9. Daily Life in the Wild West of Assyria

Stefan Jakob Universität Heidelberg

On the surface, the first expansion of the Middle Assyrian state to the Ğazira during the 13th century BC seems to have been one of the main topics on the political agenda of the Assyrian kings of that time. Adad-nērārī I (1295-1264 BC) and Shalmaneser I (1263-1244 BC) indulge in their royal inscriptions in vivid descriptions of struggles against several kings of Ḫanigalbat, as the Mittanian state was called by neighbouring countries. Soon after Tukultī-Ninurta’s I (1233-1197 BC) accession to throne, the administration of these regions was entrusted to the Grand Vizier who was also designated ‘šar Ḫanigalbat’ (king of Ḫanigalbat, see Cancik-Kirschbaum 1996: 19).

9.1 The Reluctant Annexation of Ḫanigalbat Remarkably, we do not find a single attestation of Ḫanigalbat in Tukultī-Ninurta’royal inscriptions. In contrast to the confrontation with the Babylonian king Kaštiliaš IV, the conquest of the regions northwest to west from the Assyrian heartland is discussed only in general terms. RIMA 1 (A.0.78.23: 34-43), for example, reads as follows:

“(As) with a bridle I controlled the lands Katmuḫu, Buššu, Alzu, Madanu, Niḫanu, Alaia, Tepurzu, Purulumzu, (and) the entire land of the extensive Šubaru. I subdued at my feet the kings, their leaders, and imposed (upon them) corvée.”

In other cases the mention of the area in question is often restricted to enumerations of epithets (see RIMA 1: A.0.78.3: 10-12).

It may seem surprising that Tukultī-Ninurta I, who dedicated an extensive epic to the victory over Kaštiliaš IV (Foster 2005: 298-317), devoted only a few words to the conquest of an area three times the size of the Assyrian heartland. At any rate, the king would have had every reason to be proud, because he finally managed to repress the threats to Assyria presented by the remainders of the Mittanian realm – a heritage of the preceding generations.

In the first half of the 13th century BC, it seems there wasn’t a master plan for the political-administrative structure of these newly conquered territories, however. Instead, we can document a sequence of developmental stages, from vassalage to a policy of direct rule. In the beginning, ‘Assyrianization’ was apparently not on the agenda. It seemed more attractive to gain a new vassal, at least from an economic perspective. In an inscription of Adad-nērārī I (1295-1264 BC), the grandfather of Tukultī-Ninurta, we read as follows:

“When Šattuara, king of the land Ḫanigalbat, rebelled against me and committed hostilities; by the command of Aššur, my lord and ally, and (by the command) of the great gods who decide in my favour, I seized him and brought him to my city Aššur. I made him take an oath and then allowed him to return to his land. Annually, as long as (he) lived, I regularly received his tribute within my city, Aššur.” (RIMA 1: A.0.76.3: 4-14).

Hence, Adad-nērārī I did not decide to conquer Ḫanigalbat until the son and successor of his former adversary, Usašatta, suspended payments. According to his royal inscriptions, the Assyrian king annexed eight cities within the Ḫābūr Triangle during the campaign against the rebel.

These cities were treated separately from the cities that had become victim of the unbridled revenge of the Assyrian army. Irridu came off especially badly, if Adad-nērārī is to be believed: “I conquered, burnt, (and) destroyed the city Irridu and sowed salty plants over it.” (RIMA 1: A.0.76.3: 35-36). It seems possible therefore that the above mentioned eight cities were assigned to the ‘remainder of his (Uasašatta’s) people’ (ši-ta-at um-ma-na-ti-šu), which were subject to corvée (litteraly ‘hoe, spade and basket’). In this case the Assyrian high command probably had no intentions at this point to incorporate the Ḫābūr region into the administrative structure of Assyria

proper. Instead they severely punished a certain amount of rebels hoping that this would be sufficient to prevent future insubordination.

After the death of Adad-nērārī, Shalmaneser (1263-1243 BC) inherited the problems that his father had left behind. There still was a non-Assyrian king of Ḫanigalbat, this time by the name of Šattuara. He was supported by Hittite contingents and Aḫlamu nomads. The cities Taidu and Irridu were mentioned again as targets of Assyrian attacks. The reference to victorious campaigns in the region of Carchemish rounds off the description of the king’s engagement. Surely these military actions could hardly have been more than limited raids in the manner of ‘shock and awe’ warfare. This essentially means that the strategy had not changed since the time of Adad-nērārī I. At any rate there is no evidence of an incorporation of the area concerned. It can be demonstrated, however, that the Assyrians had begun to exercise control over the Ḫābūr Triangle, or at least parts of it (for example the city of Amasakku).

