“The True Image of the God…:” Adoration of the King’s Image, Assyrian Imperial Cult and Territorial Control

There are periods in human history marked by worshiping a mortal ruler. Often these periods are also the periods of imperial expansion, when royals seek legitimacy. Nevertheless, the perception of divinity does not always permit a direct deification of an emperor.We owe the vagueness in definition of a “divine” king or kingship to our sources, which are not precise on this matter. Recently in her monumental study of Assyrian religion and ideology, Beate Pongratz-Leisten wrote:

Iw ill utilize this approach in my present article. Iw ill not attempt at rationalization of the adoration of royal images, since the Assyrians themselvesd id not rationalize it.They just usedi ta st ool for ideological and religious oppression. Albeitt he Assyrians exercised "theological imperialism," they did not deprive locals of their owng ods, but subjugated peoples were obliged, as Iw ill show,t ow orship theirm ighty oppressors,b oth gods and men.
The present paper will address the question of the adoration of the king's imagea saroyal strategy of legitimation in the periods of expansion of the Neo-AssyrianE mpire as well as study all the pictorial and written sources and their interconnections.The imageo ft he king was perceiveda s" the true image of the god." It called to mind for the targeta udience the whole complex of the "tales of royalty" and created ac limate for the king'sl egitimation. The royal imagea lone stood for the entire complex system of royal propaganda and evoked associations deeplyr ooted in the audience'sw orldview.
pearance of anotion of aroyal imageinatext⁶ "provoked narrative" in the mind of aviewer or reader.This very notion of the royal imagewas thus transmedial or multimodal. Constant repetition of the ceremonieso fa doration of royal images consolidated social perception of them and createdac limate for royal legitimation.⁷ Stelae installed as monuments and mentioned in texts memorialized Assyrian tales of royalty.

Worship of Royal Images in Assyria
The question of worship of the king and the king'si magei nt he Neo-Assyrian period has been heavilyd isputed by philologists and historians.A rguments for and against this worship were put forward in the course of this discussion, while interpreting rather scarcet extual evidence. Surprisingly,m ost art historians, while having at their disposal vast and unequivocal sourcee vidence, avoid discussing it and rely on their philologists-colleagues.⁸ Middle and Neo-Assyrian, and closelyrelated to them Neo-Babylonian, texts dealing with the creation of the king payspecial attention to the perfection of the king'si mage.⁹ Thisa spect is particularlyc elebrated, and interwoven into other aspectso fr oyalty.The king'si deal look is the most important of the royal features,a nother royal insignum. Itsp erfection, which is reached through the very act of creation, is repeatedlystressed. The supernatural character of the royal exterior is reflected in the king'sdivine splendor and strengthened by simile of the king'sappearance to the divine image.¹⁰ The idea that the king'sform is aperfect imageo fagodw as broadcasted by the veneration of royal images.
The king is the main protagonist of pictorial narrativeso ft he palaces -an aspect inherent also in royal inscriptions. Royal stelae playedaparticularlyi mportant role in Neo-Assyrian imperialism. The representations on stelae in the Neo-Assyrianp eriod werea ctuallyr educed to the imageo ft he king (e. g., Fig. 1b). All the venerated royal images known to us weree ngravedu pon stelae or stela-formed rock reliefs,which bear idealized effigies of ak ing lacking personal features.
Iwill arguefor the existenceofthe royal cult in the Neo-Assyrian period and try to define its specific form. As for the imposition of this cult outside Assyrian heartland, in provinces and vassal states,i tp robablyw ent hand-in-hand with conquest itself, but what form did this cult have?

Written Sources ¹¹
Texts use two terms regarding royal images: ṣalam/ṣalmū šarri and ṣalam šarrūtija. The literal translation of these terms should be very close, but theirm eaningsastermini technici differ.Wolfram vonSoden does not differentiatebetween them and translates both as "Königsstatue" or "Relief."¹² CAD however distinguishest hreec ases of usage for ṣalam šarri: general, "statue, relief, drawing," etc.¹³ of an amedk ing,¹⁴ of "kingsi ng en.,"¹⁵ and special category of "deified royal images worshiped in temples."¹⁶ Exploration of the usage of each of the terms ṣalam/ṣalmū šarri and ṣalam šarrūtija could lead to their more accurate understanding.

A. Revered Ṣalam šarri
There are five categories of usageofṣalam šarri to designatedeified royal image: 1. An imageofaking appears in the inventory lists of images of gods in the temples. These lists werep art of the tākultu ritual text of the akītu festival.¹⁷ Ṣalam šarri in these listsi sw ritten ideographicallym ostly with the determinative of divinity d alam/nu.man.
Ṣalam šarri is attested in the list of divine statues thatstood in Assyriantemples. In one copy of these lists, tablet K. 252, found in the library of Ashurbanipal, it appears twice: as d ṣalam(alam)-šarri(man)¹⁸ and as d ṣalam(alam)šarri(man) šá min₅ (i.e uru A[rba]-ìl in vii 18′). ¹⁹ In the other list of gods, itemizingstatues in the temples of the city of Aššur, the so-called Götteradressbuch,t he royal imagei sw ritten as (d) nu.man.Various copies of this list,d ating from Shalmaneser III to Sīn-šarru-iškun are known.²⁰ In the Götteradressbuch d nu.man occurs five times. Alltogethers ix deified royal images are listed there.²¹ 2. In the Late Assyriandocuments the imageofaking occurs as adivine witness to contracts along with gods and humans both with and without the determinative of divinity.
Oaths were sworn before ṣalam šarrisaswell as before the divine symbols or statues.²² Shigeo Yamada suggested that alsot he Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon weres worn before the images of the king and his heir Ashurbanipal, as well as they weres worn before the godA ššur and the other gods.²³ Moreover,r ecently publishedt ablet of the Vassal (or Succession) Treaties from Kinalūa( Tell-Tayinat),²⁴ provides an evidence that not onlyi mages of Esarhaddon and his crown prince designated, but also those of all the Assyrian princes wereinstalled in the temple at Kinalūa. They served witnesses of the oath togetherw ith the gods and werea dored together with them (seeb elow).
Ar oyal effigya ppears together with the divine witnesses Nabû and Šamaš on the legal contracts from the Assyrian provinceG ū z ā na (Tell Halaf). In two documents, ṣalam šarri is mentioned twice among otherd ivinew itnesses.²⁵ In the first of these Gūzāna contracts (no. 112)d ivine witnesses and the deified royal imageare separated from the human ones by the date formula. In the second (no. 113) the royal effigy terminatesthe list of the threedivine witnesses, and the human witnesses follow after him. It is worth noting,that the samek ind of documents, originatingfrom Assyrianmainland, reveals amore careless attitude to the order of appearance of the witnesses: divine and human witnesses are mixed as on the economic tablet from Kalḫu.²⁶ The same carelessness in order of appearance of the divine and human witnesses occurs in the record of purchase of as lave girl by Mannu-kī-Arba'il, cohort commander (6 80 -673B CE) of Esarhaddon. The tablet originates from Nineveh.²⁷ There is no other textual differentiation between human and divine  Lauinger2 012,H arrison and Osborne 2012.  Ungnad 1967, 62,n o. 112: 5 -7, 622* BCE: maḫar(igi) Nabû( [d] muati) maḫar(igi) d Š[á]-maš maḫar(igi) Ṣalam-šarri( d nu.man)( followed by the datef ormula and the list of human witnesses); Ungnad 1967, 63,n o. 113:8 -9( =V AT 16387): maḫar(igi) [ Na]bû( d [mu]ati) maḫar(igi) Šamaš( d utu) maḫar(igi) Ṣalam-šar[ri](nu.ma[n])( followed by the list of human witnesses). Dalley (1986,91) suggested that the gods stand in contracts instead of the usual formulas of penalties for perjury. Machinist (2006,179) proposed that the imagesofEsarhaddon and his sons servea so ath witnesses for the Vassal Treaties as well. Both documents arem oney-lend contracts,a nd the lender,a sw ella sn ot onlyt he divine, but also part of the human witnesses arei dentical. An interesting fact is that in these documents occurs aw itness called Mār-šarriilâ'i, "the crown princei sm yg od." All together five individuals bearingt his name are known (PNA7 41-742s .v.M ā r-šarriilâ'i). Those of them firmlyd ated are attestedi nt he reign of Ashurbanipal or later,t hat means they were born most probablyw hen he was ac rown prince.  Parker 1954, 33,5 4, ND 2080:1 0 -12, 644* BCE): šúi na šumi(mu) m Nabû( d muati)šarru(man)-naṣir(pab) maḫar(igi) md Ṣal-mu-šarri(man) maḫar(igi) Šamaš( d utu) m Nabû( d muati)-išdē(suhuš)-ia-ukīn(gin). Noticeh ere šumu(mu) ṣalmi(nu) an-ni-e d! Adad(u)išdē(suhuš meš )-ia-ukīn(gin) šum(mu)-šu, "the name of this image is Adad-Established-My-Fundament is its name" (see also CAD Ṣ 83b-84a and Pognon 1907, 107, pl. 5: 6onthe Neo-Assyrian stelao fM u š ē zib-Šamaš,t he governor of Dērw ith the theophoricn ame of the same sense. witnesses, apart from the order of appearance, which is observed and matters onlyi np rovincial documents. 3. d Ṣalam/Ṣalmu-šarri as the theophoric element in the names (Ṣalam-šarri-iqbi) written ideographicalyorphonetically with or without divine determinative.²⁸ Ṣalam-šarri-iqbi is an extremelyf requent Assyrian name meaning "the royal imageh as commanded."²⁹ Up to thirty individuals with this name are known.³⁰ All of them livedi nt he times of the Sargonids. At least half of the Ṣalam-šarriiqbisa re known from the time of Ashurbanipal. As for the rest,f ivea re mentioned in documents are dated to the period after Ashurbanipal'sr eign, three to the seventh centuryB CE, one to the reign of Sennacherib, one to the reign of Esarhaddon,a nd one to Esarhaddono rA shurbanipal.³¹ Remarkably, nine or ten of them wereo fficials of different kinds and ranks. One, the turtānu of "the left" and of Kummuḫi(Commagene), appears as a limmu probablyofthe year 630BCE (late reign of Ashurbanipal) on anumber of documents.³² Because of him this name is especiallywelldocumented. Another was a ša šēpi guard in the samep eriod.³³ He probablyb ecame the cohort commander of the king'sp ersonal guard lateri nh is career.They are even evidenced in the same recordo fr eal estate sale: the guard, who had alreadyb ecame au nit commander of the royal guard (rab kiṣir ša šēpi), as aw itness and the turtānu as an eponym.³⁴ One more Ṣalam-šarri-iqbi was the "third man" of ac hariot team at the time of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal.³⁵ The rest are:a no fficial (?, reign of Ashurbanipal);³⁶ ar oyal eunuch (late reign of Ashurbanipal);³⁷ two military officials(?), one from Babylonia (reign of Ashurbanipal)³⁸ and another from the Town of Chariot Grooms,p robablyi nt he vicinity of Nineveh (seventh  Oncew efind this name written m nu. d man-iq-bi (Dalley and Postgate1 984,93,no. 39b [envelope]: 6, which is obviouslyascribal error since five lines beforeitappears in its commonwriting as m nu.man-iq-bi (Dalley and Postgate1 984,9 3,no "The True Imageo ft he God…" century BCE);³⁹ the official of the temple of Nabû in Kalḫu, belongingtoapriestly family,⁴⁰ and acommander of outriders(?).⁴¹ In the remaining cases wherethis name is attested, it is borne by commoners.
