City of Akkad

City of Akkad

Mesopotamia’s first-known empire, founded at the city of Akkad, prospered from the end of the 24th century b.c.e. to the beginning of the 22nd century b.c.e. Sargon of Akkad (2334–2279 b.c.e.) established his empire at Akkad; its exact location is unknown but perhaps near modern Baghdad.

His standing army allowed him to campaign from eastern Turkey to western Iran. Although it is still unclear how far he maintained permanent control, it probably ranged from northern Syria to western Iran.

His two sons succeeded him, Rimush (2278–70 b.c.e.) and Manishtushu (2269–55 b.c.e.), who had military success of their own by suppressing rebellions and campaigning from northern Syria to western Iran.


Yet it was Manishtushu’s son Naram-Sin (2254–18 b.c.e.) who took the empire to its pinnacle. He established and maintained control from eastern Turkey to western Iran. In contrast to his grandfather who was deified after his death, Naram-Sin claimed divinity while he was still alive.

The rule of Naram-Sin’s son Shar-kali-sharri (2217–2193 b.c.e.) was mostly prosperous, but by the end of his reign the Akkadian Empire controlled only a small state in northern Babylonia. Upon Shar-kali-sharri’s death anarchy ensued until order was restored by Dudu (2189–2169 b.c.e.) and Shu-Durul (2168–2154 b.c.e.), but these were more rulers of a city-state than kings of a vast empire.

The demise of the Akkadian Empire can be explained by internal revolts from local governors as well as external attacks from groups such as the Gutians, Elamites, Lullubi, Hurrians, and Amorites. The Akkadian Empire set the standard toward which Mesopotamian kings throughout the next two millennia strove. Because of this, much literature appeared concerning the Akkadian kings, especially Sargon and Naram-Sin.

In the Sargon Legend, which draws upon his illegitimate birth, Sargon is placed in a reed basket in the Euphrates before he is drawn out by a man named Aqqi and raised as a gardener. From this humble beginning Sargon establishes himself as the king of the first Mesopotamian empire.

The King of Battle is another tale of how Sargon traveled to Purushkhanda in central Turkey in order to save the merchants there from oppression. After defeating the king of the city, Nur-Daggal, the local ruler is allowed to continue to govern as long as he acknowledges Sargon as king.

Map of Akkadian empire

Naram-Sin, however, is often portrayed as incompetent and disrespectful of the gods. In The Curse of Akkad, Naram-Sin becomes frustrated because the gods will not allow him to rebuild a temple to the god Enlil, so he destroys it instead. Enlil then sends the Gutians to destroy the Akkadian Empire.

As we know, however, the Akkadian Empire continued to have 25 prosperous years under Shar-kali-sharri after the death of Naram-Sin, and the Gutians were not the only reason for the downfall of the Akkadian Empire.

In fact, there is no evidence for the Gutians causing problems for the Akkadians until late in the reign of Shar-kali-sharri. Although this story had an important didactic purpose, it shows that caution must be used in reconstructing the history of the Akkadian Empire from myths and legends.


In the Cuthean Legend, Naram-Sin goes out to fight a group that has invaded the Akkadian Empire. Naram-Sin seeks an oracle about the outcome of the battle, but since it is negative, he ignores it and mocks the whole process of divination. As in The Curse of Akkad, Naram-Sin’s disrespect of the gods gets him in trouble as he is defeated three times by the invaders.

He finally seeks another oracle and receives a positive answer. Naram-Sin has learned his lesson: “Without divination, I will not execute punishment.” Despite these tales, there are others that paint Naram-Sin in a more positive light as an effective king with superior military capabilities.

Along with a centralized government comes standardization. This included the gradual replacement of Sumerian, a non-Semitic language, with Akkadian, an East Semitic language, in administrative documents.

Dating by year names, that is naming each year after a particular event such as “the year Sargon destroyed Mari,” became the system used in Babylonia until 1500 b.c.e. when it was replaced with dating by regnal years. There was also a standardized system of weights and measures. Taxes were collected from all regions of the empire in order to pay for this centralized administration.

The Akkadian ruler appointed governors in the territories the empire controlled, but many times the local ruler was just reaffirmed in his capacity. The governor would have to pledge allegiance to the Akkadian emperor and pay tribute, but at times, when the empire was weak, the local rulers could revolt and assert their own sovereignty.

