Assyrian Rule Research Articles

Palestine under Assyrian Rule


 
 
 The Assyrian presence in Palestine from the ninth through the seventh century B.C.E. represents a case of intercultural contact against the background of an expansionist imperial process. The “Assyrianization” of Israel and Judah, as well as that of the whole Levant, has often been posited. This term, which evokes “Romanization,” would indicate enforced cultural adaptation to Assyrian values and customs within the framework of a process of assimilation. An alleged “Assyrianization” of Ancient Israel would be congruent with that interpretation of Assyrian imperialism postulating programmatic measures to impose the Assyrian way of life upon the whole empire. However, a study of the cuneiform and archaeological sources leads to an alternative interpretation of Assyrian imperial policy in the West.
 
 

Interaktionsformen zwischen Nomaden und Sesshaften in Palästina anhand neuassyrischer Quellen

The aim of this paper is to study the forms of interaction between nomads and sedentary people in the Southern Levant in the 1st millennium BC using the Neo-Assyrian texts. According to the available sources, the chronological scope of the discussion ranges from the second half of the 8th to the middle of 6th century BC. Three groups interacted in southern Palestine at the time of the Assyrian rule: the local states (Judah, Ammon,Moab and Edom and the Philistine cities), the Assyrians and the Arabs. The local states and Assyria represent the sedentary component whereas the Arabs are the nomadic component.An analysis of the available sources shows that, contrary to commonassumption, (a) not allArabswere nomads and (b) neither all Arabs nor all nomads were involved in international trade. The caravans which brought products fromSouth-Arabia reached Southern Palestine. Itwas in the interest of all parties that trade flourished. Assyria profited from this trade by the tribute which was raised from the Arabs. Assyria's claims for annual tribute had to be implemented by direct or indirect use of force. Although hard punitive measures were undertaken, the Assyrian kings tried in this region - and particularly in the case of the Arabs - to maintain a peaceful relationship. As in other regions of the empire, various methods were used to achieve this goal: loyalty oaths, the appointment of an Assyrian or local overseer, the indoctrination of elite members (who were later appointed as rulers), and, finally, the support of a loyal heir to the throne.

The Non-Eternal Dynastic Promises of Jehu of Israel and Esarhaddon of Assyria

AbstractThree Israelite kings receive promises of a dynasty continuing indefinitely (David, Solomon and Jeroboam I), but Jehu of Israel is the only ruler in the Hebrew Bible with a non-eternal dynastic promise. While many Assyrian rulers claim divine election and speak of “eternal” dynasties, the dynastic promise of Esarhaddon is unusual because of its modest nature. The dynastic promises of Jehu and Esarhaddon are therefore unique within their ANE context because of their lack of hyperbolic language, guaranteeing only four or two generations of continuity. Since both rulers assume the throne in the midst of a political crisis their reigns would have been reasonable times for promises legitimizing their dynasties. A comparison of these two oracles will not only allow the interesting parallels between the two promises to be clearly seen, but also reveal the crucial role that non-eternal dynastic oracles can play in establishing royal legitimacy.

The City of Tabetu and the Kings of the Land of Mari

The 2005 excavation at Tell Taban (ancient Tabetu), located in the Middle Habur region, brought to light a Middle Assyrian archive which documents the administration of the local palace. This paper offers a preliminary report on this archive as well as a study of the political status of the city in the Middle Assyrian period on the basis of the new material. The cuneiform texts constituting the archive were written during the mid 13th and early 12th centuries B.C.E. The archive reveals that the city had an unusual political position within Assyria: the city was subject to Assyrian rule, but retained a privileged position as a local kingdom, differing from other provinces (pahutu) in many respects. First of all the city was governed not by a governor (bel pahete) but local rulers, who bore the title “king of the land of Mari” (sar mat Mari) and formed a local dynasty at least from the mid 13th to the early 11th centuries B.C.E. It seems very probable that this position was acknowledged in the Assyrian capital, the city of ssur. There is a possibility that the local dynasty was an offshoot of the Assyrian royal family. The geographical name “the land of Mari” in the titles of the local rulers, reminiscent of the city of Mari in the 3rd and early 2nd millennia B.C.E., seems to derive from a local tradition originating in the period when the city of Tabetu was ruled by the city of Mari and its successor, the city of Terqa, in the 18th century B.C.E.