One onlyi nstance of the name Ṣalam-šarri-uṣur datedtothe time of Ashurbanipali sa ttested for ap erson from the city of Aššur.I ti sw rittenw ithout the divined eterminative.⁴² Geographical distribution of the individuals bearing the names with the theophoric element Ṣalam-šarri-( mostly Ṣalam-šarri-iqbis) shows that these names were typical for the Assyrian heartland itself. From four to six Ṣalamšarri-iqbis livedi nN ineveh and its vicinity,f rom three to six in Kalḫu, and from seven to nine in the city of Aššur,which constitutes from fourteen to twenty-one⁴³ persons (60.9 -70 %o ft he entire amount). Among the remainingi ndividuals,f our weref rom the western provincial capitals close to Assyria: two from Dūr-Katlimmu, one from Gūzāna, and another -the most western and the earliest -from Til-Barsib (Sennacherib'sr eign). The last individual of this name is an Assyrianm ilitary official(?) in Babylonia.
Thus, we can conclude that the use of the name Ṣalam-šarri-iqbi starts within the reign of Sennacherib at least,a nd is mostlyf requent in the period of Ashurbanipal in Assyria itself and its old provinces. As ignificant portion of the bearers of this name werer oyal servants and officials of different levels and kinds, but mostlyw ith military background.⁴⁴ The only Ṣalam-šarri-uṣur livedi nA ššur in the time of Ashurbanipal.
4. There is ac ase when ak ing sacrifices as heep before the king'si maged uring the performance of the akītu-rituals of Nisannu 7-8. The "king'si mage" is written without the determinative of divinity.
Ṣalam-šarri-uṣur. Ṣalam-šarri in the name Ṣalam-šarri-uṣur ("protect/observe/ obey the royal image")written m nu.man-pab is attested for an individual from the city of Aššur actinga sawitness in as lave sale contract (PNA1 166 s.v. Ṣalam-šarri-uṣur,V AT 9832: 11 [year 641?,p ost-canonical eponym Aššur-garūa-nēre]). Here Ṣalam-šarri is used as an object.  The uncertainty in numbers derivates from the probability that some of these Ṣalam-šarriiqbis might be the same persons,t hough appearingi nd ifferent documents.  It is impossible to establish actual ethnic identity of these people. They can be native Assyrians or exiles,a sw ell as exiles' descendants.
The ritual text reads as follows: "The king … sacrificesasheep(?),⁴⁵ in front(?) the imageofthe king (he) sacrifices."⁴⁶ This sacrifice takes place at the stable (bīt abūsāte)t ow hich the king proceeds in ac hariot.Upon his arrival, the king introduces the gods to the stable, seats them upon theirt hrones,a nd kisses their feet.H et hen performs the sacrifice in front of the royal imagea nd then at "the house of Adad," which apparentlyisalsolocated within the stable. Afterwards he proceeds to the palace.⁴⁷ Thet ext is not dated, but Nineveh is mentioned in alist of possible sites of the festivities.⁴⁸ Most probablyitisnot earlier than Sennacherib'st ime.
"The True Image of the God…" Instances of installation of the ṣalam šarri of as pecific king in the temples are not rare. The evidence comesf rom the Götteradressbuch, from the correspondence of Esarhaddon, and from the Vassal (or Succession) Treaties of Esarhaddon.⁵³ Letters of Esarhaddon'ss cholars and temple officials make it clear that the usual practice was to install couples of royal images in the temples by both sides of the divinei mage. This correlates wellw ith the couples of the deified royal images in the Götteradressbuch.⁵⁴ In the Götteradressbuch⁵⁵ the name of the king,Tiglath-pileser,ismentioned. Ṣalam m Tukultī-apil-Ešarra (nu m Tukul-ti-a-É-šár-ra), written without the divine determinative,appears at the end of the list of gods' images at the bītpapāḫi of the temple of the godA ššur.I ti sn ot clear which king of this name is meant.⁵⁶ SAA1 0n o. 13 written by the chief scribe of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal, Issār-šumu-ēreš,discusses aproper datefor the installation of the images of the king (ṣa-lam lugal meš )a nd the images of the princes (ṣa-lam meš ša mārē(dumu [meš] ) ša šarri(lugal)i nt he temple of Sîn of Ḫarrān. The chief scribe further instructs the king that the large royal images (ṣa-lam lugal meš kalag ![meš] ) should be placed on the right and on the left of the statue of the god, while the images of the princes should stand in front and behind it.Images of Esarhaddon and his princes werei nstalled alsoi nt he temple at Kinalūa,⁵⁷ but alike Ḫarrān, which was Assyriana lreadyf or al ong time, Kinalūaw as vassal to Assyria and the king'sa nd princes' images werei ntroduced to its temple together with the other symbol of Assyriand omination -the tablet of the succession treaty (see below).
Finally, SAA1 3n o. 178, al etter by ah igh-ranking member of the personnel of Esagil, Šumu-iddina,concerns the images of Esarhaddon (alam meš šá lugal) for this Babylonian temple of Marduk, brought there by the sameM ā r-Issār. It clearlyt estifies that the Assyrian standards regardingt he royal images in the temples weret ransmittedo nto Babylonian soil.⁶³
In Assyria the practice of installation of the royal imagei natemple apparentlyg oes back to the Middle Assyrian period as testify the inscriptions of Aššur-bēl-kala. He speakso ft he installation of the ṣalam šarrūtija in front of the godA ššur at Ešarra.⁷¹ An undoubtedlyr evered ṣalam šarrūtija appears in the Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions in one particularsituation. In the earlier periods of the Assyrianexpansion it is installedbythe victorious king in atemple or sacred place of aconquered city,l ater -in ap rovincial capital together with the symbols of the Assyrian gods. It might interchangew ith ṣalam bunnannîja,l it. "the imageo fm y likeness," or simply narû "stela, stone."⁷² Let us turn to the cases of installation of the royal images in the sacredplaces of Assyrianvassals:  Fort he other terms used to designate ar oyal stele, which do not occur in the below discussed texts, see Yamada 2000,2 90 -291. 1. Ashurnasirpal II (883 -859B CE) usest he expression ṣalam bunnannîja in a literarytext describingthe action of installation this imageinthe temple of a client king in the conquered city.The use of different terms for the effigyof the king in the inscriptions of Ashurnasirpal might indicate that the practice of installing the revered royal imagea tt he sacredp laces of the vassals was not yetfirmlyestablished and originated in this initial period of the Assyrian expansion.⁷³ 2. In 883B CE, his first (accession?) regnal year,A shurnasirpal II placed his imageinthe ēqu-mountain in acityhenamed Ashurnasirpal or Āl(i)-Ashurnasirpal in the land of Ḫabḫunearby aspring source.⁷⁴ The land was severely devastated, much of its population brutallym urdered by the Assyrian troops.The son of its ruler was flayeda tN ineveh, and either its city Ništun was renamed afterAshurnasirpal II, or another settlement receivedthe name of the Assyrianking.But Ashurnasirpal II does not claim that he turned this region into an Assyrian province. The son of Ashurnasirpal II, Shalmaneser III, in his 29 th year (827/826) had to sendh is turtānu,D aiān-Aššur to reconquer disobedient Ḫabḫu.⁷⁵ Thisi sa nother evidence that this land remained  LKA64: 8b-13: uru Gar-ga-miš is-si-ni-qi šàmāt(kur) Ḫat-ti a-na da-na-ni bēl(en)-te-ia nam-kuru é-kál-i-šúá š -lu-la ṣal-mu bu-na-ni-ia ma-aq-ru a-na é-kur-šúú -š ar-ri-ḫa, "the city Carchemish he approached, which is in the land of Ḫatti, in order (to show) the strength of my rule the possessions of his palaceIplundered. Avaluable image of my likeness, for his temple Iglorified." Notethat the third voicechangesintofirst in the middle of the narration. Translationf ollowing Victor Hurowitz in Hallo 1997, 470 -471.  The Great Kurkh Monolith;R IMA2A.0.101.1 i6 8 -9: ina u₄-me-šú-ma ṣa-lam bu-na-ni-ia ēpuš(dù-uš) ta-na-ti kiš-šu-ti-a ina lìb-bi al-ṭùr ina šadȇ(kur-e) e-qi ina āli(uru) m Aš-šurnaṣir(pab)-apli(a) ina rēš(sag) e-ni ú-še-zi-iz, "At that time Im ade an image of myself (and) wrote thereon the praises of my power.Ierected (it) on the ēqu-mountain in the city (called) Ashurnasirpal at the source of the spring." Fort he possible identification of this city,a sw ell as for the meaning "cultic mound in the city" for šadȇ ēqi, see Yamada 2000,2 74,n .6 .F or ēqu as ac ultico bject and an inner room of the temple of ag oddess in the expression bēt ēqi, see CAD E253 -4; AHw232 and Landsberger1915,14, n. 1. Oppenheim notes: "bīt ēqi is the designation of the innermost room or part of atemple belongingtoafemale(never amale) deity;in other places, the term ēqu by itself seems to denoteaculto bject. … This is hardly sufficient to suggest that the ēqu was apillar-like sacredobject,but it should makeusawareofthe fact that the bīt ēqi might actuallyh aveb een that part of as acredl ocality where the ēqu was set up." (Oppenheim 1966,256). Holloway( 2002,306 -307, esp. n. 267) goes further and suggests a "hypothesis that awooden object comparable to the biblical ‫ֲא‬ ‫רֵשׁ‬ ‫םיִ‬ in aPhoenician temple was denotedbythe Akkadian word ēqu." Here ēqu is associated with two such venerated locations as a mountain and as prings ource.  RIMA 3A .0.102.14i156b-159a.
