For the greater part of the period from the end of the 10th century to the 7th century BC, the Ancient Near East was dominated by the dynamic military power of Assyria. At the zenith of its rule Assyria could lay claim to an empire that stretched from Egypt in the west to the borders of Iran in the east and encompassed for the first time in history, within the realm of a single imperial domain, the whole of the 'Fertile Crescent'. Mark Healy, covers the history of the Assyrians from their ancient beginnings to the eventual fall of the city of Nineveh.
THE ANCIENT ASSYRIANS was an excellent book. The high quality artwork went hand in hand with the text. As a matter of fact, call me old fashioned or simple folk when it comes to artwork, but I think artwork that looks like a photograph is real art while expressionism is for people who can't color inside the lines. Angus McBride colors inside the lines.
Anyway, this book explained just who the Assyrians were and the role they played in not only history, but the Bible as well. Ancient empires were not countries as we know them today, but rather large powerful cities, or a confederation of these cities. The cities of Nineveh, Ashur, and Arbil in what history calls the fertile crescent united to defend their territory at a time when foreign invaders and migrating people came to rape, pillage, and steal your land. Lacking natural borders, they developed their military art to a fine art, and found that the best defense was a buffer of subjugated lands that paid tribute. Extending their reach further and further for one reason or another, their empire at its peak stretched from Egypt to the borders of Iran. When it finally fell, it fell hard, never to rise again, and Nineveh had to await the brush of the archeologist before it ever saw the light of day again.
Several factors made the Assyrian Army such a scourge of their neighbors. They developed siege warfare to a fine art. Instead of simply waiting to starve out a city, which could take years, they developed siege weapons. The moveable tower allowed them to shoot their arrows down on the defenders behind the walls. Their 'ram' was actually a huge blade which they inserted between the blocks of the wall to pry them apart. Once the city was taken, some of the defenders were beheaded, flayed, impaled on stakes, burnt alive, had their faces mutilated, and so forth. Thousands of others were transported to other parts of the empire. This pacified the region for a time.
Armies that met them on the field were outclassed by them. Their archers would send volleys of arrows at long range. Their heavy chariots mounting archers were unstoppable. Once the enemy line broke their infantry and cavalry rode them down. You see, the Assyrians were among the first to use men on horseback rather than to just pull chariots. They were among the first to have a trained force at the core of their army instead of just waiting till after the harvest to mobilize their men. They sort of had uniforms, and issued footwear to their troops. In a sense they were more modern than their enemies.
As such, the Assyrians were the scourge that God sent to punish His disobedient people in Israel and Judah. As stated in the Bible, they didn't take Jerusalem. Babylon, the whore mentioned in the Bible, was to some Assyrians their second city. Some fifty years after the Assyrian empire reached its peak it was destroyed by Babylon and its allies.
After listening to an old podcast by the great Dan Carlin (Judgment at Nineveh) I opted to pause my fiction book to read this short non-fiction overview on the ancient Assyrians, a book I’ve had for years and never read. Well, what a detour it was. TW for graphic descriptions of violence ahead.
The Neo-Assyrian empire especially is remembered by amateurs like myself mainly for one thing—their alleged violence and terrifying brutality. And it’s true that they wrote about it and made statues depicting it, but is it fair that that’s the main thing many remember them for? Here’s a passage discussing this is the context of Ashurnasirpal:
”In the text Ashurnasirpal describes in some detail that the rebels were flayed, impaled, beheaded, burned alive, had their eyes put out, noses, fingers, and ears cut off, and so on. To modern eyes this grisly litany speaks to little more than sadistic excess. If, however we are to place such behavior in its historical context then a few pertinent observations need be made. Whilst the relish that Ashurnasirpal speaks to the punishments on his enemies finds no parallel in other royal courts…..the words of the prophet Nahum, as quoted earlier, are an explicit reference to the deliberate and cultivated Assyrian policy of ‘frightfulness’. Notwithstanding that such behavior has become synonymous in the popular mind with commonplace Assyrian policy, it is quite apparent that the kings were highly selective in their use of it. In most cases when atrocities do occur it is consequent upon a vassal state renouncing the solid oath of fealty to the king and the god Ashur, the punishment being viewed as the rightful chastisement of a rebellious subject”
Policy of frightfulness, eh? While this was certainly common in the ancient world, it seems the Assyrians took this to the next level. Dan Carlin refers to them as having the reputation of “the Nazis of Old Testament times”.
Here it is straight from Ashurnasirpal himself:
”I built a pillar over the city gate, and I flayed all the chiefs who had revolted, and I covered the pillar with their skin. Some I walled up within the pillar. Some I impaled upon the pillar on stakes; others I bound on stakes around the pillar. I cut the limbs of the Royal officers who had rebelled. Many captives from among them I burned with fire, and many I took as living captives. From some I cut off their noses, their ears, their fingers; of many I put out their eyes. I made one pillar of the living, and another of heads; and I bound their heads to tree trunks around the city. Their young men and maidens I burned in the fire. 20 men I captured alive, and I took them and walled them in the wall of my palace, the rest of their warriors I took and consumed them with thirst in the desert of the Euphrates.”
