose not to accept it. However, her understanding of the ¬rst line as a protasis is incorrect.
While a protasis may be marked or unmarked by a conditional particle (the particle uma is
equivalent to the Old Babylonian inanna, “now”) and a verb in the protasis must be either
in the perfect or durative, the syntax appears to be a simple declarative sentence. The perfect
signi¬es that the action, the mutual extending of a hand signifying agreement, is occurring or
has occurred.
120 The omissions may be due to the fact that this document is the court™s determination of the

amount of blood money for each victim. Another document recorded the progress of the case
in determining how many shepherds and sheep were killed.

¬ne as well, as compensation for the victims in the amount of two talents of
copper per person. Hani was not able to pay and so has been arrested.
de-e-nu sa lu sar-tin-nu 2 a-na I ha-ni-i e-m`-du-u-ni 3 3 me UDU.MES
˜ ´ˇ ˇˇ
a-di sa-ar-ti-ˇ i-na 4 sa DUMU.MAN ina IGI I ha-ni-i 5 US.MES sa
´ ˇ
´ ´ ´ ˇ
LU.SIPA 1-en LU 2 GU.UN URUDU.MES 6 sa-ar-tu-ˇ u121 I ha-ni-is´
ˇ su a-di A.SA.MES-ˇ u 8 ku-um 3 me UDU.MES
ˇ` ˇ s´ ˇ
a-di UN.MES-ˇ ´
ˇ ˇˇ ´ ˇ
a-di sa-ar-ti-ˇ i-na 9 ku-<um> US.MES sa LU.SIPA.MES 10 na-ˇ i-
´ s s
<<na>> 122 11
ˇ´ s´
man-nu sa u-ba-™u-ˇ u-u-ni
´ ´
lu-u LU.GAR-nu-ˇ u lu-u LU.GAL ki-sir-ˇ [u] 13 lu-u mam-ma-
s´ . s´ ´
ˇ a-di sa-ar-ti-ˇ u-na
s´ s´ ´
nu-ˇ u-nu u-ba-™u-u-ˇ u-ni 3 me UDU.MES s
15 ´ ˇ ˇˇ ´ ´ ´ ˇ ´
I 17 18 I
´s .
i-da-an-nu-u-ni ha-ni-i u-ˇ e-sa hur-sa-an i-tu-ra IGI tab-ni-i
I˜ ˜ 20 IGI I d UTU.ZI.AS 21 IGI I am-
´ ˇ
LU.A.BA IGI sal-mu-MAN-iq-bi
si-i 22 ITU.ZIZ UD 27 KAM 23 lim-mu I da-na-nu
A court decision which the sartinnu imposed on Hani. 3“4 Required
of Hani are 300 sheep inclusive of their ¬ne belonging to the crown
prince. 5“6 His ¬ne is the blood money for a shepherd, 2 talents123
copper per person. 6“10 In lieu of 300 sheep inclusive of their ¬ne
and in lieu of the blood money for the shepherds, Hani together
with his people and his ¬elds are to be taken. 11“16 Whether his gov-
ernor124 or his bodyguard captain125 or whoever litigates for them
shall give the blood money for a shepherd, 2 talents of copper per per-
son, for his life.126 16“17 He shall redeem Hani. He refuses the river

121 To what do lines 5“6 refer? Is 1-en LU to be taken as the blood money and the copper as the
¬ne, or is 1-en Lu to be construed with the copper? Although the ¬rst possibility is supported by
the fact that Neo-Assyrian can express “and” by parataxis (as translated by Kwasman, Legal
Transactions of the Royal Court of Nineveh, 212), this may not operate here because the plural
determinative in line 9 refers to additional shepherds killed by Hani. It appears more likely,
then, that the two talents of copper are to be paid for each victim. CAD D, 79b, renders lines
5“6 as “his ¬ne as blood money for the shepherds is two talents of copper per person, he will
give the blood money for the shepherds “ per person two talents of copper.”
122 Postgate notes that the form na-ˇ i-na is impossible and that its appearance must be due to
the -ˇ i-na in lines 3 and 8 (Fifty Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents), 159.
123 There are two weights in Neo-Assyria, a heavy and a light, which is half the weight of the

heavy. Without an indication, it seems impossible to determine to which the text refers. One
heavy talent is equivalent to 3,600 heavy shekels or 7,200 light shekels.
124 Cf. CAD S/I, especially in the Neo-Assyrian legal texts referenced on pp. 184“185.
125 Cf. CAD K, 436“438.
126 The meaning of LU-ti in line 16 is dif¬cult. Postgate argues that while Neo-Assyrian usage

of a™ luttu can refer to a man in his status as a servant, it is possible that in the context of murder
it refers to “human life” (Fifty Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents, 160). Postgate notes as well
that it might not refer to the murdered man but to Hani himself while serving in debt-slavery.
´ ´ s´
Kwasman argues that LU-ti was a scribal error for sa-ar-ti-<ˇ u> caused by the LU sign in the

ordeal.127 18“23 Witness: Tabni, the scribe. Witness: Salmu-sharru-
iqbi. Witness: Shamash-napishtu-iddin. Witness: Amsˆ. 11th month,
27th day, eponym of Dananu.

The nature of this document and its relationship to the archive in which
it was found have been debated. Postgate suggested that this was an of¬cial
record rather than a legal document to be retained by one of the parties.128
It differs from other Neo-Assyrian legal records in that it does not give a de-
scription of the progress of the case but states the court™s decision. However,
Kwasman argues that this text was part of the royal archives at Nineveh,
which included private documents as well as state administrative and liter-
ary documents.129 He identi¬es this text as constituting a single-document
archive belonging to an individual, that of Hani, which was part of the
larger royal archives. There are a number of dif¬culties with Kwasman™s
claim. First, although Kwasman hoped that recognition of the documents™
provenance as an archive would aid in understanding their context as
archives deposited for safekeeping in a royal archive, it is doubtful that the

preceding line (Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents, 129), but to me, this appears unlikely since it
involves multiple errors.
127 Lines 16b“17 are problematic for two reasons: 1) The verb used with the noun hur-sa-an,
“river ordeal,” in the phrase hur-sa-an i-tu-ra is obscure, and 2) the verbs are in a sequence of
durative and then preterite. With regard to the ¬rst problem, the primary dif¬culty is the verb
tuaru, “to return,” and its relationship to the noun, hur-sa-an, “the river ordeal.” The sign in
Johns™s edition is de¬nitely tu. Postgate argues for the reading tu because of the appearance of the
verb tuaru, “to return,” in other legal documents (Fifty Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents, 160).
Kwasman argues against Postgate™s position and states that tuaru is never attested for hursan
and that since the river ordeal needs to be completed in a legal action, a verb like parasu ˜would
be appropriate (Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents, 129). Hence, he emends tu to ba and proposes


. 16
( 55 .)