This meant that the Akkadian rulers were constantly putting down rebellions. But perhaps the most important precedent started by the Akkadian Empire was the installation of Sargon’s daughter Enheduanna as the high priestess of the moon god Nanna at Ur.

She composed two hymns dedicated to the goddess Inanna, making her the oldest known author in Mesopotamia. This provided much needed legitimacy for the kingdom in southern Babylonia and continued to be practiced by Mesopotamian kings until the sixth century b.c.e.

Armenia

Armenia

Located at the flashpoint between the Roman and Persian Empires, “Fortress Armenia” stretched through eastern Anatolia to the Zagros Mountains. Armenia was a kingdom established during the decline of Seleucid control.

Its independence ended with its incorporation into the Roman Empire in the third century c.e. The region was inhabited after the Neolithic Period, and evidence of high culture is evident from the Early Bronze Age. Urartu was an important regional power in the eighth to the sixth centuries b.c.e.

The Indo-Europeans arrived from western Anatolia in this period and formed a new civilization that was Armenian-speaking and based on the local culture. The conversion of Armenia to Christianity is associated with a number of stages or traditions. The most important one was the work of Gregory Luzavorich, the “Illuminator” (d. 325 c.e.). Armenians greatly treasure their heritage as the first nation that converted officially to the Christian faith.


Syriac Christianity first influenced Armenia: The Armenian version of the Abgar legend makes Abgar an Armenian king, and the evangelization of Addai is described as a mission to southern Armenia. The influence of Syriac literature and liturgy on Armenia remained strong even after the Greek influence, primarily from Cappadocia, and increased in the third century c.e.

The Greek tradition states that Bartholomew was the apostle to the Armenians. The Abgar/Addai legend is earlier than that of Bartholomew. The traditions of the female missionaries and martyrs Rhipsime and Gaiane are among the earliest accounts of the conversion of Armenia. Tertullian (c. 200 c.e.) also mentions that there were Christians in Armenia.

Armenia map

The conversion of the royal house of Armenia dates officially to 301 c.e., predating the conversion of the Georgian king Gorgasali and the Ethiopian Menelik by a generation. In that year Gregory the Iluminator persuaded King Tiridates III (Trdat the Great, 252–330) to be baptized.

Gregory is identified as the founder of the Christian Armenian nation and as the organizer of the Armenian Church. Gregory founded Ejmiatsin, the mother cathedral of the Armenian Church, after an apparition by Jesus Christ who descended from heaven at the site of a significant pagan temple (Ejmiatsin means “The Only-begotten Descended”). Gregory’s original church was at Vagharshapat.

The revelation to found the church at Ejmiatsin coincided with changing political circumstances. Politically, Armenians were always at the mercy of the great powers of Persia and Rome, and in 387 the Roman emperor Theodosius I and the Persian emperor Shapur agreed to partition Armenia, thus ending its independence.


As the site of a dominical apparition, the place of Gregory’s Episcopal see, the residence of Armenian Catholicoi, and the most important administrative center of the Armenian Church, Ejmiatsin is for Armenians a holy site on a par with the Church of the Anastasis (Resurrection) in Jerusalem or the Basilica of Bethlehem, where Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth was born.

The second most important event of the formative period of Armenian history was Mesrob Mashtots’s (c. 400) invention of the Armenian alphabet, which resulted in the translation of the Bible and the liturgy into Armenian and a rapid introduction of Christian and classical works, translated from Greek and Syriac into Armenian.

During the Christological controversies of the fifth and sixth centuries, the Armenian Apostolic Church rejected the decisions of the Council of Chalcedon (451) and remains to this day one of the non-Chalcedonian churches that adhere to the strict interpretation of Cyril of Alexandria’s “one nature of the incarnate Logos” formula. For this reason, Armenians are often erroneously and polemically labeled “Monophysites.”

Armenian army

Artaxerxes - Persian Emperors

Artaxerxes - Persian Emperors

The Persian Empire reached its greatest strength under Darius I; under the reign of the three Artaxerxes it began and concluded its decline, ending with Alexander the Great’s conquests in 330 b.c.e. Artaxerxes I, third son of Emperor Xerxes I, acceded to the throne in 465 b.c.e. following the murder of his father and his brother Darius, who was first in line to the throne.

