‘While I was in Kalhu, this report was brought back to me: ‘All of the men of the land of Laqe, Hindanu, Suhu, have rebelled and crossed the Euphrates.’ On the eighteenth day of the month Sivan, I moved from Kalhu. After crossing the Tigris, I took to the desert and approached the city of Suru which belongs to Bit-Halupe. I built my own boats in the city of Suru and made my way towards the Euphrates. I went down as far as the narrows of the Euphrates. I conquered the cities of Henti-Ilu and Azi-Ilu, (leaders) of the Laqeans. I massacred them, carried off captives from them, razed, destroyed, and burnt (their) cities.
In the course of my campaign I turned aside and razed, destroyed, and burnt the cities which are on this bank of the Euphrates and which belong to the land of Laqe and the land of Suhu, from the mouth of the river Khabur as far as the city Sibatu of the land of Suhu. I reaped their harvests. I felled with the sword 470 of their fighting men. I captured 20 alive and erected them on stakes. I crossed the Euphrates at the city Haridu by means of the boats which I had made, rafts made of inflated goatskins which had moved along the road simultaneously with the army. Suhu, Laqe, and Hindanu, trusting in the massiveness of their chariotry, troops, and might, mustered 6,000 of their troops and attacked me to wage war and battle. I fought with them and inflicted upon them a defeat. I destroyed their chariotry, I felled 6,500 of their men-at-arms with the sword, and the rest of them the Euphrates consumed because of the thirst they suffered in the desert. I conquered from the city of Haridu in the land of Suhu as far as the city of Kipinu, the cities of Hindanu and Laqe which were on the other bank. I massacred them, carried off captives from them, razed, destroyed, and burnt their cities.
Azi-Ilu of Laqe, trusting in his own might, seized the crossing at the city Kipinu. I fought with them and away from Kipinu I brought about his defeat. I massacred 1,000 of his fighting men, destroyed his chariotry, carried off many captives from him, and brought away his gods. To save his life he took a rugged mountain, Mount Bisuru (Jebel Bishri), in the direction of the Euphrates. For two days I went after him. I felled with the sword the rest of his soldiers and their remains the mountain of the Euphrates consumed. I went after him as far as the cities Dummetu and Azmu, cities of Bit Adini. I felled with the sword the rest of his troops and carried off him valuable booty, oxen, and sheep which, like the stars of heaven, had no number. At that time I uprooted Ila of Laqe, his harnessed chariots and 500 of his troops. I brought them to my land Ashur. I conquered, razed, destroyed, and burnt the cities Dummetu and Azmu. I emerged from the narrows of the Euphrates.
In the course of my campaign, I turned aside. Azi-Ilu vanished in the face of my mighty weapons in order to save his life. I uprooted Ila, leader of Laqe, his troops and his chariots with teams. I brought them to my city Ashur. I confined Hemti-Ilu of Laqe in his city. With the support of Ashur my lord he took fright in face of my mighty weapons, my fierce battle, and my perfect power, and I received the property of his palace — silver, gold, tin, bronze, bronze casseroles, garments with multi-coloured trim — his valuable booty. In addition, I imposed upon them more tribute and tax than ever before.
At that time, I killed 50 strong wild bulls on the other bank of the Euphrates. I captured eight wild bulls alive. I killed 20 ostriches. I captured 20 ostriches alive. I founded two cities in the Euphrates, one on this bank of the Euphrates, which I called Kar-Ashurnasirpal and one on the other bank of the Euphrates, which I called Nibarti-Ashur.’
The second area of intervention was the one of Habhu and Nairi, and along the entire mountain range. This intervention took advantage of the previously conquered, yet still unstable, strongholds of Habruri (Upper Zab) and Bit Zamani (Upper Tigris). Ashurnasirpal enforced the Assyrian centres in the Upper Tigris Valley (Tushhan) and led a series of military expeditions in the mountains. There, the kingdoms were able to resist the Assyrian conquest. They were also on the verge of shifting from being an anti-Assyrian confederacy, similar to the one of Nairi, to a compact state like the one of Urartu. From an Assyrian point of view, in order to ensure the safety of the Assyrian centres at the bottom of the valley, it was important to consolidate control of the Upper Tigris. On the left side of the valley, Habhu and Nairi could not be overcome, and were anyway not part of the territories traditionally reclaimed by the empire.
The Kashyari Mountains, located between the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates and the Upper Mesopotamian plateau, constituted a different case. They were cutting off communications between Tushhan and Nasibina. This area therefore had to be under Assyrian control at any cost. Ashurnasirpal led several violent campaigns there. The outcome of these campaigns initially seemed uncertain. However, judging from the progress of the Assyrian expansion, the king probably considered the area securely under his control. Naturally, the most inaccessible mountain areas would remain unreachable for the Assyrian functionaries and administrators. Nonetheless, the fortified cities and routes were securely under Assyrian control.