That last part is a nice way of saying Ashurnasirpal left about 20,000 soldiers to die in the desert of thirst. And who says history isn’t interesting?!?
More, this time from Ashurbanipal; after defeating the Elamites, he describes what he did to their country:
”The tombs of their earlier and later kings who did not fear Ashur and Ishtar (my lords), and plagued my fathers, I destroyed. I devastated. I exposed to the sun. Their bones, I carried off to Assyria. I laid restlessness upon their shades. I deprived them of food offerings and of water. For a month and 25 days I devastated the provinces of Elam, salts and prickly plants I scattered over their fields, the dust of their cities I gathered together and took to Assyria. The noise of the people, the glad shouts of rejoicing, the tread of cattle and sheep, I banished from its fields.”
Now, we have to remember that we are talking about ancient, ancient history here; this civilization was ancient to the Romans. The Assyrians were violent, but it seems they had a specific reason for it—any affront to god and king, as respecting them were literally more important than life itself.
However, there is far more to this civilization than the violence (which was actually supposed to be my point-LOL); they made some vital advances that were later absorbed by other civilizations after the fall of Assyrian Nineveh, specifically their army and administration and governing an Empire of this size. Their system of communication between the field commanders and the king was the fastest known to the ancient world, and involved well maintained roads, fit with a system of relay stations where fresh animal and rider could be had. One of the later and most famous kings, Ashurbanipal, is well remembered for his military exploits, but also collected the largest library of stone tablets from nearby civilizations ever collected at the time. He was highly literate and was thought to be fluent in many languages of the region, including Assyrian and Akkadian (ancient Semitic languages, related to Hebrew and Arabic), as well as Sumerian (an extremely old isolate and the language of ancient Sumer). He was incredibly learned for his time, and included in his library of hundreds of tablets was the Epic of Gilgamesh. A fascinating figure indeed.
This is a rabbit hole I go down from time to time, only to quickly discover that I don’t know shit about jack. It’s endlessly fascinating, and surely far more information has been lost than we will ever truly know about many of these civilizations. If this is something that interests you, this is an excellent book for an overview on the Assyrians. I may not be as detailed as I would’ve liked, but it’s important to remember that this is not Rome. This is earlier, with nowhere near as much information available. The lack of books on the subject will quickly show you that.
Nonetheless, I’m giving it 5 stars because it was filled with great information, as well as lush, realistic drawings of numerous aspects of Assyrian life. One of those books that teaches you how shockingly little you really know about our own species’ history.
Now that this gory but interesting side quest is done, it’s back to Rome!
Most people have heard the word “Assyrians,” but most equally have no idea when their culture flourished, or where. The “when” is between 2,900 years and 2,600 years ago, more or less -- after the Babylonians and before the Achaemenid Persians -- and the “where” is in what used to be called the “Fertile Crescent,” up the broad shallow valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers from the Arabian Gulf and on to the northeastern Mediterranean coast. In fact, most English-speakers probably have heard of the Assyrians only via the Old Testament, which is hardly an unbiased source. I first learned about them in an undergraduate course many years ago that was meant to provide background to the pre-Classical world that most of us are more likely to be interested in, and I always felt a bit sorry for them.
Assyrian history has a few “great” kings, in the sense of being successful empire-builders, people like Tiglath-Pileser and Sargon and Sennacherib, but none of them are especially sympathetic. Assyria became an imperial power as a matter of survival, Mesopotamia being essentially broad and flat with few natural boundaries and being crowded at that time with a number of highly competitive ethnic groups. She responded to depredations by her neighbors by doing them one better, but the empire was always mostly a matter of military occupation and suppression and not much cultural expansion, and when the Assyrian empire collapsed rather suddenly after a mere three centuries, no one mourned her at all.
The volumes so far in Osprey’s “Elite” series appear to be much like the longstanding “Men-at-Arms” series, only more so. They’re thicker, with extended text, more color plates, and many more photos, maps, and diagrams. (“Elite” seems a misnomer when you’re considering an entire culture, but that’s just marketing.) Healy is an educator but not particularly an academic specialist in the ancient world. Still, his style is fluid and he does a good job in this overview, both in surveying Assyria’s geopolitical goals and in interpreting the stone carvings which provide most of the pictorial evidence for what the Assyrian military was like. The plates, painted by the talented Angus McBride, are very good indeed, especially in showing detail and in pointing out the slow evolution of costume, armor, and weapons over three hundred years.
Great book about the ancient assyrians, it has the length necessary to initiate in this camp. The maps could be better, as they don't follow the campaigns described but that is also not the scope of the book in the end.