514 Mark Leuchter formed between the prophet and the Jerusalem scribal circles that would have been responsible for the Deuteronomic texts and who would have certainly been well versed in Assyrian modes of discourse (38). Finally, the language in Jeremiah’s call narrative draws from Akkadian royal terminology, a feature visible also in passages from Deutero-Isaiah who wrote while immersed in Mesopotamian literary culture (39). The issue thus arises: would Jeremiah’s exilic audience, living under the iron fist of Babylon, have recognized an allusion to an Assyrian inscription that dated from almost a century earlier? All evidence suggests that this was indeed the case. Esarhaddon’s policy of rebuilding Babylon, as massive and significant an undertaking as it was, would have been well known throughout the Assyrian empire. As discussed above, many of the texts bearing witness to his program seem to have been composed with the broader public in mind (40). The acceptance of Esarhaddon by a culture as ancient and venerated as Babylon would have indeed been an accomplishment worth celebra- ting and publicizing, as it ended a long history of violent adversity between Assyria and Babylon and presented Esarhaddon as the ultimate Mesopotamian monarch. The foundation inscriptions Esarhaddon commissioned for his building projects hermetically infused the monarch’s presence into the very core of Babylon’s socio- cultic infrastructure, but the public display of these inscriptions made certain that all of Esarhaddon’s subjects would be aware of his glory as the bearer of divine will (41). Given the degree to which Assyrian literary culture influenced Judah’s religious literature in the late 7th century, it is reasonable to suppose that Esarhaddon’s 70-year inscription was well known among the Judean literati (42), which certainly would have included Jeremiah (38) Cf. Jer 26,24; 32,6-15; 35,4; 36; 43,3; 45; 51,59-64. On the association of these scribes with the Deuteronomic circles, see J.A. DEARMAN, “My Servants The Scribes: Composition and Context in Jeremiah 36”, JBL 109 (1990) 417-420. For the familiarity of these scribes with Assyrian literary patterns, see above (re: WEINFELD, Deuteronomy). (39) SOMMER, “New Light”, 655. See also S.M. PAUL, “Deutero-Isaiah and Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions”, Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser (ed. W.W. HALLO) (New Haven 1968) 180-186. (40) PORTER, Images, Power, Politics, 105-116. (41) For the likelihood that the foundation inscriptions were indeed composed for public reading, see PORTER, Images, Power, Politics, 112-113. (42) See HANDY, “The Role of Huldah”, 45-47, for the strong parallels between the account of Josiah’s reform and the Esarhaddon inscription, though HANDY views the Josiah account as a strictly literary creation without any