Babylonian king names differ from their Akkadian equivalents due to distinct linguistic traditions.
the verdict
REFUTED
the evidence says no
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
0 sources for · 1 against
AS REPORTEDno primary record reached; this is what the reporting says
Retrieved expert discussion indicates that discrepancies between cuneiform name writings and their modern readings are due to script ambiguities rather than distinct linguistic traditions causing name variations.
# Why is it that Babylonian king names do not match their Akkadian equivalent?
Tags: names, transliteration, semitic-languages, ancient
- Score: 5
- Views: 231
- Answers: 1
- Answered: yes
- Asked by: Tyler Durden (845 rep)
- Asked: 2018-04-11
- Edited: 2018-04-12
- Site: linguistics
## Question
I am trying to figure out why it is that Babylonian (and Assyrian) king names do not match their Akkadian transcription.
For example, in the one known inscription for Nabonassar, which is written in Akkadian, his name is given as "AG-URU-ir", but it is translated as "Nabu-nasir". How is the translator (Grant Frame?) obtaining Nabu-nasir from AG-URU-ir?
This same phenomena is true not just for kings, but lesser officials as well. For example, in the same inscription, the viceroy of Babylon is named as AG-GIN-NUMUN and this is translated as Nabu-mukin-zeri. I would guess this is supposed to be the same name in a different language? In other words the cuneiform symbols have different soundings depending on the language. So, AG=Nabu, URU=nas, GIN=mukin, etc. What is the explanation?
## Answers
### Answer by Draconis (score: 9)
This comes down to the ambiguities in the Cuneiform script.