The centres in the southern foothills of the Kashyari (from Nasibina and Kahat to Guzana and Huzirina) were already under Assyrian control. Therefore, Ashurnasirpal was able to retrace the routes followed by his predecessors, and repeat the expeditions on the Khabur and Middle Euphrates (Figure 28.1). These expeditions were essentially a mixture of tribute collection, display of military power, and actual conquest. Apart from specific cases, such as local successions used as an excuse for Assyrian intervention, the situation was clear: all Aramean centres of the Khabur, as well as the ones along the Euphrates, on the ‘Assyrian’ left bank, could not escape Ashurnasirpal’s army. They were forced to submit to the Assyrians, accepting to pay the tribute. They therefore became part of the empire, in the same way as the other Assyrian centres amongst which they were located. The centres on the ‘Aramean’ right bank felt protected by the river and the support from Babylonia (for the southernmost cities) and Bit Adini (for the ones further north), and refused to pay the tribute. Ashurnasirpal promptly intervened on the other side of the Euphrates, against Hindanu and Suhu (Figure 28.2), and fought both the Babylonian army and the one of Bit Adini. He thus gained control over the entire Euphrates Valley from Jebel Bishri to Anat and the Babylonian border.
Ashurnasirpal spared Babylonia, but decided to march against Bit Adini, which was by now an anomalous state, with territories on both side of the Euphrates (its capital, Til Barsip was on the ‘Assyrian’ bank). It therefore prevented the crossing of the river, and occupied a portion of the land within the theoretical borders of the empire. In order to complete the re-conquest of the empire, then, Bit Adini had to be pushed back to the other side of the river. Ashurnasirpal led two campaigns against Bit Adini. The first, relatively small, one was aimed at regaining the territories on the left bank, although Til Barsip remained untouched. The second one brought Ashurnasirpal to cross the Euphrates and achieve the dream of gaining access to the Mediterranean.
The crossing of the river led to several clashes with Bit Adini. On the contrary, Carchemish (the other key state for the crossing of the river) did not oppose the Assyrian ruler. This was also because the latter did not wish to claim Carchemish’s territory, being located on the right bank, in the ‘land of Hatti’. The Assyrian army proceeded through the land of Patina, in a journey that was largely peaceful. The army also received tributes, although we do not know to what extent they were imposed or traded. Along the southern border of Patina, the Orontes could be crossed, allowing access to the Mediterranean. The Assyrian king founded an Assyrian colony there (repeating an operation already implemented in Zamua and Bit Zamani). He then reached the Mediterranean, where he received ‘tributes’ from the Phoenician cities. Finally, he returned, crossing the Amanus and collecting precious timber. Despite its mainly commercial purpose, this expedition outside the Assyrian borders is important. It marked a desire for stable control that had never before gone so far, and paved the way for the far stronger interventions of Shalmaneser III.
Figure 28.2 Relief of Ashurnasirpal II, with Assyrian soldiers crossing a river towards a city under siege. From Nim-rud, now in the British Museum, Reg. No. 1849,1222.10. © The Trustees of the British Museum.
In Assyria, the greatest achievement of Ashurnasirpal II was the construction of a new capital in the site of Kalhu (modern Nimrud). The site already had some buildings from the time of Shalmaneser I. His predecessors had resided either in the ancient religious and political centre of Ashur or in Nineveh. The latter was more centrally located within the agricultural ‘triangle’ and now safe after the conquest of Katmuhi. Ashurnasirpal initially resided in Nineveh, but soon after began working on the new capital. The latter was inaugurated with a grand banquet, attended by guests from all over the known world, as well as new colons, artisans, and constructors. The royal palace was lavishly decorated with sculpted orthostats inscribed with the king’s deeds. Despite having suffered considerable modifications and damages, it still stands as a testimony of the pinnacle of Assyrian political and military power, of its economic and labour mobilisation, and of its celebratory and propagandist expression. This expression was often meant to be a deterrent. In fact, the Assyrian kings even prided themselves on the ruthless punishments they inflicted over the populations they defeated. Overall, the precariousness afflicting Assyria a couple of decennia earlier now seems overcome. The centre of the world was now solid, with materials, workforce and the most talented artists travelling from the margins of the empire to contribute to the construction of Assyrian monuments.
If the excavations at Nimrud provide good evidence on the centre of the empire, the margins of the empire can be better understood through the comparison of contemporary accounts with the archaeological remains. In particular, the site of Dur-Katlimmu (Teh Sheikh Hamad, on the Khabur) is an excellent example of a site that remained ‘Assyrian’ from the Middle Assyrian period to the reign of Ashurnasirpal, while nearby centres were increasingly influenced by the Aramean infiltrations. Further south, in the Suhu area, the Assyrian ‘twin’ sites Sur Jur’a and Glaya, located opposite each other along the banks of the Euphrates, clearly show the problem of the crossing of this river, which constituted a serious barrier.
Both archaeologically and textually, it is possible to catch a glimpse of the progressive consolidation of the network of communication and administrative centres that constituted the empire. Therefore, the former mosaic now became more homogeneous, though still ambiguous. The ‘governors’ (saknu) ruling over individual cities were sometimes of Assyrian, and sometimes of local origin. Their loyalty was constantly ambiguous and their desire for autonomy can be clearly seen in the case of Tell Fekheriye. The empire did not yet have an established division into provinces like in the following periods. It continued to survive through a combination of tributes from the periphery and military expeditions. The latter were so expensive (in terms of people and means) as to become unsustainable in the long run. Having regained
The ‘traditional’ empire, Assyria now faced two problems: the first one was its internal structure; the second one was in terms of growth. The first issue seems to have been the most urgent one. However, the successors of Ashurnasirpal II did not know how or did not want to deal with the problem, preferring to expand a not yet consolidated empire.
World History