"The True Imageo ft he God…" vassal and did not become aprovince. It is onlyTiglath-pileser III who finally made Ḫabḫua nA ssyrian province.⁷⁶ 3. In the sameGreat Kurkh Monolith and in the samey ear (883BCE) we find a report about the installation of ṣalam šarrūtija of Ashurnasirpal II in the palace of "Ḫaiānu, aman of the city Ḫindānu." Erection of the royal effigyina palace of the Assyrian vassal as such is not an evidence thatthis imagewas revered,b ut it presents an analogya nd an earlier precedent to the installation of the venerated imageofTiglath-pileser III in the palace of Ḫanūnu of Gaza.⁷⁷ The inscriptionso fS halmaneser III provide further examples of ṣalam šarrūtija being installed in temples and sacredp laces of his vassals.⁷⁸ 4. In the year 856B CE -the third year of Shalmaneser III, the king conquers Enzite, located in the modern Elazığ region, east of the UpperE uphrates, the outmostn orth-west point reached in this campaign. The ṣalam šarrūtija was placed in this land in asacredp lot of the city of Saluria, this time qaqqiri ēqi.⁷⁹ 5. In the same8 56 BCE, the king'sthrid year on the campaign to Urartu in the land of Gilzānu, "the Sea of Na'iri," he placed the ṣalam šarrūtija in the city temple.⁸⁰  RINAP 1T iglath-pileser III 41:27′-31′;4 9: 6′-8′;4 7: 43 -44,s ee Yamada 2000,3 00 -305,i n concern of the difficulties of determination of the province annexation process in the earlyNeo-Assyrian period.  RIMA 2A.0.101.1 i97-8: ina u₄-me-šú-ma ṣa-lam šarru(man)-ti-a šur-ba-a ēpuš(dù-uš) li-i-ta ù ta-na-ti ina libbi(šà) al-ṭùr ina qereb(murub₄) ekalli(é.gal)-šúú -š e-zi-iz, "At that time Im ade a colossal royal statue of myself, wrotet hereon (a description of)m yv ictories and praises, Accordingtothe written sources, in the time of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III the installation of the royal imagei sn ever accompanied by the installation of the divinesymbols. Besides the abovementioned examples, stelae were erected in places sacred to Assyrians themselves, such as mountains, for instance mount Amanus, the Mediterranean shore and the shore of the lake Na'iri, multiple riversources, among them the sources of the rivers Tigris and Euphrates.⁸³ Yamada describes these locations as "conspicuous geographical features with no associated settlements, i. e. on am ountain, at as eashore or lakefront,onariverbank (especiallya tt he sourceo fm ajor streams)" and treats the installation of the royal effigies as ac ommemorative act "claiming sovereignty by setting up his monument in its territory."⁸⁴ But he cautiouslyn otes: "Thus, the Assyrian royal image -whether ar elief on as tela or as tatue in the round -wasp laced togetherw ith images or symbols of local gods in as anctuary in subjugated cities, just as at temples in Assyria proper,and represented the Assyrian monarch as aworshipper.The Assyrian king was thus associated with every act of worship performed in the sanctuary,b oth as an earthlyr epresentative of bēli(en) rabe(gal-e) bēli(en)-ia uli-ti kiš-šú-ti-ia šaina māt(kur) Na-ʾi-ri e-tap-pa-áš ina qé-reb-šú al-ṭùr ina qabal(murub₄) ali(uru)-šúina é-kur-ri-šúú-še-ziz, "Imade acolossal image of my (office of)k ingship, (and) inscribed thereon the praise of Aššur,t he great lord, my lord, and the victorious conquests which Ih ad been achievingi nt he land of Na'iri, (and) placed (it) in the middle of his city in his temple." Assyrian and local gods and as ap articipant in every favour they might vouchsafe to grant."⁸⁵ 8. The most discussed example of ṣalam šarrūtija as ad eified royal imagei s found in anumber of the annals of Tiglath-pileser III. It is alsothe most explicit one as it specificallystresses the fact that the royal imagewas counted among the gods of the land of Gaza.⁸⁶ The reconstructed text should be: ṣalam ilānī bēlēja u ṣalam šarrūtija ša ḫurāṣi ēpuš ina qerebe kalli ša uru Ḫaz[zūtu ulziz a]-˹na˺ ilānī mātīšunu amnūma [sattukkūšu]nu ukīn.⁸⁷ The translation according to Hayim Tadmor⁸⁸ is: "A( statue) bearing the image of the ((great)) gods, my lords,and my (own) royal imageout of gold Ifashioned. In the palace of Gaza [I setitup]. Icounted it among the gods of their land…." Unlikei nh is earlypublication, Tadmor suggests that the images of gods and the king the wereset in apalace and not in atemple and that the inscriptions meant as ingle image, "as tatueo ft he king,w ith symbols of gods upon his breast," thus not separating images of gods and the king.
Leaving aside the question of the imperial royal cult,which as he previously suggested was imposed on vassals onlya nd not on Assyrians,h ed oes believet hat the imagei nq uestion was revered.⁸⁹ Yamada translates this passagei nt he spirit of Tadmor  See also Tadmor 1994 Na'aman (1999,401) as asource for the restoration of sattukku in this passage.Na'aman in turn inserts sattukku/ginê,and refers to Berlejung 1998, 344,who onlysuggests Iwould, nevertheless, prefer amore literal translation taking into consideration the understanding of ṣalam šarrūtija as "the imageofmy(office of)kingship" as well as the fact that here the image(s) of the gods AND the imageofthe king are installed,a nd not as tela with ar oyal effigya nd divine symbols:⁹² This interpretation is closer to Tadmor'stranslation of the passageinto Hebrew⁹³ and also causes less syntacticd ifficulties.I nb oth cases the adoration of the king'si magea nd its installation among the gods of Gaza are obvious. This passagei nt he inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III is the most evident example that specificallyr egards the appointment of ṣalam šarrūtija among the gods of the conquered land.⁹⁴ However,Assyrian kingspracticed the imposition of the imperial cult of Assyrian gods and aroyal imageinthe vassal states much earlier,when the grounds and the guidelineso ft he empire have been laid.
Starting with the reign of Tiglath-pileser III, royal inscriptions clearlydifferentiate between annexed provinces and vassal kingdoms.⁹⁵ This distinction, however,d oes not encompass the installation of the king'si mages and divine symbols thati sa gain attested starting with the reign of Tiglath-pileser III. Then it goes hand in hand with the annexation of the territory,m ass deportato restore "Opfer?" in her German translation but not in Akkadian. The restoration is clearly based on the well-known examples of imposition of sattukku/ginê on Assyrian provinces. The actuallyexistenceofthe sattukku in the text would leave no doubt in the existenceofthe imposition of the Assyrian imperial cult in the vassal countries.  CompareT admor and Yamada 2011, 87,n o. 35,col. III, lines 31-35,weret he stelai sd esignateda snarû( na4 na.rú.a)a nd the kingi ss aid to incise the great gods and the ṣalam šarrūtija upon it: ilānī(dingir meš ) rabûti(gal meš ) bēlē(en meš )-ia ina muḫ-ḫie -˹ ṣ i ˺ -[ ir] ṣalam(nu) šarrū(man)-ti-ia ina qer-bi-šúab-ni-ma,together with the royal inscription.Herethe co-ordinate conjunctive u and repetition of ṣalam points clearlyt hat moret han one image was installed. Grammatical singular of ṣalam in ṣalam ilānī bēlēja mays tand for an umber of images (contra Berlejung 2012, 158), as for instancei nt he Esarhaddon'sV assal Treaties from Tell Tayinat (Lauinger 2012, 98, line 404,Tv6 7ṣ a-lam [aḫḫē(šeš meš )]-šum ā r ē ( dumu.nita meš )-šu, "image(s) of his brothers, his sons"). In anycase it indicates few divine symbols or images, and not asingle one. Sinceinthis inscription the images of gold aresaid to be installed it is indeed possible that not stone stelae, but divine symbols or statues in the roundt ogether with the royal statue arem eant.  Tadmor 1964,264 tions, organization of the provincial capitals,and appointment of the šūtrēšiofficials as the provinceg overnors. Steven Hollowaycounted six cases of erection of the symbol, literally "weapon" of Aššur,byTiglath-pileser III.⁹⁶ He claims that the symbolwas installed alone,without the divine image. Nonetheless, actually in two of these cases bothadivine "weapon" and aroyal imagewereinstalledin some connection to each other.Inboth of these instances text variants reportof the installation of the symbolo ft he godA ššur and of the erection of the ṣalam šarrūtija. Further,three texts describethe annexation of the region of Ulluba and Ḫabḫuin7 39 BCE.⁹⁷ The installation of the divineand royal symbols duringthe same campaign and in the sameprovinceisthe onlyfeature connectingbetween the weapon of Aššur and the royal relief: the divine symbol is setinanAssyrian provincial royal palace and the king'si mages eems to be cut upon am ountain cliff. Asimilar situation is attested on the other occasion, at Bīt-Ištar,central Zagros,7 37 BCE, wheret he divine weapon⁹⁸ was installed together with the royal image.⁹⁹ The installation of the royal monuments in the newlya nnexed provinces as reflected by Tiglath-pileser III'sinscriptions appears to be aroutine and less glorified event than as imilar action carried out by himself or by his predecessors in the vassal states. Thus, in RINAP 1T iglath-pileser III 47: 37b -38a,wef ind ap assagew hich seems to be copied from the royal stelae inventory list:  RINAP 1Tiglath-pileser III 15:8b-9a; 28:6b-7a; the quoteisarestoration combiningthese texts: ina u₄-me-šu-ma mul-mu-lu parzillu(an.bar) zaq-tú ēpuš(dù-uš) li-ta-at Aš-šur bēl(en)-ia ina muḫ-ḫià š -ṭ ur ina muḫḫi(ugu) nam-ba-'i šaB ī t-Ištar( uru é-d 15) ú-kin, "At that time, Im ade a pointedi ron 'arrow,' inscribed the mighty deeds of (the god) Aššur,m yl ord, on it,( and) Is et (it) up at the springofthe city Bīt-Ištar." These inscriptionsalso makeclear what was kakAššur.
Ierectedm yroyal image in Mount Tikrakki, in the cities Bīt-Ištar (and) Ṣibur,inthe Mount Ariarma -the mountain¹⁰⁰ of roosters -(and) at [Mount S]ilḫazu, which they call the fortress of the Babylonian(s).¹⁰¹ C. Narû Used Insteado fṢ alam Šarrūtija and Installed Together with Divine Symbols Alreadyinthe time of Tiglath-pileserIII asimple narû appears in place of ṣalam šarrūtija in RINAP 1T iglath-pileserI II 35 ii 28′-29′a, ap assagew hich seems to be even closer to the original inventory list: "Ifirmlyplaced my stelae in [ … ], the city Bīt-Ištar,the city Ṣibar (Ṣibur), (and at)Mount Ariarma (and) Mount Silḫazu, mighty mountains."¹⁰² Unfortunatelyitisunclear from the abovequoted passages, whereexactlyinBīt-Ištar the royal stela waserected. Since it is listed among the stelae set up on the mountains, it is plausible that the Bīt-Ištar stela was placed at the spring together with the symbol of Aššur.