According to Josephus, the first century c.e. Jewish historian, Artaxerxes’ pre-throne name was Cyrus. The first century b.c.e. Roman historian Plutarch adds that he was nicknamed “long-armed” due to his right arm being longer than his left.

Earlier kings of the Persian Empire, namely Cyrus II, Darius, and Xerxes, were discussed in the comprehensive works of the near contemporary Greek historian Herodotus of Halicarnassus, but unfortunately Herodotus’s work did not cover much of Artaxerxes’ reign, and none of the reigns of later kings.


Artaxerxes I

The Bible refers to Artaxerxes explicitly in Ezra 4:7, in reference to a letter written by the Jews’ enemies in Samaria. Both Ezra and Nehemiah, significant figures in the later history of the biblical Israelite people, arrived in Judah in Palestine to serve the Jews there during the reign of Artaxerxes.

If this is accurate then it was Artaxerxes for whom Nehemiah was cup bearer (Nehemiah 2:1), a position that gave him close access to the king, and it was to him that Nehemiah asked for permission to go to Jerusalem to oversee the rebuilding of the city walls.

A. T. Olmstead in A History of the Persian Empire states the opinion that it was also Artaxerxes to whom Ezra went in 458 to ask permission to take a group of Jewish exiles back to Judaea in order to reestablish proper worship (Ezra 7:1, 8:1).

During his reign Artaxerxes generally followed the administrative practices of his father Xerxes. However, it was increasingly clear was that the empire, having reached its maximum extent under Darius I, Artaxerxes’ grandfather, was weakening.

Undoubtedly, a key cause was the high levels of taxation, which was stripping the satrapies, the regions of the empire, of gold and silver, enriching Persia’s vaults, but fostering discontent among the king’s subjects. In 460 ancient Egypt rebelled, drove out the Persian tax collectors, and requested aid from Athens. The Athenians, who were looking for a fight with Persia, sent a fleet; and by 459 nearly all of Egypt was in the hands of the rebel alliance.

It was probably in this turbulent period that Ezra made his application to Artaxerxes to allow a contingent of Jews to organize the worship of the returned exiles in Judaea. The Jews of Babylonia were probably some of the more loyal citizens, and since Persian policy supported organized religion, Ezra’s appeal met with sympathetic ears.

In the meantime Artaxerxes sent money to the Athenians’ Greek rival, Sparta, in order to counter their support of the Egyptian rebellion. Consequently, Athens was defeated at Tanagra (457), and with Judaea quieted, Artaxerxes sent his general Megabyzus at the head of a huge army down through the Levant to Egypt, taking back the country after one and a half years of siege.

Tomb of Artaxerxes I

The resultant defeat left Athens severely weakened and demoralized. In 449 the Callian treaty was agreed between Athens and Persia in Susa, in which the parties accepted the maintenance of the status quo in Asia Minor, namely that those Greek city-states that were in either party’s control at the time of the treaty stayed under that party’s control.

A few years later the general Megabyzus resigned from the army and retired to the satrapy he governed, “The land beyond the River,” namely modern-day Israel, Lebanon, and Syria—and there led a revolt. Possibly it was the rebellious courage stirred up by Megabyzus’s actions that led local authorities to pull down the Jerusalem walls lest there be another uprising.

In 431 hostilities broke out between Athens and Sparta, thereby beginning the long Peloponnesian War. Artaxerxes decided to take a position of noninterference and made no effort to slow the course of events, ignoring the entreaties for support from both sides. Artaxerxes I died of natural causes toward the end of 424 b.c.e.


Artaxerxes II

Artaxerxes II, the grandson of Artaxerxes I, acceded to the throne in March 404 b.c.e. on the death of his father, Darius II. However, the following year his younger brother Cyrus began plotting his overthrow. Cyrus gathered an army, significantly including 10,000 Greek mercenaries, and marched east.

Finally battle was drawn in 401 against his brother’s army at Cunaxa in central Mesopotamia, but despite initial success on Cyrus’s part, his rashness led to a crucial mistake that resulted in his death, and Artaxerxes won the day.