The Neo-Assyrian Royal Lion Hunt and Yahweh's Answer to Job

(ProQuest Information and Learning: ... denotes non-USASCII text omitted.) The ancients were quite aware of contrast between center and periphery, inner versus outer territory.1 The social archaeologist Ian Hodder detects these antipodes, domus and ager, as early as neolithic European settlements.2 Agriculture is attempt domesticate ager, a culturing of Hunting and warfare, which were conceptually linked, were also an attempt effect domus by domesticating and wild. Neolithic societies sought create monumental walls and dirt around their long houses exclude wild; at same time they sought bring outside under control of cultural by hunting.3 The contrast between domus and forts (outside gate) recalls importance of city walls as a limen. So many Mesopotamian rituals of passage exploit liminality of seru, wilderness, as a place of transition. In such varied rituals as akitu, mis pi, bit rimki, maqlu, surpu, namburbi, seru can receive evil that must be disposed of away from âlu, the city, civilization (fig. Ia).4 The classic treatment of this polarity is story of civilizing of Enkidu in Gilgamesh Epic.5 In Erra Epic, when Erra wishes universalize his rule, he boasts: ina AN-e re-ma-ku ina ?ι-tim lab-ba-ku ina KUR sar-ru-ku (1:109-110) In heavens I am a wild bull; in land (ersetu) I am a lion; in homeland (matu) I am king .... The gods shared their cosmogonie control of wilderness with Assyrian king, who was delegated to expand his rule.6 As we shall see, however, such a divine-royal synergy, though at home with Priestly writer in Gen 1:27 and Psalm 8, was quite at odds with view of author of YHWH speeches in book of Job. I. THE NEO-ASSYRIAN LION HUNT By his lion hunt Neo-Assyrian king identifies himself symbiotically with his victim and thus, like Erra, becomes lion, extending his rule beyond city ersetu/seru.7 The king as identified with lion (or with wild bull) is then a creature of nature who rules over his (domesticated people), as a shepherd (Sumerian sipad; Akkadian reu).8 Because of this identification, defeated lion is never mutilated but is treated with respect, unlike fate of king's human foes.9 Until twentieth century, Panthera leo persica (the Asiatic lion) inspired both awe and fear in inhabitants of Mesopotamia.10 Now limited around 250 animals on a game preserve in northwest Indian Gir Forest, Asiatic lion is a pathetic survivor of its noble feline predecessors. From our earliest artistic and textual evidence Asiatic lion has been linked with kingship. The famed mace head of Mesilim, twenty-sixth-century B.C.E. king of KiS (AO 2340; see fig. 1), found at a possible Ningirsu shrine in Girsu, bears six intertwined lions on its sides and lion-eagle Anzu (Imdugud) on its top. Its inscription clearly links it with kingship: Mesilim king of Kis, builder of temple of God Ningirsu.... The Assyrian ruler gradually progressed from ruba'um (prince) sar kiisati (king of universe); Neo-Assyrian royal lion hunt played a role in effecting and visualizing that evolution. In this article I wish concentrate on function of well-known Neo-Assyrian royal lion hunt represented in Assurnasirpal IIs Northwest Palace at Kalhu (865 B.C.E.)12 and especially in Assurbanipal's North Palace at Nineveh (645 B.C.E.). In Assurnasirpal II's Northwest Palace lion hunt was portrayed on stone slabs in throne room (room B) side of king at sacred tree (fig. 2); below lion hunt was libation scene that completed successful hunt. As I. Winter has pointed out, basreliefs of lion hunt have far greater centrality than they are afforded in corresponding royal annals. …

“From the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea”

Seas and lakes (Akkadian tâmtu) located in the surrounds of Mesopotamia, which the Assyrians encountered in their military campaigns, are mentioned in Assyrian royal inscriptions under various names. These sea names were used not only for indicating specific geographical entities, but also for expressing political ideas relating to the extent of the Assyrian dominion. Many of the terminological components such as “upper” or “of the sunset” were used at different times to refer to different bodies of water over the course of time. The rich variety in the appellations of seas attested in the Assyrian royal inscriptions from different times essentially originated in scribal efforts to renovate the use of geographical terminology. The terminological development clearly reflects the changes in the interests of Assyrian rulers in the seas over the course o f time.