Thus, we return to the starting point of our considerations: the reign of Tukultī-Ninurta I. In his royal inscriptions only one enemy, Eḫli-Teššup, king of the land Alzi (allied with Aššur in the time of Aššur-uballiṭ I in the second half of the 14th century) is mentioned by name. His kingdom was situated north of Kašijari mountain (modern Ṭur ʾAbdin).

9.2 Imperial Control at Tell Chuēra The archaeological (and textual) evidence, however, clearly shows that the Assyrian sphere of influence stretched deep into Ḫanigalbat at the time of Tukultī-Ninurta. Examples include the site of Tell Chuēra, located halfway between the Ḫābūr Triangle and the Balīḫ River. At present, the site seems to be situated in the middle of nowhere, but in Middle Assyrian times there was an important overland route leading past this city that bore the name of Ḫarbe.

The Middle Assyrian building activity was restricted to the northeastern part of the tell using the highest point on the top (area G, see figure 9.1). The foundations were constructed directly on earlier third millennium strata. In the immediate vicinity, also close to the surface, the remainders of a settlement have been unearthed which has been labelled ‘Mitanni-Bau’ (Mittanian building, area M). This designation was selected by the excavators due to the ‘Nuzi pottery’ found. According to the state of research at the time the housing complex was dated back to the 2nd millennium BC (Moortgat and Moortgat-Correns 1976: 36), more recently to 1600-1400 BC (http://web.uni-frankfurt.de/fb09/vorderasarch/tch2jt.htm).

Meanwhile it has been proven that Mittanian pottery continued to be used in the Middle Assyrian period (Duistermaat 2008: 93). The Assyrians did not therefore necessarily settle in an abandoned city. On the contrary, the ‘Mittani buildings’ could have survived into the 13th century as the residence of those people with non-Assyrian names we know from the written sources of Tell Chuēra.

It seems to me very likely that the inhabitants of a formerly non-Assyrian city could have maintained their local traditions in pottery making at home while using the official Middle Assyrian style ceramics only in the context of an employment at the Assyrian ‘palace’ (see Duistermaat this volume for a more extensive discussion of this matter). Perhaps the Assyrian settlement was hardly more than an administrative headquarter with a garrison on top of the city while the rest of Ḫarbe adhered to its traditional way of life.

S. JAKOB178

Figure 9.1: Middle Assyrian and Mittanian occupation of Tell Chuēra

(after Orthmann et al. 1995: Beilage 1) The archive from Tell Chuēra consists of 112 texts and fragments, covering a period of one

and a half decade during the reign of Tukultī-Ninurta I (Jakob 2009). We learn from these documents that Ḫarbe was the residence of a provincial governor (bēl pāḫete) representing the Assyrian crown. This title only occurs in a series of ‘letter orders’ from the office of the Grand Vizier. Unfortunately, the title holder is not mentioned by name, but a certain Sutī’u seems to be a strong candidate. In ration lists of the palace his name cannot be found among the beneficiaries. In addition Sutī’u is superior to the first two men of the lists: firstly, his right hand Sîn-napšer, perhaps a ‘steward’ (mašennu); and, secondly, the local ‘mayor’ (ḫaziā’nu) Ana-šumīja-Adad, and his successor Sîn-mušallim, respectively.

The immediate superior of Sutī’u was a certain Sîn-mudammeq, an official under the direct supervision of the Grand Vizier Aššur-iddin and later of Salmānu-mušabši, who was presumably from the same family. As we know that these Grand Viziers had several sukkallu officials at their disposal, it seems very likely that Sîn-mudammeq was one of them. Further, several sons of Aššur-iddin, including Ninu’āju, Ilī-padā and Qarrād-Aššur, are also involved in administration matters.

DAILY LIFE IN THE WILD WEST OF ASSYRIA 179

The individual people in this hierarchical system treated each other in an austerely top down fashion. The tone of higher officials towards their subordinates was explicitly rude. The office of the bēl pāḫete, however, was less characterized by a clear-cut allocation of tasks than by a comprehensive responsibility for the smooth functioning of the Assyrian machinery of power. This includes ensuring domestic security, as well as economic matters (agriculture and its commodities, storage, crafts etc.), and, associated with these tasks, personnel administration.