This not withstanding, the Greek mercenaries were allowed to march the thousand miles home, Artaxerxes not wanting to tackle them. This “March of the Ten Thousand” from the heart of the Persian territory became a symbol of the internal weakness of the Persian Empire at that time.

In 396 Sparta began a new war to take back control of the Greek cities of Asia Minor. While the Spartans played off one Persian satrap against another, Artaxerxes, aware of the empire’s military weakness, used its vast wealth to buy an alliance with Athens, Sparta’s local rival.

The Athenians aided the strengthened Persian navy, successfully countering the Spartan threat, with the result that in 387–386 a peace was struck, which once again required Sparta to give up any claims to sovereignty over the Greek cities in Asia Minor.

In 405 Egypt had revolted and remained independent from Persia throughout most of Artaxerxes’ reign. In 374 Artaxerxes sent a force to retake Egypt. The attempt failed, reinforcing the impression that the central authority was weakening. With rebellion rife the situation seemed to be slipping out of control and auguring the end of the empire.

However, the rebels’ Egyptian ally, Pharaoh Nekhtenebef, died unexpectedly in 360, leaving Egypt in chaos and the satraps of Asia Minor to face the wrath of the emperor alone. Rather than risk losing to the central authority, the rebels made peace with Artaxerxes, and many were in fact returned to their satrapies.

Artaxerxes III

Artaxerxes III of Persia

In 358 b.c.e., after a long and moderately successful tenure, though rife with revolts, Artaxerxes II died. His son Ochus acceded to the throne taking the name Artaxerxes III.

Ochus’s bloodthirsty reputation—possibly the worst in this regard of any of the Achaemenid kings—was compounded by the murder of all his relations, regardless of sex or age, soon after his accession. However, his ruthless ferocity did not stop revolts from rocking the empire.

Ochus made a fresh attempt to take back Egypt in 351 but was repulsed, and this encouraged further rebellions in the western satrapies. In 339 Persia misplayed its hand with Athens by refusing Athenian aid to deal with the rising power of Philip of Macedon. Persia took on Philip alone but failed to defeat him, and in 338 Philip took overlordship of the whole of Greece.

Greece united under Philip proved impervious to Persian might, and within eight years Persepolis, the Persian royal capital and the whole empire, was to collapse at the hands of Philip’s son, Alexander the Great.

Ochus’s physician, at the command of the powerful eunuch Bagoas, murdered Ochus, and Bagoas made Ochus’s youngest son, Arses, king (338–336 b.c.e.). Arses attempted to kill the too powerful Bagoas and was killed, allowing Darius III to become king. Darius survived until his death in 330 b.c.e. at the hands of Alexander.

Assyria

Soldiers of Assyria Going to Battle

The country of Assyria encompasses the north of Mesopotamia, made up of city-states that were politically unified after the middle of the second millennium b.c.e. Assyria derived its name from the city-state Ashur (Assur). This city was subject to the Agade king, Manishtushu, and the Ur III king, Amar-Sin.

During the Ur III period, Ashur also appears as the name of the city’s patron deity. Scholars have suggested that the god derived his name from the city and, indeed, may even represent the religious idealization of the city’s political power.

The Old Assyrian Period

The Old Assyrian period (c. 2000–1750 b.c.e.) began when the city of Ashur regained its independence. Its royal building inscriptions are the first attested writing in Old Assyrian, an Akkadian dialect distinct from the Old Babylonian then used in southern Mesopotamia. This period also saw the institution of the limmu, whereby each year became named after an Assyrian official, selected by the casting of lots.


The sequence of limmu names is not continuous for the second millennium b.c.e., but has been completely preserved for the first millennium b.c.e. A solar eclipse (dated astronomically to 763 b.c.e.) has been dated by limmu and thus provides a fixed chronology for Assyrian and—by means of synchronisms—much of ancient Near Eastern history.

During the Old Assyrian period Ashur engaged extensively in long-distance trade, establishing merchant colonies at Kanesh and other Anatolian cities. Ashur imported tin from Iran and textiles from Babylonia and, in turn, exported them to Kanesh. Due to political upheavals, Kanesh was eventually destroyed, and Assyria’s Anatolian trade was disrupted. Before this disaster, moreover, Ashur itself had been incorporated into the growing empire of Eshnunna.