Excavations at Nineveh: The Halzi Gate

AbstractThe University of California Expedition to Nineveh excavated at the Halzi Gate in 1989 and 1990. The gate proved to be one of Nineveh's larger defensive gates and a scene of chaos and destruction. Tower 4 to the south of the gate was of irregular masonry, having been hastily rebuilt. The juxtaposition of a rough tower directly beside the fine ashlar masonry of the rest of the curtain wall of the gate appears to reflect a political instability that prevailed during the declining years of Assyrian rule. The late reconstruction of Tower 4 contrasts with the earlier attention to detail seen in building work of Sennacherib's reign (704–681 BC), when smoothly dressed orthostats lined the lower walls of the gate's large inner court and sophisticated waterproof membranes of bitumen-soaked reeds protected the mud-brick superstructures. Buried beneath the pavement in the corners of the court were apotropaic foundation figurines. Within the only partially excavated outer entrance passage at least twelve individuals died, perhaps while defending the city or trying to escape from it, as a stallion and a rider lay at the eastern limit of the gate passage. Within the reduced width of the gate passage were eight adult males, four adolescents and four children including one infant. Weaponry was found throughout the area and the scattered bodies lay where they had fallen. The associated small finds, which had not been looted, included silver jewelry, bronze personal items, stamp seals and a composite necklace.

Royal hermeneutics: Observations on the commentaries from Ashurbanipal's libraries at Nineveh

The British excavations at Nineveh, initiated in 1845 by Austen Henry Layard, produced about 30,000 clay tablets or fragments of tablets, most of them coming from the citadel mound of Kuyunjik. This textual material can be divided into two main groups: on the one hand, library tablets, consisting of literary, lexical and historical texts, rituals, medical compendia, Sumerian prayers and above all omen texts, and on the other, archival documents, such as letters, contracts and administrative notes. The great, and rather unique, potential of the texts from Kuyunjik lies in the fact that they reveal to us, more than any other repository of cuneiform tablets ever found, how culture, represented by the first group of texts, and politics, represented by the second, were related to each other in ancient Mesopotamia.While the archival documents from Kuyunjik date to the reigns of several Assyrian rulers from the eighth and seventh centuries, the library texts seem to belong mostly, though not exclusively, to the reign of a single Assyrian king, Ashurbanipal (669 to about 630), a man deeply interested in the scribal arts of ancient Mesopotamia. His enthusiasm for reading and writing, which he seems to have shared with his wife, Libbāli-šarrat, can be traced back to his youth. From an autobiographical sketch about his intellectual socialization, we know that Ashurbanipal had received the education of a future scholar. In a passage somewhat reminiscent of the twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple, Ashurbanipal described the scribal training of his early years as follows:I learnt the craft of Adapa the sage, the hidden mystery of the scribal art. I used to watch the signs of heaven and earth and to study them in the assembly of the scholars. Together with the able experts in oil-divination, I deliberated upon (the tablet) “If the liver is a mirror of heaven”. … I looked at cuneiform signs on stones from before the flood.

The Final Destruction of Beth Shemesh and the Pax Assyriaca in the Judean Shephelah

Judah and Philistia suffered different fates following Sennacherib's campaign in 701 BCE. While the Philistine coast and hinterland flourished under Assyrian rule, the Shephela of Judah was devastated and depopulated. New data unearthed at the renewed excavations at Tel Beth Shemesh illuminate the fate of the Shephelah of Judah during the 7th century BCE—the era of the pax Assyriaca in the Levant.

