7 ûsslriolagiqueinternationøle,Miünchen,zg.Juni bisj.J:ulirgTo,ed.DierzO.Edzard, zo9-t6. Munich: Verlag der Bayerischen Akadamie der \ffissenschaft. Zaccagnini, Carlo. 1989. "Asiatic Mode of Production and Ancient Near East: Notes towards a Discussion."In Production and Consumption in the AncientNear Eøst,ed. Carlo Zaccagnini, r-126. Budapest: University of Budapest. Zadok Ran. 1995. "The Ethno-Linguistic Character of the Jezireh and Adjacent Regions in the 9th7th Centuries (Assyria Proper vs. Periphery)." In Me o-,l.ssyrian Geography, ed. Mario Liverani, zt7-8z.Rome: IJniversità di Roma "LaSapienza.,' 2 Zeh.nder, Markus. zoo5. Umgang mit Fremden in Israel und Assyrien: Ein Beitrag zur Anthropologie des "F¡emden" im Licht antiker Q¡ellen. Stuttgart: arglrably the first world- Åt the Root of the Møtter Kohlhammer. The Neo-Assyrian Empire, often presented by scholars as a fundamen- Zehnder,Markus. zoo7."Die Aramaisierung'Assyriens als Folge der Expansion des empire, is phenornenon. Here, I will argue that the The Middle Assyrian assyrischen Reiches." In In . der seine Lust hat øm Wort des flerrn! FætscÌrift tally new of Neo-Assyrian success reach back in Prelude ta Ernpire fiir ErnstJenni zum 8o: Geùartstag, ed.Jürg Luchsinger, F{ans-Peter Mathys, and foundations preceding Middle Assyrian Markus Saur,417-39. Münster, Germany: Ugarit Vedag. D^rt iîto the short-lived state. This continuity can be seen in a range Zimansl<y, Paul E. 1995. "fhe Kingdom of Urartu in Ðastern Anatolia."In CANE, imperi^l and in a Brpoa S. DünrNc n35-46. of imperial practices in conquered territories the Late Btonze (Lnroar Uurvnnsrrv) "ôulture of empire" that has its roots in Age. Other components of the Neo-Assyrian rep- erioitet of rules were first developed in the Iron Age, however. This chapter will bring into sharper focus how the Neo-Assyrian Empire can be understood in its historical context to better understand its remark- able success. CONCEPTUALIZING THE MIDDLE TO NEO-AS SYRIAN TRANSITI ON The idea that the Neo-Assyrian Period is separate and distinct in character from the preceding Middle Assyrian Period is found in many studies (Roaf r99o; Bedford zoog; Cline and Graham zorr; Herrmann and Tyson, this volume). Arguments for drawing such a distinction between the two periods can indeed be found in both philological and archaeological data sets. In particular, textuai data arc plentiful in the twelfth century ncn and from the ninth-sixth centuries ¡c¡ but are much less abundant in the intervening period (Postgate 1992; RadneÍ zoo4,53). Likewise, in many D Ol: rc.587 6 / 97816 o7 3z8z3o.co o z 4O VTRGINIA R. HERRMANN AND CRAtc W.TYSON 4t regions in Upper Mesopotamia, the archaeological sequence shows a gap sep- ,¿L arating Middle Assyrian and Neo-Assyrian occupation, This is true, for exar¡- ple, for the UpperTigris region, the Balikh Valle¡ and parts of the Khabu¡ Tiiangle (Parker zoor; Szuchma:n zooT;Tenu zoog;Matney zoro). At the same time, we now have many archaeological sequences that suggest a greater degree of continuity from the Middle Assyrian Period to the Neo* Assyrian Period than previously thought in much of the Assyrian heartland and the central and southern Habur region, at sites such as Tell Sheikh Hamad, Tell Barri, andTellTaban (D'Agostino zoog;Kühne zor3; D'Agostino zor5). Further north and west, in the Upper Habur, the UpperTigris, and the Bali[]¡, I is some evidence from sites as and there such Tell Fekheriye Tell Halaf that r50 50û km (} Assyrian material culture continued deep into the lron Age and was used by groups who would self-identi$r as Arameans as late as the tenth century BcE extent of the Axyrian Empire in the Middle Assyrian Frcunn z,r. Juxtøpasition of the (Novak by Tijm Lønjouru. zor3). periatJ and the ea.r4) ?ørt of the Neo-Asyrian Period. Produced Furthermore, the dunnu (a privately owned agriculturai estate, the owners of which usually lived elsewhere and used the proceeds as a source of income) within of Giricano had Assyrian texts dating to between toTj and ro56 rcn, rnore state and its expansion into the first world-empire arguably took place from than a century after the Late Bronze Age "collapse" of ca. rrSo ¡ce (Cline the Neo-Assyrian Period, starting with the reign of Tiglath-pileser III fel| zor4).There is little to suggest unstable conditions at Giricano, and the trans- 1^L BcE and lasting until 6rz BcE) when the Neo-Assyrian Empire finally one could therefore actions the estate was involved in point to business as usual (Radner zoo4,73). ipostgate r99z; Kühne zor5). From a historical perspective Giricano, at least, evidences continuity of Middle Assyrian traditions of the argue that the early Neo-Assyrian state-that is, before the expansion under Late Bronze Age on into the lron Age. Ti*glath-pileser III-was not only consciously modeled on its Middle Assyrian Eventuall¡ the Upper Tigris, Upper Habur, and the Balikh were lost to