This topic was posted , One of *those* topics.
Posted on 07/04/2019 10:49:07 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
The Assyrian kings of the late tenth and early ninth centuries campaigned in the west and helped to reestablish regional control through infrastructure. However, it is Ashurnasirpal II (r. 883-859 B.C.E.) who is often considered the founder of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. His kingdom reached from the Taurus Mountains in the north to the Euphrates River in the west. He established a new capital city in Kalhu and built it into an impressive city with imperial wealth accumulated from taxes, trade, and the "tribute" payments extracted from vassal nations in exchange for their independence. This "yoke of Assur" was a great burden to smaller client states.
Shalmaneser III (r. 858-824 B.C.E.) expanded farther and came into conflict with King Ahab of Israel, who was part of a federation of 12 western kings who had banded together to throw off Assyrian control. As recounted on Shalmaneser's Kurkh 053Monolith, Ahab was one of the larger contingents, with 10,000 soldiers and 2,000 chariots. Shalmaneser waged four campaigns against the coalition between 853 and 845 B.C.E. Although the outcomes of these campaigns are not entirely clear, his famous Black Obelisk includes a record of receiving tribute from King Jehu of Israel a few years later, in 841, and even depicts the Judahite contingent.
Assyria stagnated for much of the next century, struggling with centripetal forces that worked against centralized power. The period saw the rise of Queen Shammuramat, the wife of Shamshi-Adad V (r. 823-811 B.C.E.) and source of the later Greek legends about Semiramis. As mother of the crown prince, she wielded significant influence and was sometimes described as a virtual co-regent with her son.
(Excerpt) Read more at baslibrary.org ...
;^)
He is indeed.
When the Assyrians marched in to take some territory, they were often just after the tribute. Cities which resisted longer had to pay a higher tribute, basically whatever it cost to pulverize them got tacked on. If they couldn't pay it and decided to refuse, the Assyrians would march on in again and really clean their clocks.
King Hammurabi is the best known of the early monarchs of ancient times... belonged to the First BabyIonian Dynasty which came to an end, under circumstances shrouded in mystery, some three or four generations after Hammurabi. For the next several centuries, the land was in the domain of a people known as the Kassites. They left few examples of art and hardly any literary works -- theirs was an age comparable to and contemporaneous with that of the Hyksos in Egypt, and various surmises were made as to the identity of the two peoples. A cartouche of the Hyksos king Khyan was even found in Babylonia and another in Anatolia, a possible indication of the extent of the power and influence wielded by the Hyksos. Until a few decades ago, the reign of Hammurabi was dated to around the year 2100 before the present era... At Platanos on Crete, a seal of the Hammurabi type was discovered in a tomb together with Middle Minoan pottery of a kind associated at other sites with objects of the Twelfth Egyptian Dynasty, more exactly, of its earlier part. This is regarded as proof that these two dynasties were contemporaneous... however... At Mari on the central Euphrates, among other rich material, a cuneiform tablet was found which established that Hammurabi of Babylonia and King Shamshi-Adad I of Assyria were contemporaries. An oath was sworn by the life of these two kings in the tenth year of Hammurabi, The finds at Mari "proved conclusively that Hammurabi came to the throne in Babylonia after the accession of Shamshi-Adad I in Assyria"... The Khorsabad list ends in the tenth year of Assur-Nerari V, which is computed to have been -745... the first year of Shamshi-Adad is calculated to have been -1726 and his last year -1694... it reduced the time of Hammurabi from the twenty-first century to the beginning of the seventeenth century... "a puzzling chronological discrepancy", which could only be resolved by making Hammurabi later than Amenemhet I of the Twelfth Dynasty... If Hammurabi reigned at the time allotted to him by the finds at Mari and Khorsabad -- but according to the finds at Platanos was a contemporary of the Egyptian kings of the early Twelfth Dynasty -- then that dynasty must have started at a time when, according to the accepted chronology, it had already come to its end. In conventionally-written history, by -1680 not only the Twelfth Dynasty, but also the Thirteenth, or the last of the Middle Kingdom, had expired.
Hammurabi and the Revised Chronology, Immanuel Velikovsky
Alright that was funny. :)
Although you could say they got their As handed to them.
1. By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
2. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.
3. For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion.
Well, at least they were’t named MOHAMMED!...............
This topic was posted , One of *those* topics.
This topic was posted , ping message update.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
