Daily Life in the Wild West of Assyria, in: B. S. Düring (ed.), Understanding Hegemonic Practices of the Early Assyrian Empire. PIHANS CXXV (Leiden 2015), 177-187. (original) (raw)

The Archaeological Character of an Imperial Frontier: Assyrian Control Policy in the Hula Valley

The Assyrian conquest marked the beginning of a new political reality in the history of the territories to the west of the Euphrates River. One of the first regions in Palestine to meet the Assyrian rage was the Hula Valley, which presented the empire with a developed human settlement system but also with stark ecological disadvantages in the form of extensive marshlands. Tiglath Pileser III’s military campaigns to the region in 734-732 BCE devastated most local sites and brought an end to the existing Israelite political order. Echoes of the Assyrian invasion and subsequent mass deportations are found in both Assyrian texts (Summary Inscription 13:17-18) and the biblical record (II Kings 15:29; 16:9) and led scholars to emphasize the devastating nature of the Assyrian conquest, suggesting the area was razed and left as an “empty cell” throughout most of the seventh century BCE. Indeed, an overwhelming use of power was exercised by the Assyrians in their attempt to put down local resistance and prevent any future anti-Assyrian coalition. However, this was followed by integration into the Assyrian provincial system and subjection to imperial direct rule. The archaeological evidence from Iron Age II Hula sites and neighboring territories suggests that the area was not depopulated following the Assyrian campaigns but that it was reorganized in a completely different manner, according to Assyrian conceptions. In this framework the Assyrians disempowered the former Israelite administrative center at Hazor and nearby settlements in order to prevent any future opposition. While Hazor and other sites lay waste, the Assyrians built imperial edifices in two key positions: one at Ayyelet ha-Shaʻar and the other at Chinnereth, in the spirit of the typical Assyrian architectural tradition. This decision demonstrates the imperial interest to protect the land corridor leading to Damascus via the Beth Shean and Hula Valleys, with a branch leading north through Chinnereth and Hazor up to the Lebanese Beqaʼ. However, the most striking evidence for the extent of the Assyrian involvement in the region comes from Tel Dan, the former cultic capital of the northern Israelite kingdom that was transformed by the Assyrians into a highly populated provincial city. A large public edifice was built at Dan, near the spring of Ein Leshem, with its plan and material culture sharing parallels with Sargon II’s citadel (Dur-Sharrukin) at Khorsabad. Finally, several methodological observations concerning the ways in which Assyrian imperial control policy was exercised and manifested in the material culture are summarized in two main stages. The first stage is territorial expansion through an overwhelming military campaign aimed at specific targets said to have committed some sort of insult against the imperial power. This is followed by a second phase, comprising territorial consolidation which involves reconstruction and reordering of conquered towns and the creation of centrally-located administrative and military hubs. To sum up, the imperial control strategy that the Assyrians exercised in their western border was a combination of ecological adaptation, political considerations and economic interests that would inspire imperial regimes in the region for generations to come.

The Rise and Consolidation of Assyrian Control on the Northwestern Territories

Understanding Hegemonic Practices of the Early Assyrian Empire. Essays dedicated to Frans Wiggermann. (PIHANS 125). Edited by B. Düring, 2015

Flanking the western and northwestern boundaries of the territorial nucleus of Assyria, the Khabur Triangle in northeastern Syria and the Upper Tigris River Valley in southeastern Turkey represented areas of great value for the Assyrians, and were targeted in the expansion that took place in the Late Bronze Age. These territories were part of the area known as Hanigalbat in Assyrian sources, and constituted the heartland of the Mittani kingdom. To understand the nature and meaning of the Assyrian impact, as well as the ways in which territorial and hegemonic control was exercised over the subjugated lands, we need to analyse changes in settlement systems and material culture. In previous articles. The aim of the paper is to highlight what archaeological evidence may tell us about the rise of Assyrian power in the territories beyond the steppes.