In the time of SargonI I( 721-705B CE) conquered lands werea nnexed and turned into Assyrian provinces; their original population was exiled and they werer epopulated with deportees.¹⁰³ The cities werer enamed and the cult of the divine symbols together with the royal imagew as established there. The term narû is constantlyu sed in the royal inscriptions as parallel to ṣalam šarrūtija.¹⁰⁴ Inscriptions of SargonIIdescribethe installations of the royal stelae and divines ymbols in Media,i nt he cities of Kišēsim, Ḫarḫāra nd others in 716/715 BCE.¹⁰⁵ One of the text variants calls the imagei nstalled at Ḫarḫar "stelae of  The beginninga nd the end of this passage surviveda lso in RINAP 1T iglath-pileser III 17, 8 -9a. In the light of RINAP 1Tiglath-pileser III 35,28′-29′ (see the quote) and takinginto consideration that the stelae (or reliefs) were commonlyset up in the mountains whilei nstallation of the royal imagesins ome unspecified location "in the land" sounds odd, Is uggest to amend Yamada'si nterpretation of kur heref rom mātu into šadû.
"The True Imageo ft he God…" šarrūtija but ṣalam RN is used here to designatethe effigies mounted at Kinalūa. The installation of the imageofthe king together with the images of the princes recalls the installation of their images at the temple of Sîn in Ḫarrān.¹¹⁶ It is plausible that astela similar to those of Til Barsib and Sam'alla with the large figure of Esarhaddonatthe front and the smaller ones of the his heirs on the sides was erected at Kinalūa.
All the textual evidence discussed aboveunequivocallyshowsthatroyal images werea dored in the samem anner,a sw erei mages and attributes of gods. Instances of installation of the royal images in Assyrian temples are copious. Sennacherib'si nscriptions testify that this was av ery ancient practice: "Since time immemorial, the kings, my ancestors, created copper statues, replicas of their (own) forms, to be erected in temples."¹¹⁷ But as ufficient difference in the use of the terms ṣalam šarri and ṣalam šarrūtija in the Neo-Assyrianp eriod is worth noting.
In all evidence where ṣalam šarri relates to the imageo faparticulark ing it appears without the divine determinative.M oreover,a ll these instances but one¹¹⁸ are dated to the reign of Esarhaddon and, all of them, but one,¹¹⁹ relate to images of Esarhaddon. The attestations of d ṣalam šarri both in the Assyrian heartland and in the provinces are not associated with anys pecific king.B ut the copies of the listso fg ods in which they are found, seem to belong to the times of SargonI Ia nd Sennacherib. Ṣalam šarri as ad ivine witness and as a theophoric element in the name m(d) Ṣalam-šarri-iqbi is attested onlyi nt he the time of Sargonids, mostlyi nt he reign of Ashurbanipal. The sacrifice before the king'si magea sapart of the akītu-ritual is dated to Sennacherib'st ime or later.¹²⁰ The situation is different with the worshiped ṣalam šarrūtija, installed in subjugated lands. The glorious conqueror-king erected the "imageo fh is (office of)k ingship".H is name was known to all his contemporaries, literate and illiterate,a nd to anyone able to read his inscriptionsi np osterity because his name was written upon his image. Thet extual evidence attests that the royal images  See above, SAA1 0n o. 13.  RINAP 3/1S ennaherib 17 vi 80 -85;R INAP 3/2S ennacherib4 2: 17′b -18;4 3: 67b6 9a; 46: 139b -140a: šau l -tu ul-la šarrū(lugal meš ) abū(ad meš )-ia ṣa-lam erî(urudu) tam-šil gat-ti-šú-un a-na šu-zu-zi qé-rebe kurrū(é.kur meš ) ib-nu-ma (with ortographic variants).  The Götteradressbuch mentioningthe image of Tiglath-pileser.This copy of the textdatesto the reign of Ashurbanipal.  SAA1 0n o. 350,s ee above. This is the letter of Esarhaddon which speaks of the images of SargonI I.  See above, fn. 48. werer evered, starting with time of Ashurnasirpal II and through end of the empire.¹²¹

Archaeological and PictorialE vidence
Collecting,comparing,and correctlyinterpreting archeological and pictorial evidence can be the most valuable complement to the data of the texts.

A. Archaeological Evidence
This is the evidence for the cult of aroyal image, preserved in the archaeological record at our disposal. Onlyt wo cases of the adoration of the royal effigya re presentlyk nown. One is constituted by as tationarya ltar installed before a stela, the other is as tela set up in ac ella of at emple.
Example 1 ( Fig. 1a-b): Stela the 5 th year of Ashurnasirpal (879 BCE) with an altar in front of it While excavatingthe Ninurta temple at Kalḫu(Nimrud), Henry Layarduncovered as tela of Ashurnasirpal II (8 83 -859B CE), standing to the right of the temple's portal (Fig. 1a).¹²² Thismonument is known as the Great or Nimrud Monolith. Before the stela was an altar;b oth wered iscovered in situ (Fig. 1b):¹²³ It was fixed on aplain squarep edestal and stood isolated from the building. In front of it was an altarofstone, supported on lions' feet,very much resemblinginshape the tripod of the Greeks. It would seem from the altarbeforethis figure, that the Assyrians,likeother nations of old, werei nt he habit of deifyingt he heroes of their race,a nd that the kingw ho extended the bounds of the empiret od istant lands,a nd raised temples to the gods,r eceiveda fter his death divine honors.
Layardd id not read the cuneiform: thus his comprehension of his find is based solelyonthe archaeological record interpreted in the spirit of the classical antiq- Note, however,the Middle Assyrian evidenceofthe installation of ṣalam šarrūtija at Ešarra by Aššur-bēl-kala (fn. 71).  Layard 1953a, 351.  Layard 1953a.
"The True Image of the God…" uity.J utta Börker-Klähn¹²⁴ notes,t hat the stone altarb ore no inscription, which excludes Cogan's(following Galling) suggestion that "the offeringsweredirected to the gods."¹²⁵ MordechaiC ogan was misled by Galling'ss tatement that "the round altar standing before the stela bears ad edicatory inscription to Bel, 'the offeringsw ered irected to the gods, and would bring coincidently, benefit to the king.'"¹²⁶ Peter Machinist¹²⁷ confirms Börker-Klähn'sinformation, supporting it by referencet oG add.¹²⁸  It should be noted thatthe exactyear of the installation of the stela with the altar cannot be established with certainty. We can presume that it was the year of the creation of the stela (879 BCE), since that was the regular course, as we learn from the royal inscriptions.¹²⁹ Example 2 ( Fig. 2a-b): Stela of Adad-nērārī III (810-783 BCE) The stela was found in situ at the cella of the Neo-Assyrian temple at the site of Tell al-Rimah, identifiedasancient Zamaḫâ,¹³⁰ next to the statue of the god. The massive pedestal of the statue is preserved. It is "ap lacing that is unparalleled among the find spots of otherr oyal stelae"¹³¹ so far.The stela was asubjectofa selective mutilation. Another rare,b ut not extraordinary pecularity of this stela is that the king is depicted turningtohis left.Inthe cella the stela was installed in aw ay that the adoration gesture refered alsot ot he deity on the pedestal. There is no analogyt ot he installation of ar oyal effigyt ogetherw ith divine images or symbols in asacred location in the archaeologicalrecordbut it is widely attested in the abovequotedwritten evidence, as well as in the pictorial evidence presented bellow.This is aexcellent example of the installation of aroyal images in the temple cellas known from the Götteradressbuch and from the correspondence of Esarhaddon. It should be stressed that Tell al-Rimah was part of the Assyrian heartland as wasK alḫu.
"The True Imageo ft he God…" This building,u suallyi nterpreted as bīt ḫilani,¹³² is located upon the top of a wooded hill with watercourses running down. The path with the altar leads uphill towards the bīt ḫilani.¹³³ An arched aqueduct connects the complex atop the hill with at riple walled city,¹³⁴ surmounted by ap alace or temple with an entrance flanked by apotropaic figures of lions and bull-men. Richard Barnett¹³⁵ suggested thatthe city is Nineveh and the palace should be Sennacherib's "palace without arival" since its appearance is doubtlessAssyrian. He goes even further,s upposing that the stela is representing Sennacherib, who constructed the aqueduct leadingw ater to Nineveh and that the altar and stela "commemorate the murdered monarch."¹³⁶ The important conclusion here is thata doration of the king'se ffigy -in a form of relief sculptured upon as tela and erected at the entrance to at emple or at the temple cella -existedinthe Assyrianheartland through entire Neo-Assyrian period. The expressionsofthis phenomenon wereidentical in the timesof Ashurnasirpal II and Ashurbanipal: an altar in front of royal stelae.  E. g., Albenda 1976-77.  Bīt ḫilanisa re usuallym entioned as temples or as parts of them.  Barnett 1976,p l. XXIII, slabs 8 -9.  Barnett 1976,4 1.  See also Reade 1964,5 . Another type of the pictorial evidence represents religious rites performed before the royal effigy engraved upon as tela or arock relief.This ceremonycan be depicted in avery explicit narrative form includingofferings, sacrifices, and praise (example 5); in the other case the pictorial narrative displays the preparation to sacrifice (example 4); an abbreviated form of as tandard scene of worship is characteristic of am iniature media (example 7).
Example 4 ( Fig. 4a-c): Balawat Gates (eleventh year of Shalmaneser III -848 BCE), band X The pictorial representation used by Olmstead (see Excursus at the end of the paper)t os upport his concept was band X ( Fig. 4a-c) of the Balawat Gates of Shalmaneser III (859 -824B CE). As the accompanyng ephigraph suggests, the band depicts an expedition to what the Assyrians considered to be the sourceof the Tigris (year 6/7o ft he king,8 53/2 BCE). The lower registerc ontains as cene showing the cutting of ar oyal effigya bove the entrance to the Tigris tunnel, which Assyrians believed to be as ourceo ft he river. Ar elief designed as a stela with aking in ubāna tarāṣu gesture is being chiseled by ashort-clothed artist,w ho is represented at work with his tools in his hands. Behind the artist stands ab eardless official in al ongg arment.D oubtless,t he rock relief is conceivedh ere in af orm of as tela, though the actual rock relief of Shalmaneser III at the left wall of the tunnel does not have as tela shape at all.¹³⁷ Below it, ar ectangular object emergesf rom the waters of the stream, probablyr epresenting an altar.Two individuals in short dress (soldiers?) drive asacrificial bull and ar am towards the cave mouth with the freshlye xecuted imageo fS halmaneser III.¹³⁸ The king himself arrivesbehind them riding ahorse, his chariotisbrought by his servants.Then follow the chariots with the symbols of the gods and the army. The band bears the epigraph: "Ie ntered the mouth of the river, made offeringstothe gods, set up my royal image."¹³⁹ Since thereare no images or symbols of gods in the pictorial representation, LeonardKing described the scene as "Abull and rambeing led forward for sacrifice before the imageofShalmaneser, which is being carved on the rock-face of the grotto… ."¹⁴⁰ Jutta Börker-Klähn¹⁴¹ avoids ad efinition and relates onlyt ot he scene of rock-relief carving and banquet arrangements.