9.3 Controlling the Ḫarbe Region Several times another city, Pankibe, is mentioned in the texts. Here messengers, officials or merchants had the opportunity to spend the night. Moreover Pankibe disposed of a cattle pen and storage facilities for barley and sesame. It is clear from the sources that this city was subject to the Ḫarbe administration. This also applies to some villages in the surrounding countryside (in Assyrian ugāru), the remains of which have been discovered in course of a survey.

Many texts in the Tell Chuēra archive deal with the role of the site as a road station (between the cities of Aššukanni and Saḫlala), which were used by couriers (kalliʾu, see Jakob 2009: nos. 58 and 38), messengers of Assyrian officials (ibid.: no. 17) or the officials themselves (ibid.: nos. 18 and 50), as well as envoys from abroad, mainly Hittites (ibid.: nos. 24-26, 54, 56), but also from Amurru (ibid.: no. 23), Canaan (ibid.: no. 54), Sidon (ibid.: no. 28) and Egypt (ibid.: no. 22) (figure 9.2). As long as they stayed in Assyrian territory, foreign travellers were normally accompanied by Assyrian military personnel or scouts (ibid.: no. 48). This was necessary because the surroundings of Ḫarbe and the adjacent areas north of it were by no means peaceful or safe.

Figure 9.2: Distribution of places discussed in this chapter. Figure produced by Stefan Jakob.

S. JAKOB180

This is primarily reflected by the letter reports of Sîn-mudammeq. The following examples from a period of a few months in the eponym year of Ina-Aššur-šumī-aṣbat clearly show some of the problems the Assyrian administration was facing. On the fifth day of Kuzallu (the fifth month of the Assyrian year), Sîn-mudammeq writes to the grand vizier as follows:

“1500 enemy troops have been gathered in the Ḫasumu mountains. I don’t know the target of their raid – whether to Niḫriya, whether to Ḫani or to the banks of the river Ḫābūr – I do not know.” (BATSH 4/1: 3: 10-16).

17 days later, on the 22nd of Kuzallu, there is no longer any doubt. The enemy has progressed in a southern direction. Sîn-mudammeq reports on an attack on the areas surrounding Ḫarbe:

“When Adad-nāṣir has passed on after the delivery of the horses, the enemy attacked the city of Ḫarbe. He took oxen from five carts. Ten people were killed. The oxen of the threshing boards [he took]...” (BATSH 4/1: 4: 5-10).1

The reports of Sîn-mudammeq suggest that the Assyrian troops were forced into an asymmetric war. The enemy is hiding in the northern mountain regions. From there he descends to attack Assyrian cities and storehouses, only to disappear again:

“I have heard that the enemy is in the mountains. He attacks the banks of river Subnat and river Sarua. There he burns the straw.” (BATSH 4/1: 4: 4’-7’).

Several months later, in the region of Ḫarbe there is more trouble. On Allanatu the 27th Sîn-mudammeq mentions that a caravan of foreign merchants has been the victim of targeted attacks (BATSH 4/1: 6: 16’-32’).

In most cases the identity of the enemies remains anonymous. However, once Sîn-mudammeq speaks explicitly of Hurrian troops plundering and pillaging Niḫriya and its vicinity:

“Hurrian troops [have attacked] the city of Niḫrija. [They carry out] a robbery in the surroundings of Niḫriya. The straw of Niḫriya and Panua... [ ] all of it [ ]” (BATSH 4/1: 8: 54’-56’).

That these were by no means only minor skirmishes, is illustrated by the fact that, according to Sîn-mudammeq, 5000 soldiers were assembled to besiege a city whose name remains unknown to us. The letter did not explain in detail the situation, but it is clearly a large scale military operation, targeting a major settlement. After all, no less than 1000 elite soldiers were involved. The opponent is most likely a renegade of prime importance. This is demonstrated by the following remark of Sîn-mudammeq: “I will not let escape your servant as I did not before...I shall arrest him [litteraly seize his arm].” (BATSH 4/1: 8: 35’-36’).