Around the end of the 19th century b.c.e., the Amorite Shamshi-Adad I attacked the Eshnunna empire and conquered the cities of Ekallatum, Ashur, and Shekhna (renamed Shubat-Enlil). With the defeat of Mari in 1796 b.c.e., Shamshi-Adad could rightfully boast that he “united the land between the Tigris and the Euphrates” in northern Mesopotamia. The Assyrian King List was manipulated so as to include Shamshi-Adad in the line of native rulers, despite his foreign origins.

In the new empire Shamshi-Adad reigned as “Great King” in Shubat-Enlil, delegating his elder son, Ishme-Dagan, as “king of Ekallatum” and his younger son, Yasmah-Adad, as “king of Mari.” Government officials were frequently interchanged among the three courts.

King of Assyria

This mobility had the effect of homogenizing administrative practices throughout the kingdom, as well as creating loyalty to the central administration instead of to native territories. Shamshi-Adad’s empire, unfortunately, did not survive him for long. A native ruler, Zimri-Lim, reclaimed Mari and King Hammurabi of Babylon eventually subjugated northern cities such as Ashur and Nineveh.

The four centuries after Ishme-Dagan are referred to as a “dark age,” when historical records are scarce. During this time the kingdom of Mittani was founded. As it expanded its territory in northern Mesopotamia, the city-states once united under Shamshi-Adad became separate political units. The Middle Assyrian kingdom (1363–934 b.c.e.) began when Ashur-uballit I threw off the Mitannian yoke.

Whereas former rulers had identified themselves with the city of Ashur, Ashur-uballit was the first to claim the title “king of the land of Assyria,” implying that the region had been consolidated as a single territorial state under his reign. In his correspondence to the pharaoh, Ashur-uballit claimed to be a “Great King,” on equal footing with the important rulers of Egypt, Babylonia, and Hatti.


Mitanni remained in the unenviable position of warfare on two fronts: the Hittites from the north-west and Ashur-uballit’s successors from the east. Adad-nirari I annexed much of Mitanni, extending Assyrian’s western frontier just short of Carchemish.

Shalmaneser I turned Mitannian territory into the Assyrian province of “Hanigalbat,” governed by an Assyrian official. His reign also witnessed the first seeds of Assyria’s policy on deportation: Conquered peoples were relocated away from their homeland in order to crush rebellious tendencies as well as to exploit new agricultural land for the empire.

Tukulti-Ninurta I conquered Babylon and deposed the Kassite king, Kashtiliash IV. He appointed a series of puppet kings on Babylon’s throne, but a local rebellion soon returned control to the Kassites. This Assyrian monarch also set a precedent by founding a new capital, naming it after himself (“Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta”). Tukulti-Ninurta was eventually assassinated by one of his sons, and the rapid succession of the next three rulers suggests violent contention for the throne.

Stability returned to Assyria with the ascension of Ashur-resha-ishi I. Around this time the increased use of iron for armor and weapons greatly influenced the methods of Assyrian warfare. His son, Tiglathpileser I, achieved great victories in the Syrian region and even campaigned as far as the Mediterranean. He was the first to record his military campaigns in chronological order, thus giving rise to the new genre of “Assyrian annals.”

To the south conflict between Assyria and Babylonia was temporarily halted by the advent of a common enemy: the Aramaeans. They were a nomadic Semitic people in northern Syria, who ravaged Mesopotamia in times of famine. Under this invasion Assyria lost its territory and may have been reduced to the districts of Ashur, Nineveh, Arbela, and Kilizi.

The Neo-Assyrian Kingdom

The Neo-Assyrian kingdom (934–609 b.c.e.) began with Ashur-dan II, who resumed regular military campaigns abroad after more than a century of neglect. He and his successors focused their attacks on the Aramaeans to recover areas formerly occupied by the Middle Assyrian empire.

Adad-nirari II set the precedent for a “show of strength” campaign, an official procession displaying Assyria’s military power, which marched around the empire and collected tribute from the surrounding kingdoms. This monarch also installed an effective network of supply depots to provision the Assyrian army en route to distant campaigns.

