Assyrian Empire
There are two main reasons why the Neo-Assyrian Empire became so powerful between 934 - 610 B.C. First, through this era, the power of Assyria was largely dependant on the success of its army (Saggs, 1962). Winer (1961) states that the Assyrian military perfected the art of war. During this time period, some 180 punitive expeditions or campaigns were launched against foreign foes, rebellious vassals or other anti-Assyrian groups (Olmstead, 1923). Second, the Assyrians developed an efficient and effective administrative system with which to maintain, supply and expand their empire. In Assyria, warfare was a way of life (Saggs, 1962) and its government was run as a military state (Winer, 1961). Early wars had been like raids; undertaken to obtain booty, settle disputes over land and water rights, or fought for military notoriety. During the second Assyrian Empire, war became a part of the state policy. The raid was replaced by a detailed and carefully planned scheme of conquest (Sayce, 1899). The Assyrian Empire maintained a powerful standing army, not only to satisfy its imperialistic appetite, but also to safeguard the King against potential rebellious provincial governors. Sayce (1899) writes that nothing was sp
men of the rebels, and I covered the wall with is not at hand, you shall await him and A powerful army allowed the Assyrians to control the trade routes that ran from Iran and beyond to the west. Trueman (1964) states that because of Assyria's strategic position on the Fertile Crescent, only constant warfare or an empire prepared for war could maintain these east-west trade highways. Under the reign of Asasnirai II, a system of fortified posts was constructed to protect these trade routes. This practice was continued through the New-Assyrian era. The employment of terrorism foe the purposes of propaganda had a profound effect on Assyria's enemies. In his victories over the main armies of the Urartu and Zikirtu, Sargon II stated that the very fear of Assyria's army caused his enemies' soldiers to fight like dead men (Saggs, 1965). multitude of them to be flayed in my presence, the great gates of the cities; I flayed the chief The Assyrian Empire's military machine and infrastructure became a paradigm for other great empires that followed. Olmstead (1923) states that whether we admire imperialism or not "it is simple fact that modern empires owe their government of dependencies to Assyria" (p. 650). Olmstead (1923) suggests that the Persians, Romans and the Greeks modeled much of their empires after the Assyrians. The Persians and Romans, for example, turned their occupied lands into provinces under the rule of governors. Like the Assyrians, the Persians and Romans built excellent roads to keep in touch with their empires. Both Persians and Assyrians used posting stages (Saggs, 1962), across their empires so messages could be rapidly passed between the King and his governors. Persian kings also appointed riyal inspectors to monitor the rule of its governors. Unlike the Assyrians, the Romans did not employ such a system of supervision and consequently many of these governors often turned to graft and greed.
Some common words found in the essay are:
Tartannu Sayce, III Assyrian, Qipu-official Qipu-official, Neo-Assyrian Empire, River Sayce, Assyrian Empire, Asasnirai II, Assyrians Romans, King Saggs, Rab-saris Assyrians, sayce 1899, saggs 1962, olmstead 1923, rab alani, trueman 1964, assyrian empire, assyrian army, saggs 1965, provincial governors, persians romans, olmstead 1923 assyrians, sayce 1899 writes, responsibility rab alani, assyrians persians romans,
Approximate Word count = 2032
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
