The Importance of Monuments in Mesopotamian Warfare

According to Bahrani, many wars in Mesopotamia were "fought at the level of monuments as much as land and natural and economic resources." This motivation for war has not been looked at by any of the other historians we have looked at all semester; resources and power were the motivations that they cited. In chapter 6, Bahrani talks about how the capture, mutilation, and public display of monuments in Mesopotamian wars displayed one Kingdom's victory over another. One example of this was how some armies would destroy a cities' records. In ancient Mesopotamia, much weight was kept on record keeping, and it would be a huge blow for a city for their records to be destroyed.

However, I do not see how the capture of another city's records and monuments can be separated from the other motivations. By capturing them, isn't the king still showing off his power and strength to his people as well as his enemies? For example, with the code of Hammurabi, the Elamite army took the stela to show off the kings wisdom and valor. The same can be argued with the capture of deities and cult statues. The deities were not "harmed" when they were taken from enemy cities, but they were kept by the enemy. The city who had lost the deity would then be left helpless and powerless. The deities were like prisoners of war, and by taking them, it would seem as a way that a kingdom could assert their superiority over others.