Ashurnasirpal II has been considered the ideal Assyrian monarch, who personally led his army in a campaign every year of his reign. He subjected Nairu and Urartu to the north, controlled the regions of Bit-Zamani and Bit-Adini to the west, and campaigned all the way to the Mediterranean.

Shalmaneser III continued his father’s tradition of military aggression. From his reign to Sennacherib’s (840–700 b.c.e.), the annual campaigns were so regular that they served as a secondary means of dating (i.e., the “Eponym Chronicle”). At Qarqar on the Orontes River in 853 b.c.e., Shalmaneser fought against a coalition led by Damascus, which included “[King] Ahab, the Israelite.”

Under Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III military strategy was honed to great effectiveness: When enemies refused to pay regular tribute, a few vulnerable cities would be taken and their inhabitants tortured by rape, mutilations, beheadings, flaying of skins, or impalement upon stakes.

This “ideology of terror” was designed to discourage armed insurrection, lest Assyria exhaust its resources. As a last resort, however, the foreign state would be annexed as an Assyrian province. The strategy of forced deportations was employed with reasonable success.

For the next century Assyria experienced a decline due to weakness in its central government, as well as the military dominance of its northern neighbor, Urartu. Tiglath-pileser III (biblical “Pul”), however, restored prestige to the monarchy by curtailing the power of local governors.

Instead of levying troops annually, he built up a standing professional army. Tiglath-pileser defeated the Urartians and invaded their land up to Lake Van. In the west an anti-Assyrian coalition was crushed, and the long recalcitrant Damascus was annexed. He also adopted a new policy toward Babylonia.

The Assyrian monarchs had traditionally restrained their efforts to control Babylonia, in deference to the latter’s antiquity as the ancestral origin of Assyria’s own culture and religion. In 729 b.c.e., however, Tiglath-pileser established a precedent by deposing the Babylonian king and uniting Assyria and Babylonia in a dual monarchy.

Hebrew tradition credits Shalmaneser V with the fall of Samaria in 722 b.c.e., the very last year of his reign. Two years later, however, Sargon II still had to crush a coalition led by Yaubidi of Hamath, who had fomented rebellion in Arpad, Damascus, and Samaria. The victory was depicted on relief sculptures in the newly founded royal city, Dur-Sharrukin (modern Khorsabad).

After a prolonged struggle, including a defeat by the Elamites at Der (720 b.c.e.), Sargon eventually wrested the Babylonian throne from Merodachbaladan II. In 705 b.c.e., however, Sargon’s body was lost in battle, prompting speculation about divine displeasure. Sargon’s successor, Sennacherib, eventually decided to move the capital to Nineveh.

During his 701 b.c.e. campaign in Palestine, Sennacherib became the first Assyrian monarch to attack Judah. He also attempted various methods of controlling Babylonia. When direct rule failed, Sennacherib installed a pro-Assyrian native as puppet king. There-after, he delegated the control of Babylonia to his son, who was later kidnapped by the Elamites. Finally, in 689 b.c.e. he razed Babylon to the ground.

Sennacherib was assassinated by two of his sons, a crime later avenged by another son, Esarhaddon. The latter was successful in his overtures to achieve reconciliation with Babylon. Esarhaddon may have overstretched Assyria’s limits, however, when he invaded Egypt and conquered Memphis in 671 b.c.e.

At his death Esarhaddon divided the empire between two sons: Ashurbanipal in Assyria and Shamashshuma-ukin in Babylonia. Egypt proved troublesome to hold, and Ashurbanipal eventually lost it to Psammetichus I. Moreover, civil war broke out between Assyria and Babylonia.

The Assyrians conquered Babylon by 648 b.c.e. and invaded Elam, which had been Babylon’s ally. Although successful, the civil war had taken its toll on Assyrian forces. Also, the crippled Elam was no longer a buffer between Assyria and the expanding state of Media.

In 614 b.c.e. the Medes conquered the city of Ashur. Two years later, in coalition with the Babylonians and Scythians, they overthrew Nineveh. The defeated Assyrian forces fled to Haran, but the allied armies pursued them there and effectively ended the Neo-Assyrian kingdom in 609 b.c.e.