prJd...rro, but also very similar in its scale and aspirations (figure z'r)' Assyria for about tvyo centuries, during which period regional states domi- In the end, the assessment of the degree to which the Middle Assyrian state nated these areas (Szuchman zooT). The memory of these lost former Middle is perceived as similar to or different from the succeeding Neo-Assyrian state Assyrian territories seems to have been an important tz?os in Assyria in the depends on both the data set one focuses on and the phenomena one is ìnter- Iron Age, and the initial wars of conquest in the Neo-Assyrian Period were ested in. In this chapter the focus is the Assyrian "repertoires of ru1e" in both presented as a reconquistø inwhich Assyrian lands and Assyrian communities periods and the degree to which they are different or similar. "Repertoires were liberated from their oppressors (Liverani 1988; Postgate rgg2; Fales zorz). of ru1e" (Burbank and Cooper zorc, 6) are the practices appiied by imperial So from an Assyrian perspective, the Middle Assyrian Period was perceived as states in conquered territories to create and maintain their dominance. Are an ideal representing the essence ofthe Assyrian project rather than a qualita- there, then, specifrc repertoires of rule that appear first in the Middle Assyrian tively distinctive period in history. imperial state which might explain the remarkable longevity and success of To most scholars who argue for a disjunction between the Middie and Neo- the Assyrian state in the Late Brorøe and Iron Ages? Assyrian Periods, the crux of the matter appears to be that the Neo-Assyrian state qualifies as an empire-because it was an expansive state that domi- nated a large number of vassal states that were not provincialized-whereas COMPARING REPERTOIRES OF RULE INTHE the Middle Assyrian state was much smaller in scale and as a rule converted MIDDLE AND NEO.AS SYRIAN PERIODS conquered territories into provinces (Postgate zoro,zo; Koliírski zor5; Kühne In the long-term pefspective of ancient Near Eastern history, the Assyrian zor5,59). However, the real disjunction between Assyria as a relatively small Empire, ca. .,35o-6rz BcE, appears to represent a decisive turning point. 42 BLED,{ s. DüRING AT THE ROOT OF THE MATTER 43 7 regions previously little cultivated by means Whereas earlier empires were relatively short-lived, here a state emerged that " Asriculrural development of estates, colonization, lasted for about seven centuries, rose from humble origins, and uitimately '' ,,-,".1., as the establishment of agricultural agricultural came to dominate much of the ancient Near East. How, then, did the Assyrian and the construction of (complex) irrigation systems in which existing population centers are in part state become so successful, and in what ways did it differ from other polities 4. Demographic policies in the ancient Near East? replaced by new ones and populations are broken up through deportation If one were to compare Assyrian repertoires of rule with those of contempo- a,.ð colonizafion policies that frustrate the cultural capacities of conquered rary empires of the ancient Near East, such as those ofMitanni, the Kassites, the populations to form an alternative to the imperial system Hittites, and the Egyptians, the most striking are of an imperial road and relay system to facilitate communica- differences not to be found 5. Construction in the core areas or metropolitan regions (Doyle 1986). All of these empires dons, trade' and military campaigns invested heavily in the construction of large monumental capitals, developed refers to changes in cu1rure promoted by the empire and the prac- elaborate courts, and undertook considerable efforts toward the development Software that help consolidate imperial hegemony. These include: of an imperial ideology. The Assyrians stand out, however, for how they dealt tices of government with conquered territories and how they transformed provinces and peripheries. 1. Techniques of administration, such as the development of a homogeneous Thus, while other empires in the ancient Near East operated in a hegemonic system of administration that facilitates control by the imperial core and fashion (Higginbotham 2ooo; GTatz zoog zor3;Heinz zorzlVon Dassow zor4), , the deployment of administrators throughout the imperial lands ruling a series ofvassals through a system of indirect rule, the Assyrìans used a z. Organîzation of the imperial elite territorial system of domination (Parker zoor; Koliriski 2or5), annexing neigh- , 3. Use ofa vassal system boring regions as provinces. While it is possible to quali$' this distinction, for the dominators 4. An ideology that legitimized imperial domination to both example, Egypt also used territorial repertoires of rule in Nubia (Smith zoo3; and the dominated, and investment in propaganda media zor3) and the Hittites appe r to have done the same in their heartland (Glatz 5.