It seems that Sîn-mudammeq usually did not have such well-trained soldiers at his disposal. In many cases, he is compelled to recruit mercenaries:

“I am going to hire mercenaries. They will march off with me. I did not call on your troops and your workforce. As for you, do your own job!” (Jakob 2009: no. 4:10-17).

Sometimes these troops disappear swiftly: “As for the troops, of whom my lord wrote: ‘send me 50 troops for my protection’: All of the soldiers made a bolt for it after they have received their provisions.” (BATSH 4/1: 3: 24).

9.4 Controlling Locust Plagues In a year of a good harvest the administration was, by and large, able to cover the local demand. However, the surplus was apparently not sufficient to compensate for several successive bad years. In such a fragile system, it does not take much to set off disaster. To name but two: destruction of 1 The attack is presumably taking place outside the city of Ḫarbe, in close vicinity of a threshing floor. The city itself was at that time protected by a garrison of Elamite archers staying at least from the eponym year of Ellil-nādin-apli to Bēr-išmânni (Jakob 2009: 97-105; for the chronological connection to the eponym Ina-Aššur-šumī-aṣbat see Jakob 2013: 519).

DAILY LIFE IN THE WILD WEST OF ASSYRIA 181

stocks by enemies and plagues of locusts. As Karen Radner has pointed out (2004: 15), the Neo-Assyrian administration took measures to block the development of pupae and larvae of locusts before they reached adulthood. We may assume that they did likewise in Middle Assyrian times. This is underlined by another letter of Sîn-mudammeq, addressed to the person in charge in the city of Ḫarbe (Jakob 2009: no. 10). There we read: (obv. 7-13):

“You know: In the whole area the locusts have laid eggs. The arable field, whether [ ] or [ ] ...’ (rev. 14-13) ‘Let the workforce descend to [the fields(?)]!. I have chosen and sent sheep. Sheep should be numerous. You should take them!”

Obviously, Sîn-mudammeq expects all employees to fight against the threat of a plague of locusts. It seems very likely that sheep from several flocks and cities had a role to play:

“There is no…in Aššukanni. The brewers have not yet brought the sheep. Hence, the brewers which I have recruited should take the sheep!” (ibid.: no. 9 rev. 16-21).

The recipient of this letter is the aformentioned Suti’u, the highest official in the city of Ḫarbe. It seems likely that the following order to his subordinate Sîn-napšer refers to the same matter:

“Send off the sheep of the brewers and the Sutean sheep in your responsibility quickly!” (ibid.: no. 1 rev. 12-15).

These Tell Chuēra letters only show the day of the month, but no year date. Hence a connection to the information about a plague of locusts in a letter from Dūr-Katlimmu, also written by Sîn-mudammeq, remains uncertain. But if they do, the fight against the locusts had not really been successful in some of the areas involved:

“As my lord wrote to me: ‘The people from Aššukanni – why didn’t they pursue them (the fugitives)?’ The locusts have eaten their harvest. After they have eaten up the chickpeas, there isn’t anyone left in the city. 50 Kassite soldiers, both hostages and prisoners, are currently in the city, but there isn’t anyone to guard them.” (BATSH 4/1: 2 obv. 15-21).

To summarise, these examples may indicate that the daily life in Middle Assyrian Ḫanigalbat proved to be difficult, a permanent struggle against adversities of all sorts. It seems that the Assyrian administration often was limited to damage control rather than determining the agenda. Was it perhaps, because the economic and military capacities had been exhausted, or did the territorial expansion to the west play a less important role in the long-term perspective of the Assyrian king than hitherto assumed?

9.5 The Assyrian-Babylonian Conflict To answer these questions it is best to have a look to the economic and political developments in other parts of the Assyrian realm. In the regnal year 13 of Tukultī-Ninurta I the Assyrian army returned home victoriously from Babylonia, bringing with them the defeated Kassite king Kaštiliaš IV (Janssen 2012: 138; Jakob 2013: 515). In royal inscriptions these events are referred to as follows:

“...I approached Kaštiliašu, king of Karduniaš, to do battle. I brought about the defeat of his army (and) felled his warriors. In the midst of that battle I captured Kaštiliašu, king of the Kassites, (and) trod with my feet upon his lordly neck as though it were a footstool. Bound I brought him as captive into the presence of Aššur, my lord. (Thus) I became lord of Sumer and Akkad in its entirety (and) fixed the boundary of my land as the Lower Sea in the east.” (tr. Grayson 1987: 244-5).