The examples described abover eceivedm uch scholarlya ttention.¹⁴² The rest of the pictorial material discussed here almost escaped notice. The examples discussed below displayt he cult of the king together with the divine symbols. Some of them, like example 5, contain fullyd eveloped pictorial narration. The narrativeofexample 5depictes preparations for the ceremony, represented in example 4; in example 4, the stela is beeng carved, the sacrifices,divine symbols, and royal chariot are on their way.  (Fig. 5a-b) depicting ar itual performed before a royal stela on the shore of the Sea of Na'iri (Lake Vano rU rmia). Four texts describing this campaign tell of the offeringsbroughtb efore the gods after the ritual weapon bathing and report the installation of the ṣalam šarrūtija/bunnannîja as aclosing event in the series of rites performed to commemorate the victory.¹⁴³ The pictorial narration transmits,n evertheless,adifferent message.
In this pictorial narration, sacrificial rites are performed in front of the royal imagea nd symbols of gods. The stela with as tandard ṣalam šarrūtija in ubāna tarāṣu gesture is mounted upon ah illock of scales -ad esignation of am ountain, on which ar ock relief wasc ut,a sK ing had suggested.¹⁴⁴ In front of the  Three of them arei nf act identicala nnalistic inscriptions (Yamada 2000,2 75,A nn 1, obv.3 7 -40;A nn 2, II, 33 -37 and Ann 3, I2 6 -27 =R IMA3A.0.102.1: 37-40;R IMA 3A .0.102.2 i2 6-27;), the fourth is as ummary version (Yamada 2000,2 75,S umm. 6, ii 11-13;RIMA 3A .0.102.28: 11-13).  King1 915. stela stand two posts with divine emblems(šurinnū).¹⁴⁵ The emblems are rosettes identical with those filling the strips between the bands. Stefan Maul¹⁴⁶ interprets them as two gods, apparently Šamaš and Asalluhi(?), being worshiped. Karlheinz Deller¹⁴⁷ thought that these are Adad and Nergal. It can be said in favour of Deller'ss uggestion that the onlyr ecognizable representations of divine emblems are those of Adad.¹⁴⁸ Before the stela and the emblemsstand cultic paraphernalia: an offering table (paṭīru),e mpty and covered with ac loth, incense burner (nignakku), and libation receptacle (adagurru)o nahigh stand. The emblems' posts, the offering table, and the receptacle stand have legs shaped as animal paws or hooves. The personnel, who performs the ritual, is depicted approachingt he stela and the divine symbols with the cultic utensils installed in front of it.The first couple includes the libating king with ab eaker in his right hand and an oblong object,m ost probablyamace, in his left.The king appears in the foreground. In the background is abeardless priest in along garment and at all pointed cap, approaching with the offering dishes. Behind this couple stands another priest dressed identicallyw ith the first one. He holds in his both handst wo high beakers(?), described by Kinga sr hytons.T hen come three musicians in long robes:t he first,b earded, and the second,b eardless, are playing small harps, and the third, alsob eardless,p robablyh olds cymbals or ar attle. The third priest of exactlyt he same appearance as the first two dragsabull and ah oard of rams for sacrifice.F inally, the royal chariot and the armyc lose the procession. On the other side, behind the stela, twos oldiers are shown throwingt he remains of the animal sacrifice into the lake. This composition puts the royal stela in the midstofthe ceremony, stressingthus its role as ar ecipient of the offeringst ogether with two divines ymbols.
There is an epigraph in the field of the depiction,¹⁴⁹ recalling that of Band X, but with as triking difference. The order of the ritual act in this epigraph differs also from that in historical inscriptions: "Is et up my imageb yt he sea of the Land of Na'iri. Im ade offeringst ot he gods."¹⁵⁰ It is important, though the epigraph does not it sayexplicitly, that the offeringswereperformedinfront of the royal effigy,b ut it leavesapossibility that this effigyi si ntended to be counted with the gods and worshiped together with them. It describes the entire band  Kingd escribes them as "royal standards." King1 915.  Maul 1994,5 3.  Bleibtreu, Deller and Pongratz-Leisten1 992, 344.  Bleibtreu, Deller and Pongratz-Leisten1 992, pls. 51-4; 63, 67.  King1 915,2 1.  ṣalma(alam) ina muḫḫi(ugu) tamti(a.ab.ba) šám ā t ( kur) Na-i-ri ú-šá-zi-iz niqête( udu siskur meš ) a-nailānī(dingir meš ) aqqi(bal-qí),RIMA 3A.0.102.63and Yamada 2000,275. "The True Image of the God…" as representing "offeringst ot he gods" and these offeringsa re presented to the royal stela and the divine emblems.¹⁵¹ The pictorial narrative unequivocallydisplays the symbols of royalty and divinity as equallyv enerated.¹⁵² Thus the ceremonyrepresented on this band includes libation, offerings, animal sacrifice,and incense burning performed by the king¹⁵³ and threepriests, and accompanied by music. The king'sp articularp art in this ritual is the libation. This depiction is paralleled by the one on the Middle or Neo-Assyrianmonu-ment¹⁵⁴ generallyknown as the White Obelisk. Itst hird register,s ides A-B, represents aritual described in an epigraph aboveit. Sacrificial rites are performed in front of abuildingf lanked with towers ( Fig. 6a-b). The king receivest he ring from as eated goddess inside it.I ti nvolvese xactlyt he same cultic utensils that stood before the royal stela of Band Iofthe Balawat Gates:anoffering table (paṭīru),covered with ac loth and loadedwith offerings, incense burner (nignakku) and libation receptacle (adagurru). The personnel is much more modest and so is the animal sacrifice: the king in royal headdress performs the libation,holding a mace. Behind him ab earded attendant with ab owl is depicted. Then come two people bringingasacrificial bull. Another couple frames the procession. There are no priestsi nvolved, neither are sheep. Through performingt he libation and sacrifice the king is being granted his kingly authority by the deity inside the temple -the act depicted upon earlys telae (e. g. the stela of Hammurabi).
 Contra Yamada 2000,298 with n. 82, whowrites that "The standardorder of such elements is: i. washingw eapons;i i. makinga no ffering; iii. the celebration banquet; this is usuallyf ollowed by the erection of an image. The sequencem ight reflect the actual order," claiming thus that the sacrificed id not take placei nf ront of the royal effigy.H erea nd in example 4i t is clear that the installationo fṣ alam šarrūtija was accomplished prior to the sacrificea nd the banquet,a nd that the sacrificew as performed for the royal imaget ogether with the divine emblems.  King( 1915,2 1) with much obscurity defines the representation as "Dedication of Shalmaneser imageo nt he Shore of Lake Van." J. Börker-Klähn (1982, 187, no. 146) describes it as the ceremonyo fi nstallation of the royal stela.  Maul (1994,(53)(54) quotes this pictureasanillustration of libation ritual, performed by the king. Unfortunately, he relates onlyt oap art of this band, as published by Börker-Klähn (1982: 187, no. 146).  The dateo ft his monument was much discussed, since it is not certain whether it should be attributed to Ashurnasirpal Io rA shurnasirpal II (see Pittman 1996 for the most recent bibliographyo nt he question).H owever,E .F rahm provides convincingp hilological prooff or the earlyd ate( Ashurnasirpal I) of the WhiteO belisk (Frahm 2009,121-122).
The epigraph abovethe depiction reads: "The bītnatḫi of Nineveh: Iperform the wine offeringso ft he temple of the exalted goddess."¹⁵⁵ This does not leave room for anydoubt that on Band Iofthe Balawat Gates the sacrificial rites are the same as those of the temples of gods. On the other hand, the White Obelisk epigraph does not mention the offeringst og ods, but the offeringst hat are customary in the temple. If we look inside the building in front of which this ritual is performed, we will see the king before the goddess, receiving from her his royal power as ar ewardf or his piety and careful observance of her temple rites.The scene inside the temple is iconographicallyi dentical with the stelae of the late third/second millennia¹⁵⁶ and represents the king worshipingt he goddess, as are the Assyrian royal stelae and reliefs.
"The True Imageo ft he God…" ated representationofw orship of and sacrifice to ar oyal stela cut upon acylinder seal.
Example 6 ( Fig. 7): Fragment of ab ronze band N, most probably from Balawat This representation resembles closelythat of the Band Iinexample 5. Aconventional effigyo ft he king is depicted upon an object shaped as as tela mounted upon ap edestal of scales designating mountains. In front of it stand two posts crowned with rosettesa nd an incense burner; twot rees of different kind are set behind. The rest of the band is broken away.
This fragment is attributed to the Balawat Gate of Shalmaneser III as connected to his march against Tyre and Sidon, in the course of the campaign to the Mediterranean Sea coast,w hich took place in 858B CE.¹⁵⁷ Onlyt he words ṣalam šarrūtija remained from the epigraph of this band.
"The True Image of the God…" It is worth noticing that in absenceofany inscription, Börker-Klähn is much less cautiousa nd remarks that this piece might be evidence of the adoration of the king'se ffigy.¹⁶² In this connection she regardst he Ninurta temple stela ( Fig. 1a-b),¹⁶³ and the stela represented on Ashurbanipal'ss lab from the room H( Fig. 3a-b).¹⁶⁴ The most important feature in examples 4-7i st he representation of the king'si magew orshiped along with the divine symbols. This can partlya nswer the question what was the ceremonyo ft he adoration of the royal effigy almost never described textually. Actually, the parallelism between the stelae and šurinnūsc an be traced as far backa st ot he Neo-Sumerian period, when they are depicted together upon one of the stelae of Gudea as installed within the temple area or the temple.¹⁶⁵   Börker-Klähn 1982, 217, no. 176;200: T5 71 72 .  Börker-Klähn 1982, 182, no. 132.  Börker-Klähn 1982.  Suter2 000,3 88, st.60a nd pl. A; Börker-Klähn 1982, no. 63a.