Peter Hulin's Hand Copies of Shalmaneser III's Inscriptions

The late Peter Hulin devoted much of his scholarly life to the study of the inscriptions of Shalmaneser III, king of Assyria (859–824 BC). He copied and studied a number of texts of this monarch excavated at Nimrud. Among them, the inscriptions on the throne base (ND 11000) were published in 1963. Unfortunately, however, his death in 1993 prevented him from publishing the further fruits of his effort. After Hulin's death his file of Shalmaneser III texts was placed at the disposal of Professor A. K. Grayson for use in his third volume of the series Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia, Assyrian Periods: Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC II (858–745 BC), Toronto, 1996 (RIMA 3). Thus Hulin's study of several new texts from Nimrud, as well as some others, was effectively utilized and incorporated in RIMA 3, with full respect being paid to his contribution. The purpose of this paper is to supplement RIMA 3 by publishing Hulin's hand copies of Shalmaneser texts found among his papers in a publishable state, together with several photographs, and to add some philological notes on them. Among Hulin's copies, those of the lengthy texts on the large stone tablet ND 6237 (below, No. 1) and on the broken statue N D 5500 (below, No. 2) are of primary importance. These texts were originally assigned to Hulin by Professors M. E. L. Mallowan and D. J. Wiseman for publication in the journal Iraq. His copies were entrusted to Dr Jeremy Black of the Oriental Institute, Oxford University, by Mrs Mary Hulin and are gratefully used in this publication by the British School of Archaeology in Iraq.

Assyrian Rulers of the Third and Second Millennia BC (to 1115 BC). A. Kirk Grayson

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewsAssyrian Rulers of the Third and Second Millennia BC (to 1115 BC). A. Kirk Grayson A. R. GeorgeA. R. George Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Near Eastern Studies Volume 52, Number 4Oct., 1993 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/373639 Views: 2Total views on this site Copyright 1993 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Seleucia Pieria: an ancient harbour submitted to two successive uplifts

Historical sources ascribe the foundation of Seleucia (Seleukeia) Pieria to Seleucos I Nikator, shortly before the foundation of Antioch in the late 4th century BC. The Seleucia Pieria site seems however to have been inhabited earlier, perhaps from around 700 BC, possibly by a Greek population under an Assyrian ruler. The city became of considerable military importance during the wars between the Ptolemies and the Seleucids; it was occupied by the Romans in the 1st century BC, but had practically disappeared in the 6th century AD. Geomorphological surveys in the area have revealed the existence of elevated marine notches and rims bioconstructed by vermetids, oysters and calcareous algae, which occasionally erode or intersect the archaeological sites, showing that two rapid land uplift movements, probably of seismic origin, took place during the late Holocene. The first movement, which occurred about 2500 ± 100 years bp, was the strongest one and caused a local vertical displacement of about 1.7 m, which may have severely affected the earlier Greek settlement. Though several earthquakes are reported to have occurred in the area during the following ten centuries, none of them seem to have been strong enough to cause significant vertical displacements. The second movement occurred around 1400 years bp, probably in May 526 AD, when a great earthquake followed by tsunami waves is known to have caused devastating damage in Antioch and Seleucia. According to geomorphological data supported by several radiocarbon dates, the earthquake was accompanied by a 0.7 to 0 8 m upheaval. This seismotectonic event also caused a rapid silting of the Seleucia Pieria closed harbour basin and entrances, thus preventing its further use.

Gezer Under Assyrian Rule

(1985). Gezer Under Assyrian Rule. Palestine Exploration Quarterly: Vol. 117, No. 1, pp. 41-54.

Invocation of the Trinity and the Tradition of the Lorica in Old English Poetry

Previous articleNext article No AccessInvocation of the Trinity and the Tradition of the Lorica in Old English PoetryThomas D. HillThomas D. Hill Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Speculum Volume 56, Number 2Apr., 1981 The journal of the Medieval Academy of America Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2307/2846934 Views: 17Total views on this site Citations: 8Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1981 The Medieval Academy of AmericaPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Edward Currie The fly-net in Judith : Anglo-Saxon perceptions of an ancient Assyrian ruler, Studia Neophilologica 93, no.11 (May 2020): 4–11.https://doi.org/10.1080/00393274.2020.1771616Kelly Williams Movement, Space, and Power in Cynewulf’s Juliana, Exemplaria 32, no.11 (Aug 2020): 72–94.https://doi.org/10.1080/10412573.2020.1743532Phillip Pulsiano Prayers, Glosses and Glossaries, (Aug 2017): 209–230.https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165303.ch12Charles D. Wright The Irish Tradition, (Aug 2017): 345–374.https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165303.ch19Miranda Wilcox Confessing the Faith in Anglo-Saxon England, The Journal of English and Germanic Philology 113, no.33 (Jul 2014): 308–341.https://doi.org/10.5406/jenglgermphil.113.3.0308John Charles Arnold Michael Contained: The Carolingian Cultus, (Jan 2013): 121–136.https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137316554_6Christine Rauer Direct Speech, Intercession, and Prayer in the Old English Martyrology, English Studies 93, no.55 (Aug 2012): 563–571.https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2012.698534Thomas D. Hill The Rod of Protection and the Witches’ Ride: Christian and Germanic Syncretism in Two Old English Metrical Charms, The Journal of English and Germanic Philology 111, no.22 (Apr 2012): 145–168.https://doi.org/10.5406/jenglgermphil.111.2.0145

