Bloodthirsty Assyrians

Andrew Brown
NES R1B 004
Brown

In this reading, we get a taste of just how much has happened since the Babylonian era, and the time of Uruk before that. It is remarkable how the size and complexity of political organization in the region grew exponentially. An era of disconnected city-states, declaring autonomy in their relatively limited regions, have given way to empires.
The Assyrian Empire, which Empires discusses in excruciating detail, is larger and more dynamic than even the Babylonian empire under Hammurabi’s kingship. Instead of squabbling with it’s neighbors, as Hammurabi had done, the Assyrian Empire does business from the Mediterranean Sea, to Anatolia, to Memphis, Egypt; the Assyrians truly redefined the concept of scale of influence.
The text goes into various reasons for the success of the Assyrian Empire. While chapter 1 was not assigned and so I may have missed the explanation for this, it is difficult to describe how the Assyrians amassed so much land and power. However, it is clear that, once the Assyrians were in power, they dominated the region.
Principal to the successes of the Assyrians was their army, which was built on conscripted Assyrian citizens, mercenaries, and, basically, slaves of fallen governments. The Assyrian army was in a constant state of conquest. This constant state of conquest had the effect of ensuring that the army was experienced in war. Additionally, it was through conquest (i.e. tribute) that Assyria funded its empire: silver and gold valuables, horses, and slaves. Horses were very important because the Assyrian army relied heavily on chariots, at first, and later mounted archers. Even on numerous occasions when the Assyrian army would encounter defeat, the empire was essentially too big to fail; there was always war to be waged on another front or another successor to take the throne. However, this was also the cause of its decline, as the army eventually came to be spread too thinly over the Fertile Crescent.
While, at first, the relationship between the Assyrian Empire and its tributary states was purely exploitative, as time passed, we see the incorporation of foreign cultural aspects into Assyrian culture. Additionally, the Assyrians took more of an interest in foreign states, often installing Assyrian officials in governmental roles in them. After many centuries of repeatedly conquering the states of the Fertile Crescent, the Assyrians finally realized how to truly unite the peoples. It was this unification that allowed other empires to more easily assume command of the entire region, all at once. Perhaps this was also the case with the coming to power of the Assyrians. Could the success of the Assyrian Empire be due to the scaffolding set up by Hammurabi and the Babylonians?