The visual evidence provided here shows thatthe perception of the act of the veneration of the stelae and divine symbols was the samea st hat of the adoration of gods, which is especiallystrengthened by the almostidentical depictions of the Balawat Gates,band I(example 5, Fig. 5) and of the White Obelisk (Fig. 6).

Neo-Assyrian Royal Stelae -Ṣalam Šarrūtija
The analysis of the iconographyofroyal stelae and its perception in antiquity are most important for understanding of the role of aking'seffigy in the cult.All the veneratedr oyal images weree ngraved upon stelae or stela-formed rock reliefs, as we can judge from the depictions and archaeological record. To comprehend the place of this phenomenon in the Neo-Assyrian period we need to understand the meaning of stelae in Mesopotamian tradition.
Stelae are one of the most ancient media in Mesopotamia. Theaim and place of theiri nstallation -temples and borders¹⁶⁶ -remained by and large the same from the Uruk period through to the fall of Babylonian Empire.¹⁶⁷ Beforethe Middle Assyrian period all stelae discovered so far,werecommissioned by kings. The famous Stelenreihen at the city of Aššur are dated to the Middle and Neo-Assyrian period. Stelae of officials are present at the Stelenreihen besides the royal stelae. Remarkably, the onlystela of Stelenreihen, which bearsavisual depiction,¹⁶⁸ is that of Ashurbanipal'sq ueen Libbi-āli-šarrat.¹⁶⁹ In the Neo-Assyrianp eriod, the privilegeo fs etting up as tela was reserved onlyf or kingsw ith an exception of as hort time span within the eighth century BCE.¹⁷⁰  Fort he placeo ft he installationo ft he earlys telae, see Börker-Klähn 1982, 14 -19.  The first monumentofthis kind originates from Uruk(Moortgat1969, pl. 14)and is generallyk nown as the Lion or Lion hunt stele. The 80 cm highb asalta shlar is adorned with ar epresentation of abearded man huntingalion with abow and arrowsand then with aspear.The inscriptionislacking, but Schmandt-Besserat (1993, 204, 218-219) provedthat the priest-king is represented.  Andrae 1913.  Börker-Klähn 1982.  In the time of Adad-nērārī III and ShalmaneserI Vc ertain officials gained extraordinary powers and playeda ss upreme authority writingi nscriptions of royal stylea nd establishing their own stelae. This phenomenonstarted alreadyinthe last years of Shalmaneser III and continued even into Tiglath-pileser III'sr eign (RIMA 3, 200 -202;May2 017, 502-503,n .8 4;May 2018, 252-259).B ut onlyt wo stelae of higho fficials,t hat of Bēl-Ḫarrān-bēlu-uṣur (May2 018, 255, 261-262) and that of ac ertain Mušēzib-Šamaš,t he governor of Dēr ( Pognon 1907, 107, pl. 5: 6;May2018, 255, 261-262, Fig . 2),bear an imageo ft he official. The officials arew earing af ringed garment,b ut not the royal one, and arer epresented in the ubāna tarāṣu gesture. In "The True Image of the God…" In Mesopotamia only royal¹⁷¹ stelae and rock reliefsb ore figurative depictions, which in the Neo-Assyrian period wereactuallyreduced to the representation of the kings. UnlikeW estern stelae, Mesopotamian ones never represented onlyg od(s). Contrarily, in most cases their main protagonist was the king.I n the Neo-Assyrian period, the emphaticallys tandardized imagery of royal stelae was referred to as ṣalam šarrūtija. The king'se ffigyu pon stelae symbolized the very essence of the divine royal power and was venerateda ss uch.
In the Western tradition the stelae (betyl, maṣṣēvôth, and Hittite huwaši were adored, which is well evidencedb yt he Bible and other sources.¹⁷² The West Semitic adoration of stones was well known in Mesopotamia since the Old Babylonian period at least.¹⁷³ Beforethe Neo-Assyrian period, we do not have anydirect evidence for worshippingthe stelae in Mesopotamia, though they wereinstalled within the sacred areas of the temples since the earliest periods.¹⁷⁴ Wasthe phenomenon of the cult of royal stelae in the Neo-Assyrian Empire influenced by the West Semitic practices,expedited by the general aramaisation under the Sargocase of Bēl-Ḫarrān-bēlu-uṣur the gestureisintended for the divine symbols in the upper part of the stela. The images seem to follow exactlythe manner of representation of kings upon stelae, but without royal insignia: the garment,the tiara, and the mace. The beardismissingaswellin both instances. The last featurepoints to eunuchs.The textwritten upon the stelaofBēl-Ḫarrānbēl-uṣur glorifies the deeds of the official, as do the royal inscriptions those of the kings.Thus, we have onlythree stelae with the depiction of the installer other than aking, these of Bēl-Ḫarrān-bēl-uṣur,Mušēzib-Šamaš,and of queen Libbāli-šarrat (May2018, 260 -261, Fig. 1), in the entire Mesopotamian art in general and in the Neo-Assyrian art in particular.Nevertheless,all the stelae, discovered at the Stelenreihen and at the Stelenplatz ared efined as ṣalam PN by the inscriptions incised upon them, includingt he uniconic stelae of Sammuramat and Sennacherib's queen, as well as that of Libbi-āli-šarrat,a dorned with the queen'sp ortrait.Aplain stone stela served as an imageofits installer when put in asacred area of atemple. Remarkable is that the monuments of Antakyaand Pazarǧik, which marked the borders,call themselves tahūmu,aborder stone. Narû, which often is related to stelae (Slanski 2003,20-27), but generallyjust means "stone," appears as aself-definition both in the Antakyaand in the Bēl-Ḫarrān-bēl-uṣur inscriptions.Those monuments do not define themselvesa sṣ almu.  With threee xceptions described in previous footnote.  Vand er Toorn 1997;Mettinger1 995, 115 -198. The archaeological record shows that those weresimple standingstones,uninscribed, and bearingnoimage,venerated sincethe Canaanite period at least (e.g, Hazor,AreaCshrine, Mazar 1990,253 -254, Fig. I, 7. 10;Timna, Mazar 1990, 286, Fig. I, 7. 31 and TelDan; and Naveh1995,1-3, figs.1-2, see also Mettinger1995). The inscription upon the recentlyd iscovereds telao fK uttamuwa says that his soul is in it (Pardee 2009, 53 -54,l ine 5).  Vand er Toorn 1997, 9 -10.  Börker-Klähn 1982 nids?¹⁷⁵ Thisishighlyprobable in light of the fact that all our evidence for deified ṣalam šarrisi sc oncentratedi nt his time span.
From the Neo-Sumerian through to the Neo-Assyrian period, the king is depicted on the stelae either in narrative or in abbreviated scenes onlyasa doring the god(s). Even if the king seems to be portrayeda se qual to the divinef igure due to the isokephalia,h ei si nf act depicted as am inor visual counterpart to the god( e. g. the stela of Hammurabi). Starting with Ashurnasirpal, II the new iconographical pattern becomes ubiquitous and typicalfor the Neo-Assyrianstelae. Ah ugei mageo faking occupies the entire field of the representation and small divine symbols appear at its side. The reduced size of the divines ymbols in imagery of stelae and rock reliefs makes the Assyrian king their main protag-onist¹⁷⁶ similarlytohim being the focus of the historicalnarrations upon the palatial reliefs.Texts written upon the stelae confirm this; e. g. the curse formula of the aforementioned Great Monolith refers to the depiction it bears as [… ṣalmi(alam)-i]a šu-a-tú, "this imageo fm yself" (i. e. of the king), thus stressing that the role of the divine symbols is to serveapart of the royal portrait.
The epigraphs accompanying the depictions, which represent stelae or rock reliefs,c all them ṣalam šarrūtija. Thus, the textual evidence points out that the stelae are images of the king in his royal office and definitelyn ot the images of gods. This evidence is again consistent with the inscriptions on the non-royal stelae from the city of Aššur calling them ṣalam PN, even when aniconic. Thus, the word ṣalmu is also the wordfor acertain type of monuments, which we call stelae. If these monuments do bear an image, it is the royal one. There are rock reliefs, like thosea tt he Tigris,¹⁷⁷ that do not even have anyd ivine emblems, but onlythe effigyofthe king in agesture of worship. The same applies to the miniature depictions of stelae. They displayo nlyt he figure of the king and not the divines ymbols. One of Esarhaddon'ss telae from Til Barsib was even installed without an inscription or anyr epresentations of gods but onlyw ith the image of the victorious king.¹⁷⁸ In Neo-Assyrian stelae, the king is the active party, and not the gods, whose representations are reducedt ot he emblems of a minor scale.
"The True Imageo ft he God…" formationofinscriptions. The spectator who observed the Balawat Gates of Shalmaneser III sawthe cult of the royal image. The aim of the epigraphs in this period, was to transmit the essence of the topoi of royal inscriptions. These short captions did not reflect the details of the representation, but grasped onlyi ts general meaning.
The ṣalam šarrūtija functions as ar epresentationo fak ing performing,b y the command of gods, his office of kingship,which is first and foremost the adoration of the gods. This is further confirmedb yt he opening phrases of inscriptions on the stelae/rock reliefs and elsewhere. Fori nstance,t he inscription of the Balawat gates of Shalmaneser III reads: At that time Aššur,t he great lord, called [myn ame for shepherdship of]t he people, he crowned (me) with the exalted crown… placed the weapon, the scepter, the staff appropriate( for rule over)t he people in my hand… ."¹⁷⁹ On stelae/rock reliefs the king is represented in agesture of adoration before the symbols of the gods, which reflects the divine will expressed in his rule. Yet, he remains the focus and the protagonist of the scene, as he is the main and in most cases the onlyhero of the royal inscriptions, acting of course in accordance with the gods' command. Thus, the adoration of images of the king in his office of kingship (ṣalam šarrūtija), performingthe gesture of worship before the symbols of gods is the adoration of kingship authority sanctioned by the gods.
As mentioned above, the representations on Bands Ia nd N, as well as that on the seal (figs. 5, 7, 8) demonstrate the ṣalam šarrūtijasbeing worshiped along with the divine symbols. Let us examine the existence of further parallelism between those two categories of objects.