However, an administrative document of that time speaks a different language. Amidst several items of accounting, covering, inter alia, the issue of rations to Babylonian deportees, we find the following entry:

“447 homers 4 sūtu of barley (given) to the heralds whose writing boards for the starving troops in their responsibility which had taken part in the campaign against Babylonia have been mustered in the city of Libbi-āli...” (MARV I: 1 IV 32-35; Freydank 1974: 70-1).

From this we may conclude that the soldiers returning home couldn’t be sufficiently supplied with provisions on the march back, even in Assyrian territory. Moreover, it may be observed that the

S. JAKOB182

granaries of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta were seemingly insufficient to supply the needs of the incoming army units together with many accompanying deportees. This is demonstrated by the fact that only a fraction of the total amount of barley could be taken from the stock of the residence itself.2 The lion’s share had to be provided by granaries from outside the city.

Thus, the victory over Babylonia was ultimately bought at a high price and Assyria would have required years of calm on its southern border to recover. However, in the decade that followed, Babylonia did not remain peaceful. The Assyrians were repeatedly forced to intervene. The first puppet king Enlil-nādin-šumi was removed after one year by an usurper who ruled for another two years. Then, presumably with the help of the Assyrian king, a certain Adad-šuma-iddina ascends the throne of Babylonia (Jakob 2013: 516-20). In the end Tukultī-Ninurta is facing the necessity to undertake a punitive action against the city of Babylon:

“He destroyed the wall of Babylon and put the Babylonians to the sword. He took out the property of Esagil and Babylon amid the booty.” (tr. Grayson 1975: 176).

Only now, after several unsuccessful attempts, did Tukultī-Ninurta decide to establish direct rule over Babylonia. This opened the way for the victorious Assyrian troops to plunder Babylonian natural resources and food stocks, possibly as reparation payments.3 The amount of booty taken necessitated the construction of ships for transporting the grain ‘from the campaign to Babylonia’ (MARV IV: 34:17; Freydank 1976a: 112).

However, the Assyrians couldn’t enjoy these revenues for long. Chronicle P says that Tukultī-Ninurta ruled the ‘land of Sumer and Akkad’ for only seven years (Grayson 1975: 176). If this is correct, the control over Babylonia came to an end during his lifetime.4 Moreover, we have every reason to expect that this wasn’t the only difficult region the Assyrian army had to deal with.

9.6 The Assyrian Heartland The major part of the Middle Assyrian official correspondence still awaits discovery (Llop 2012). It can therefore only be assumed that the evidence from the letters sent to the Grand Vizier Aššur-iddin, for example, may be representative for the whole period in question. It is, however, a notable fact that the sites of conflict are spread over a large geographical area.

First, by the end of the fourth month (Sîn) in the eponym year of Ina-Aššur-šumī-aṣbat the Grand Vizier received a letter concerning a group of presumably Assyrian people from the city of Lubdu in the eastern Tigris area (BATSH 4/1: 12). A few days later, on the 6th of Kuzallu, Qarrād-Aššur, a son of Aššur-iddin, informed his father that the city was under siege and added that the people of Lubdu had provisions for only two months left (BATSH 4/1: 12: 5-10). It remains unclear whether a solution of this problem was found during this period, for example in the form of aid by military forces. It is possibly relevant, that in the same context substantial economic difficulties in the Nineveh region are discussed (ibid.: 14-35). 2 The total sum amounts to approximately 8200 homers from the ‘granary of Kidin-Ellil’ and the ‘city of Sîn-rabi’. Out of that amount only 57 homers are attributable to Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta itself (Freydank 1974: 71). 3 A comparable procedure might be reflected by the memorandum MARV VIII: 7 from the eponym year of Aššur-zēra-iddina. There we read: 7...i+na u4-mi LUGAL 8a-na KÁ.DINGIR 9˹ni˺-sa-na 10a-na šal-lu-ú-me 11i-lu-ú-ni 12[š]al-la-ta ma-’a-da 13[na-ṣ]u-ú-ni “when the king went up to Babylon to perform the spring festival (and) brought with him a large quantity of deportees” (ll. 9 & 12 collated in August 2013). The mention of deportees indicates that a military campaign was successfully completed. If we are allowed to link the visit of the Assyrian king to Babylon to the enthronement of Adad-šuma-iddina (Jakob 2013: 517), the latter’s role as an Assyrian puppet king would become obvious. 4 The evidence of Chronicle 25 (Walker 1982) has led to the assumption that Adad-šuma-uṣur couldn’t conquer the city of Babylon until a later stage of his reign or more precisely at the time of the Assyrian king Ellil-kudurrī-uṣur. Putting aside the fact that Chronicle 25 is only partially preserved, it seems unlikely to me that the Assyrians were able to take control of the northern part of Babylonia for another 25 years (Yamada 2003: 166; cf. Janssen 2012: 132-3).