Observations on Methods of Assyrian Rule in Transjordania after the Palestinian Campaign of Tiglath-Pileser III

Previous articleNext article No AccessObservations on Methods of Assyrian Rule in Transjordania after the Palestinian Campaign of Tiglath-Pileser IIIB. OdedB. Oded Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Near Eastern Studies Volume 29, Number 3Jul., 1970 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/372067 Views: 12Total views on this site Citations: 7Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1970 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Lily Singer-Avitz, Yoram Eshet Beersheba – A Gateway Community in Southern Arabian Long-Distance Trade in the Eighth Century B.C.E., Tel Aviv 26, no.11 (Dec 2013): 3–75.https://doi.org/10.1179/tav.1999.1999.1.3John Boardman, I. E. S. Edwards, E. Sollberger, N. G. L. Hammond The Cambridge Ancient History, 20 (Mar 2008).https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521227179A. K. Grayson Assyria: Tiglath-Pileser III to Sargon II (744–705 B.C.), (Jan 1992): 71–102.https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521227179.003A. K. Grayson Assyria: Sennacherib and Esarhaddon (704–669 B.C.), (Jan 1992): 103–141.https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521227179.004A. K. Grayson Assyria 668-635 B.C.: the reign of Ashurbanipal, (Jan 1992): 142–161.https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521227179.005Joan Oates The fall of Assyria (635–609 B.C.), (Jan 1992): 162–193.https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521227179.006A. K. Grayson Assyrian civilization, (Jan 1992): 194–228.https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521227179.007

Fragments of Historical Texts from Nineveh: Middle Assyrian and Later Kings

A Number of the historical texts excavated by R. Campbell Thompson at Nineveh belong to the period of the Middle Assyrian kingdom, or to the first two centuries of the first millennium B.C. They attest the activity of successive Assyrian rulers in structural works on the mound of Kouyunjik, although the buildings themselves have been demolished, or remain undiscovered. Moreover, they add information on the history of that age, known mainly from texts unearthed at Ashur. All the pieces studied here are catalogued in the Second Supplement to the Catalogue of Cuneiform Tablets in the Kouyunjik Collection of the British Museum (1968) where details of provenance and physical appearance are given. They are published by permission of the Trustees.The series of clay knobs (‘bosses’) recording the history of the Temple of Ishtar was edited by R. Campbell Thompson and he had a presentation of some other texts in hand at the time of his death, in 1941. His notes and copies were made available by courtesy of the Keeper of the Department of Western Asiatic Antiquities, but the tablets have been baked and cleaned recently, so new copies have been drawn. One of the texts, an important tablet of Tiglath-pileser I, has been edited by E. F. Weidner (see below, n.2), the remaining fragments of historical content are given now, and some related pieces added for the information they add in this respect. Although these are but scraps, and many are unidentified, they merit publication as records of a poorly documented era.