The archaeological record of installing royal¹⁸⁰ stelae at the sides of gateways and entrances is copious.¹⁸¹ Archaeologicale vidence is supported by the visual sources, includingt hosed iscussed abovea nd others.¹⁸² Divine emblems installed and adored at the gateways,a st he stelae were, can be seen in the extremelyd amaged relief from room Io ft he North Palace of Ashurbanipal (669 -626B CE) depicting the libation over Te'umman'sh ead ( Fig. 9a-b). The divine emblems on this relief are shown worshiped in exactlyt he same manner as  ina u₄-me-šú-ma Aššur(aš) bēlu(en) rabû(gal-ú)[ š umi ana rē'ût ? ] nišē (un meš ) i-bu-ú a-ga-a ṣīra(mah) ú-pi-ru … kakku ( giš tukul) ḫaṭṭa( giš gidru) giš ši-bir-ru si-mat nišē(un meš ) ina qāte(šu)-ia ú-šat-me-ḫu,R IMA3A .0.102.5 i6 b -ii 1a with emendations.  As wella su ninscribed and uncarved stelae in the western tradition.  Discussed extensively by David Ussishkin (1989).  May2 014, 86 -88. those placed togetherwith the royal imageonBand I. The king and his entourage make offeringsinfront of the two šurrinū flanking the gateofapalace or atemple (Fig. 9b). An incense burner and an offering table stand before them. The king is holding ab ow in his left hand while his right is raised in the adoration gesture. Te'umman'shead is placed under the king'sbow,sowecan assume that the king is making al ibation over the bow and the dead enemy.
Pictorial evidence complements the written sources quoteda bove. It clearly demonstratest hat the royal images werei nstalled together with the divine symbols both in the earlyand in the late Neo-Assyrianperiod. Together with written sources it proves that they wereworshiped not onlyinthe shrines and palaces of subjugated peoples but also at the rivers ources, mountain tops, seao rl ake

Conclusions
The evidence discussed abovep roves thatr oyal images upon stelae/rock reliefs werev enerated. The monuments bearing thosei mages have been treated as sacred. The appearance of stelae/rock reliefs venerated alongside divine symbols in ritual scenes points to asimilarityorevenanidentity in significanceand function of the divine emblems and the royal stelae. Deification of the cult symbols of gods waswidelypractised in all Ancient Near Eastern religions.¹⁸⁴ The depiction of the king upon astela/rockrelief, the ṣalam šarrūtija, "the king in his office of kingship," the king performing his kingly obligations, was the symbol of kingship itself. That is whythe king is represented on stelae in agesture of worship before gods, who delegated to him his office and whose worship was his primary and most important duty.
The divine entity of kingship,which descended from heavenaccordingtothe Sumerian KingL ist and the Etana myth, was fundamental to the Mesopotamian worldview from the earliest days.¹⁸⁵ Aking of flesh and blood was deifiedonlyin the most ancient times and for very shortperiods. In art,deification of the kings is found onlyi nt he reigns of Narām-Sîn of Agade and the Ur III dynasty -the times of the first Mesopotamian empires.N arām-Sîn explicitlyd emonstrated his divinity by pictorial means; it is by representing himself wearingthe horned crown of gods.¹⁸⁶ In the royal art of the Ur III period deification of kingswas expressed in much more modest and indirect ways.The replacement of as eated godb yaseated king in presentation scenes on the seals of higho fficials is much disputable as visual evidence of the deification of Ur III kings.¹⁸⁷ Over against it,t he textual evidence of deification of Ur III kingsi sa bundant.
Neo-Assyriankingsn ever officiallydeified themselves. But they used elaborate strategies to upgrade themselvestothe supernatural status. The textual evidence does not provide clarity about whether divinized royal images werethatof  E. g. Yamada 2000,2 75 -290 for Shalmaneser III, and elsewherei nt he royal inscriptions.  Vand er Toorn 1997, 2, 11:B leibtreu, Deller andPongratz-Leisten1 992.  Frankfort 1978,2 37.  The famous stelaofNarām-Sîn at the Louvre (Moortgat1969, 155) and mould fragment, also attributed to this king ( Hansen 2002,9 3, Fig . 3).  E. g. Winter1 986,1987Winter1 986, , see also vanB uren 1952 the living kingso rt he deceased ones. Nevertheless, the sacrificial scene before the unfinished effigy of Shalmaneser III at the Tigris tunnel indicates beyond anyd oubt that the living king is meant.B oth pictorial and writtens ources show that the images (ṣalam šarrūtija¹⁸⁸)o ft he living king,t he conqueror, werei nstalled in the palace of Gaza, in the templeso fC archemish, Maruba(?), Kinalūa, the city on the lake Na'iri shore and at the sacred plot of Salurīab y Ashurnasirpal II, Shalmaneser III, and Tiglath-pileser III in the periods of the construction of the Assyrian Empire.
In the time of the Sargonids, ṣalam šarris, probablyi nthef orm of stelae, werer evered also in the temples of the Assyrian heartland. It was the abstract symbolofdivinity of kingship. It is almostnever known which king this termrefers to. The texts actuallynever mention the name of aking represented by ṣalam šarri. The obscurity of the texts on this matters uggests thatitw as not of importance. In the Assyrian core, royal images werea dored as symbols of kingship.
There is no evidence of ar oyal imageundergoing the mīs/pītpîritual in the Neo-Assyrianperiod.¹⁸⁹ Performance of this ritual is not an indication of deification. Mīs/pītpîwas aset of purification rites aimed either to make cultic images and utensils,a sw ell as humans,i ncludingt he king,p roperlyp repared for participationinreligious ceremonies or to release them from contamination for any other purposes.¹⁹⁰ The absenceo fs ources concerning mīs/pītp îof royal stelae does not provet hat they weren ot adored.¹⁹¹ The veneration of the royal effigycan be an echo of deification of the Akkadian Sargonids. The Assyrian Sargonids sawthem as their own forerunners;they stressed parallels with and exploited allusions to their famed predecessors.¹⁹² The onlyn ot Assyrian but Mesopotamian king who set up his imagei nt he foreign land as amarkofhis conquest was the founder of the first empire, Sargonof Agade. At Mari, Šamšī-Adad Iand his son Yaḫdun-Lîm carried on this undertak- Less often bunnannîja.  Machinist 2006,180=2011:4 22 contraH olloway2 002, 189 -190.  Walkera nd Dick 2001H urowitz 1989.  A. Berlejung stresses that the object of the mouth-washingritual could be animateorinanimate,whilst the object of the mouth-openingwas always inanimate (1997: 45). In order to make an imagebeable to receive offerings its mouth had to be opened (Berlejung 1997, 46 -45). Thus, to enable the statue "to become av ivified god," earthlyr epresentative of ad eity,t he mouthopeningr itual would be necessary.The livingk ingw ould not need to be "vivified," but mīsp î was performed on him (Hurowitz 1989,4 6;Walker and Dick 2001,1 0). Nonetheless, note that in the course of the rituals cycle of of Šabattu, on the 23rd day, the kingp erformed am outhwashing, probablyt oh imself (SAA 20 no. 1r ev.6 ;n o. 6: 1).  See May2 015,103 -106.
"The True Image of the God…" ing.¹⁹³ Both belonged to the Old Assyrian dynasty that worshiped Sargona nd Narām-Sîn of Agade, probablya st heir divine ancestors.¹⁹⁴ Their Neo-Assyrian heirs definitelyremembered the tradition and revived(or reinvented?) it together with the politics of conquest.
As the abovediscussed evidence shows, differences existed between the Assyrian core, the provinces, and the vassal countries in matters of the adoration of the royal image. The very specific king,who subjugated the land and installed there his ṣalam šarrūtija,h ad to be adoredb yh is vassals and new subjects. The imposition of the royal cult was part of the Assyrians ubjugation programme. The images of the king werer evered in the templeso ft he Assyrian heartland. Assyriana rmies performed sacrificest ot hem when on the march. The adoration of the royal effigyw as part of the imperial religion and ideology. With Tiglath-pileser III'sa ccession the character of the Neo-Assyrian expansion dramaticallychanged in favour of completes ubjugation rather thanvassaldom.
To sum up: - In the times of Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III royal effigies,but not the divine symbols, werei nstalleda tt he sacred places of the vassal cities. -Tiglath-pileser III reign was the turning point.S tarting with his reign, the policy of annexation prevails over the vassaldom relationship. The imposition of the Assyrian cult,w hich included the installation of royal stelae and the symbols of Assyriang ods, becomes ap art of his annexation program togetherw ith the renamingo ft he city,a ppointing of the provincial government,a nd mass deportations. -In the time of Esarhaddon and probablyofAshurbanipal images of the king and his successorst ogetherw ith the tablet of Succession Treaties werev eneratedi nt he templeso fp rovinces and vassals. -In the time of Esarhaddon and probablyofAshurbanipal, images of the king and his successorst ogetherw ith the tablet of Succession Treaties werev eneratedi nt he templeso fp rovinces and vassals.
Agreat discussion concerning the imposition of the Assyrian imperial cult upon the vassal countries is closelyc onnected to the adoration of the king'se ffigy.¹⁹⁵ We owe it to the question of installation of the Assyrian cult images in the Jer- usalem temple.Inm yview,the installation of the royal imageinthe sacred places of the vassals was not the main and not an obligatory aspect of the Assyrian "theological" imperialism, but am atter of as pecific situation, as was anyother aspect of local politics.¹⁹⁶ The main purpose of the imperial policy towards the vassal statesw as providingA ssyrian temples,a nd not thoseo ft he vassal lands. Loyal vassals weret ob ring their annual tribute as an offering to the Assyrian gods. They participatedi nt he Assyrian feasts celebrated duringm ilitary campaigns and in Assyria itself. Tributaries ranatt he wheel of the king'schariot,asBār-Rakib did. ThusAhaz, king of Judah, could see the Assyrian altar when he madeh is homaget oT iglath-pileser III at Damascus. Imitating the habits of his suzerain, he ordered the introduction of ac opy of this altari nto the temple of Jerusalem(2Kings16: 10 -14). Loyal vassals wereeager to adore the great king of Assyria as he adored his gods.¹⁹⁷ Assyrian rituals, such as tākultu,apart of akītu,i ncluded the veneration of royal images. Sacrifice itself was the expertise and privilegeofthe Assyrian king and priests, but annual tribute was delivered by the vassals to the Assyrian gods in theirtemples in Assyria.¹⁹⁸ As apart of this practice the procession of emissaries of Egypt,Gaza, Judah, Moab and Ammon entered Kalḫu(ina Kalḫietārbūni)  Berlejung 2012.  Bar-Rākib of Sam'al, loyalv assal of Tiglath-pileser III, calls himself "slave" ) ‫דבע‬ (o ft he Assyrian emperor,whomherefers to as "my lord" ‫יארמ‬ () ,enlistinghim under this title together with his local deity Rākib-El, thus elevatinghis sovereign to the rank of his god. Moreover,both his "lords" endow him with rulership over his land on account of his and his father'sloyalty.He is installed upon his parental throne by Tiglath-pileser III just as the Assyrian kings areinstalled by their gods to rule peoples and kings (e. g., Adad-nērārī II, RIMA 2A .0.99.2: 5 -10 and elsewhere). This statement not onlyd epicts the Assyrian monarcha sd ecreeing his vassals' destinies,asisappropriatetogods of Assyria, but reveals Bar-Rākib'sintimateknowledge of Assyrian royal rhetoric. Another witness to royal propaganda reachingi ts targeti st he Aramaic translation of the Akkadian "kingo ff our quarters:" Akk. šar kibrāte rbetti =A ram.
