This paper argues that the two instances of the name Ila-kabkabi in the Assyrian King List (AKL) refer to two separate people. The majority of scholars follow the 'legitimisation' hypothesis and consider the two attestations as references to the father of Šamši-Adad I. The argument follows that by placing his father's name in an early section of the AKL, Šamši-Adad I attempted to legitimise his rule over Aššur. However, the evidence from Aššur and Mari does not support such a view. Further, the genealogy of the Neo-Assyrian king, Adad-nirari III, from Calah indicates that the Assyrian tradition did not consider the two instances of the name Ila-kabkabi in the AKL to refer to the same person. As a result of the porposed existence of two different people name Ila-kabkabi in the AKL, I argue that the foundation of the 'legitimisation' hypothesis is undermined.
|Number of pages||11|
|Publication status||Published - 2007|