The Assyrian Sculptures in the Collection of the Royal Geographical Society

The society's collection of eight fragments of Assyrian sculpture has a certain historical connection with the Society. They appear to have all belonged originally to Colonel (afterwards Sir) Henry Creswicke Rawlinson, famous as the decipherer of the cuneiform inscriptions, who was twice (1871-2 and 1874-5) President and a Vice-President of the Society, and are stated to have formerly ornamented his library. After the death of his eldest son, Henry Seymour, General Lord Rawlinson, in 1925, they were presented to the Society by Lady Rawlinson in memory of her husband. Attention was first drawn to them by Professor Ernest Weidner of Graz in Austria, who in 1935 began a systematic publication of the fragments of the Assyrian palaces dispersed over the various museums and collec? tions of Europe and Asia.1 Rawlinson's fragments come from the Assyrian palaces at Nineveh, either from the south-west palace, built by King Sennacherib (705-681 B.c), known from the Bible as the opponent of Hezekiah of Jerusalem, or from that built by Sennacherib's grandson, Ashurbanipal (668-626 B.c), the last of the great Assyrian rulers, on the same site a little to the north. Rawlinson's connection with the re-discovery of Assyria was very close, and in the excavation of the palaces in question, though not in their discovery, he may be said to have played a leading part. After distin? guished military service in India and Afghanistan, he was in 1843 appointed Political Agent of the East India Company in Turkish Arabia, and in the following year was made Consul at Baghdad, finally being promoted to Consul-General in 1851. In this position he was able to support, and follow to the fullest, Layard's short career of discovery and excavation of the Assyrian palaces at Nimrud, and especially that of Sennacherib at Nineveh, from 1846-50. When the Trustees of the British Museum, who had taken over the excavations, sent out H. Rassam, Layard's ex-assistant, to renew the work of excavation, they requested Colonel Rawlinson to accept general control and supervision of the work; Rawlinson duly undertook this task, as well as he could from a distance, till Rassam retired from the field in spring 1854. In 1853, however, a new party appeared on the scene, in the form of a society calling itself the Assyrian Excavation Fund, which employed as its excavator a geologist named William Kennett Loftus, assisted by an artist, William Boutcher. After negotiation, an agreeement was reached between the Fund and the British Museum, by which Loftus and Boutcher, from 1 October 1854, were to work for the Museum, again under the authority and supervision of Colonel Rawlinson. Their discoveries, however, and those of Rassam, of fine scupltures were so rich that the Museum, by lack of space, was constrained to order Rawlinson to exercise rather sparingly his right of selection of sculpture to be brought home. Rawlinson accordingly ordered Loftus in February 1855, before closing down, to select 40 or 50 marbles for the Museum, then some for the French, then some for the Prussian Government, then (on certain conditions) to offer some of the remainder to a Mr. Hector; the rest were to be offered to private parties. It is apparent that at this 1 See E. F. Weidner, 'Die Reliefs der assyrischen Konige,' Berlin, 1939. 14

How Did Early Israel Differ from Her Neighbors?

Next article No AccessHow Did Early Israel Differ from Her Neighbors?G. Ernest WrightG. Ernest Wright Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 6, Number 1February 1943 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2307/3209153 Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 2Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in The Biblical Archaeologist (1938-1997), which is continued by Near Eastern Archaeology (1998-present). PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article: Pierre M. Purves The Early Scribes of Nuzi, The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 57, no.22 (Oct 2015): 162–187.https://doi.org/10.1086/370573 D. D. Luckenbill Inscriptions of Early Assyrian Rulers, The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 28, no.33 (Sep 2015): 153–203.https://doi.org/10.1086/369688

The Palace of Darius the Great and the apadana of Artaxerxes II in Susa.

The long dynasty of the Elamite national kings, who ruled over Elam for nearly 1, 500 years, was, after a long and unequal struggle, brought to a close by the Assyrians under Assurbanipal in about 640 B.C. The Assyrian rule in Elam collapsed soon after the death of this conqueror in 625 B.C. The Elamite kingdom was thereupon divided into two different monarchies, Perso-Anzanite and Susiano-Babylonian. After the defeat of the last Babylonian king Nabunaid in 539 B.C., Cyrus the Great, the fourth Perso-Anzanite king, became the founder of the great Achæmenian dynasty. After the death of his son and successor Cambyses and the suppression of the revolt of Gaumata the Magian, Darius the Great, a descendant of the younger branch of the Achæmenides, became the inheritor of the vast empire of Cyrus in 521 B.C. During the early years of his reign he had to subdue many revolts in different provinces of his empire. It seems that the political troubles ended in about 518 B.C., and the great king began the work of rebuilding and embellishing Susa, which he had made the capital of his empire, as well as Persepolis and Hamadan. This work was carried on with great zeal by his son Xerxes, who was a far greater builder than his father. Owing to the free use of huge blocks of stone in the palatial buildings of Persepolis their ruins have for centuries drawn the attention of travellers by their colossal dimensions and gigantic magnificence. But the memories of the palaces of Susa and Hamadan are preserved only in certain allusions in the Bible and in the works of ancient writers. Their traces were nearly wiped out by time, whose ravages the less durable materials, bricks and wood, of which they were constructed, could hardly resist.

Inscriptions of Early Assyrian Rulers

Inscriptions of Early Assyrian Rulers