), which appears in this inscriptiona satitle of Tiglath-pileser III: , " Ahaz sent messengers to Tiglath-pileser,k ingo fA ssyria to say: 'Ia my ou slave and your son.'" Such terminology doubtlesslyw as implied by Assyrian sovereigns whoc all their vassals "slave" (urdu;e .g.L ivingstone 1983, 44-5, no. 17:l ines 7, 24;C ogan and Tadmor 1979,5 04-508).  See also van Driel 1969van Driel , 190 -191,S pieckermann 1982 "The True Imageo ft he God…" on a1 2 th dayo fafeastw ith theirt ribute, as we learn from the letter of the city governort oh is king SargonI I.¹⁹⁹ The delivery of the annual tribute was one of the most important aspectso ft he AssyrianN ew Year festival. On this occasion also royal stelae were revered. Esarhaddon praysi nt his wayi nh is Schlußgebet ending the Nineveh cylinder: On the New Year (feast) of the first month mayIreview in it,inthis palace, all the war horses, mules,camels,weaponry,battle gear,all of the troops,spoils of (my) enemyevery year unceasing!²⁰⁰ The purpose of the Assyrian annual campaigns was to bring booty and tribute to the gods of Assyria on the New Year festival. Adoration of the king'simage, as we have seen, is closely connected with the akītu-celebration. The vassal tributaries weret op articipate in the triumphal akītu-procession, to observet he great king offering his loot to the Assyrian gods, and to learn the fear of the gods and the king.
The claim that Assyrians did not practise the imposition of the Assyrian cults,since they did not built temples of their gods outside Assyria, can be refuted since onlyone temple of the godA ššur is known in Assyria itself, that at the city of Aššur,²⁰¹ much like onlyt he Jerusalem Temple was supposed to be the true temple of YHWH.²⁰² Outside of the city of Aššur,t he symbol of the god Aššur was worshiped in am ovable sanctuary duringm ilitary campaigns,²⁰³ or when installedi nt he sacred spaces of the subjugated people and added to their gods. Provincesh ad to provide the Assyrian gods with the sattukku and ginû offerings;²⁰⁴ vassals sent theirs to Assyrian temples.A ll of them pulled the "yoke of Aššur." Economical resources must not be dispersed to insufficient local sanctuaries, but had to be accumulated in the Assyrian heartland. The focus of the imposition of the Assyrian imperial cult was economy, i. e. supplying Assyrian templesb yt he subjects of the empire. Personal beliefs weren ot of interest for the empire.
 SAA1no. 110 rev. 4 -13.  ina zag-muk-ki arḫi(iti) reš-ti-i kul-lat anše mur-ni-is-qí parê( anše kunga meš ) gammalê( anše gam.mal meš ) til-li ú-nu-ut tāḫāzi(mè) gi-mir ummāni(erim ḫi.a ) šal-la-atn a-ki-ri šatti-šam-ma la na-par-ka-a lu-up-qí-da qé-reb-šáqé-reb ekalli(é.gal) šá-a-tu;RINAP 4Esarhaddon 25 vi 58 -62.  See also Postgate 1992, 251.  Despitethat others areknown. It seems that the very idea of the single temple in Jerusalem was inspired by Assyrian example.  May2 010.  Cogan 1974,49-55,H olloway2 002, 100 -108. The royal imagewas the statement of kingship.Asanabbreviated depiction it symbolized the doctrine behind it: the doctrineo ft he king being the "true imageofthe god." ThisdoctrineemergedinAssyria in the reign of Tukultī-Ninurta Iand developedtogetherwith the development of the Assyrian expansion. In the Epic of Tukultī-Ninurta Ithis king is called the "eternal imageofEnlil."²⁰⁵ As is evidenced by the correspondence of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal, the story behindt he royal imagew as well recognized. These kingsw erec alled by their subjects the true images of the god, of Bēl, of Marduk, and of Šamaš.²⁰⁶ The stories of the Creation of the King were well known in Assyria and Babylonia.²⁰⁷According to these stories,B ē let-ilī endowed the king with ap erfect appearance, one of the most important features bestowed on him by the gods.²⁰⁸ Forthe subjugated peoples, Assyrian royal effigies installed in theirtemples and sacred places werethe reminders of the story of theirsubjugation.²⁰⁹ Royal stelae were dispersed all over the empire. They reached the widest audience. In the provinces, as Gūzāna examples demonstrate, they werev enerateda sw ell as in the heartland. An easilyrecognizable abbreviated imagewas incisedonthem. It was purposelychosen to represent all possibleaspectsofkingship.The imageconfirmed for the observer the narrations written upon the stelae, stories of the Assyrian king,hero-conqueror and builder.These royal effigies delivered and transmitted to the non-Assyrian audience the tales of royalty incised upon them in cuneiform. The ṣalam šarri/šarrūtija became as ubstance in its own right,r ather than amere depiction of aking.The cult of the king'simageproved an efficient wayfor the legitimation of royalty.Itstartedinthe AssyrianEmpire, but outlived it.LikemanyotherAssyrian imperial institutions, it was adopted by the Babylonian and Achaemenid Empires.²¹⁰  That the subjugated people were familiar with the narrations of the Assyrian royal inscriptions is welle xemplified by 2K ings1 9=Isaiah 36.S ee the discussion in Machinist 1983.  Recently, new evidencefor the cult of the royal images in the Neo-Babylonian Uruk and the Achaemenid Sippar was published by C. Waerzeggers and K. Kleber (Waezeggers 2014,323;B M 72747: 1 -4a nd Kleber 2008, 273;BM 114521:1-2).The tablet fromU ruk datingt oy ear 11 of Nabonidus speaks of the regular offerings fromthe prebends of the brewer and baker to the image of an anonymous king. Another from year 1ofX erxes, deals with the regular offerings, sattukku, for the imageo fD arius.This evidencei su nique, because the imagei si dentified explicitlya s representation of King Darius and refers to aB abylonian cult for aP ersian king. Remarkably, "The True Image of the God…"

Excursus:B rief Historyo fR esearch and Interpretation of the Evidence
In 1923 A.T.E. Olmstead claimed in his book Historyo fA ssyria that "the captives( settled by Tiglath-pileser III in Babylonia, in Dūr-Tukultī-apil-Ešarra -N.N.M.) … were commanded to worship the royal imagew hich his lordA shur ordered him to set up 'as as ign of victory and might'" (Olmsetad 1923,1 77). Olmstead relayedo nP .R ost'se dition of Tiglath-pileser'sa nnals (Rost 1893, 7), but modern reading of this passage does not support Rost'sr econstruction (RINAP 1T iglath-pileser III 6: 1-4a). Olmstead refers also to an altar recovered in situ before the stela of AshurnasirpalI Ia tt he entrance of the Ninurta temple at Kalḫu( Olmstead 1923, 102-104,s ee below figs. 1a -b). He further based his statement that Assyrian royal images werew orshiped by adducing the evidenceo fs acrifices to ar ock relief (in the form of as tele) as depicted on Shalmaneser III'sB alawat Gates (ibid., 116;s ee Fig. 4a -c). Olmstead'si dea of the worship of the Assyrian kingw as opposed by C. Gadd. Gadd (1934,15-16) admits the fact that stelae wereworshipped on the grounds of: (1) the altar posed beforethe stelae of Ashurnasirpal II at the Ninurta temple ( Fig. 1a -b); (2) The Balawat Gatesdepiction (figs. 4a-c); (3) the relief fromthe North palaceofAshurbanipal ( Fig.3a-b). Nevertheless,heconsidered adoration of the stelae to be an act different fromthe worship of the gods. His attempt to comprehend the sourcesd oes not clarify their meaning ( Gadd 1934,16). This leavest he adoration of the stelae, which according to Gadd himself is obviouslycultic action, unexplained. H. Tadmor (1964,264) suggested, based on Tiglath-pileser III'sd escription of his campaign against Philistia, that "the clearest signofthe enslavement was the royal Assyrian cult which was introducedthere, i. e., the serviceo fthe stelaofthe kingofAssyria in the central Shrine of Gaza. Onlythose vassal states which weren ot annexed to Assyria weref orcedt op racticet his cult,whereas the people of Assyria proper and residents of Assyrian provincesw erea bsolvedf romi t." (Tadmor 1964,2 64: translation from Hebrewa fter Cogan 1974,57). In his subsequent publicationo ft he textso fT iglath-pileser III Tadmor (1994,177) refrains from expressinghis own opinion concerningthe Assyrian imperial cult and refers the readert od iscussions of this question in the books of M. Cogan and H. Spieckermann. All those authors area ctuallyconcerned with the question of imperial cults beingi mposedu pon the Assyrian vassal states. The matters of the deification of a kingo rh is image areo fs econd priority for them. Noteworthy,t hat in his 1994 edition Tadmor interprets ṣalam šarrūtija as astatue of the king (Tadmor 1994,177), and not as astelaashedid previously ( Tadmor 1964,2 64).
A. Ungnad concludes (Ungnad 1967, 58 -9, n. 21 and 63, n. 5), that royal images(not stelae, as in Cogan 1974,5 9) weres anctified,b asingh imself on contracts,f romG ū z ā na, which put ṣalam šarri in one line with divine images. He further supports his opinion citingt he names, which use ṣalam šarri as as ubstitute for the divine name in theophoricp ersonal names. Cogan (1974,5 5-61)a rgued against Tadmor'sa nd Ungnad'ss uggestions and supported Gadd. Oddlyenough he does not discuss the textual evidence, but the pictorial and archaeological only. Thus,heclaims that the altar beforethe Ashurnasirpal II' stela at Ninurta temple bears an inscription,dedicatingittoBēl, in which case the sacrifices there were made to gods and not to the royal image. He postulates (1974,(57)(58) that "… typological studyoft he altarsf ound in proximity to stelae -both those found in situ and those represented on palacer eliefs -differentiated at least twod istinct architectural styles:( 1) peaked incense(?) altar,a nd (2) round table altars.P eakeda ltars areu suallys hown stationed at temple gateways and entrance; both in Uruk and Sippar the culto fr oyal image was modelled on the traditional Babylonian prebendary system. Fig. 1a-b. Stelao fA shurnasirpal II at the entrance to the Ninurtat emple at Kalḫu( Nimrud) with an altar in front of it. 5 th year of Ashurnasirpal II -879 BCE; (b) detail. After Layard1 853a, 303. "The True Imageo ft he God…"