battle. A fragmentary copy of a treaty between Ashur-nirari and Mati'ilu, king of Arpad, also survives. Also known is a fragmentary description, the only known inscription written under Ashur-nirari himself, which records the grant of lands and tax exemption to the official Marduk-sarra-usur by Ashur-nirari following Marduk-sarra-usur having distinguished himself in a battle. Marduk-sarra-usur might be the same individual as a man of the same name mentioned in the eponym of 784 BC. Based on the list of eponyms, Ashur-nirari's reign was lackluster from a military perspective. The king is recorded to have stayed "in the land" (i.e. not campaigned) for almost every year of his reign, save for only three years. In 755 BC, the year of his accession, he campaigned against Arpad and in 748–747, he campaigned against the city of Namri in Urartu. It is probably from the conclusion of the 755 BC campaign that the treaty with Mati'ilu comes from. Almost all of the surviving portions of this treaty is made up of curses against Mati'ilu. It was customary for an Assyrian king to campaign every year which means that Ashur-nirari staying in Assyria could be a sign of domestic instability. Most Assyrian kings also undertook building projects, but no construction work conducted under Ashur-nirari V is known. Succession Ashur-nirari is generally regarded to have died in 745 BC, as this was the year of his successor Tiglath-Pileser III's accession. The nature of Tiglath-Pileser's rise to the throne is not clear, particularly because ancient sources give conflicting accounts of his lineage. The Assyrian King List states that Tiglath-Pileser was the son of Ashur-nirari V, but in his own inscriptions Tiglath-Pileser claimed to be the son of Adad-nirari III and thus Ashur-nirari's brother. Given that there are records of a revolt in Nimrud, the capital of the Assyria, in 746/745 BC, and that Tiglath-Pileser in his inscriptions attributes his rise to the throne as a result of divine selection rather than his royal ancestry, he is typically assumed to have usurped the throne from Ashur-nirari. In her 2016 PhD thesis, the historian Tracy Davenport advanced the hypothesis that Tiglath-Pileser may have succeeded entirely legitimately and had even briefly been co-ruler with Ashur-nirari. Davenport based this idea primarily on oddities in the sequence of eponyms under Tiglath-Pileser, an unusual horizontal line in the list of eponyms after 744 BC (which might mark Ashur-nirari's death) and the Assyrian King