DAILY LIFE IN THE WILD WEST OF ASSYRIA 183

Second, an administrative record concerning the distribution of provisions to workers and employees, written not long after the conquest of Babylon (Jakob 2013: 521), includes the remark that “the king marched to the land of Hanigalbat, brought up barley, conquered the city of Ša...na.” (MARV II: 17:110; Freydank 1982b: 43). This campaign took place sometime between the end of the year Abī-ilī, son of Katiri, and the first months of the following eponym Salmānu-šuma-uṣur, that means about the time of the construction of ships intended for the transport of booty from Babylonia (MARV IV: 34, see above). It is remarkable that the Assyrian ruler needed military forces to raise barley from Ḫanigalbat, a region that was supposed to be part of his own realm, or within the lands of his Grand Vizier.

Furthermore, we recognise that the Assyrian military campaigns of the third decade of Tukultī-Ninurta’s reign were not only undertaken to fend off enemies, but also to ensure food supply for the capital. One example from the same period (eponym year of Qarrād-Aššur, Jakob 2013: 514) leads us to the river Diyālā. In MARV I: 9 (also Freydank 1974: 78) we read that large quantities of cereals, sesame and groats had been received in Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta by some officials as the tribute for a military campaign imposed on the land Zamban on the Diyālā River (36[ma-d]a-tu ša ḫu-ra-di 37[iš-t]u kurZa-am-ba-an a-aḫ Tu-ra-an 38[(x)] e-mi-da-an-ni).

Further, there were deliveries of grain from the periphery to the centre without reference to a military expedition. As we have seen above, a large amount of barley had come from the ‘city of Sîn-rabi’, shortly after the first Babylonian campaign (see above n. 3; Llop 2010). It cannot be excluded that such documents as MARV VIII: 19 (eponym is Kaštiliašu, see Jakob 2013: 514) in which great quantities of grain are assigned to various cities also date to this period. The lower part of this tablet is badly damaged, but it seems that the official Uṣur-namkūr-šarre received a delivery from the cities mentioned before in his function as governor (bēl pāḫete) of Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta (Jakob 2003: 114). The most recent group of texts in this series refers to an expedition to the city of Tille (Tell Rumēlān; Nashef 1982: 261), northwest of the Assyrian heartland. The yield of this transport was obviously so voluminous that it was sufficient for several years (Llop 2013: 551-8).5

We do not know the legal basis for these expeditions (for more examples see ibid.: 552), either a kind of taxes or simply as a result of a royal order. But it seems clear that the capital was obviously in dire need of food staples from external supply sources. Evidence suggests that this situation wasn’t solely initiated by a fundamental inability of the centre to provide for itself. From the initial phase of the newly established residence Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta, the Assyrian administration adopted a forward-thinking approach to itensify the agricultural use of the land in the immediate and distant surroundings of the city (Freydank 2009: 24). However, it can be observed that the yield of these fields was significantly reduced over the last decade of Tukultī-Ninurta’s reign (ibid.: 78). This might be a strong indication for a climatic change that affected the Assyrian heartland (see below note 6). If so, the hope for a swift improvement would have been in vain. In any case, an economical use of resources was required.

9.7 How the West was Lost Having a closer look at the designated use of the deliveries to the capital, one may observe that, apart from the allocation of royal gifts (rīmuttu) to officials or their relatives (Llop 2007: 119), support is given to prestigious construction projects such as the palaces in Aššur and Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta. We do not know what happened to the barley from Ḫanigalbat which is spoken of in the aforementioned ‘Sammeltafel’ MARV II: 17, but the western realm itself, likewise afflicted with supply problems, presumably could not benefit from these stocks. It rather seems that the west was left to itself.

5 In the same period, the city of Tille was the destination of another expedition, this time conducted by a certain Kidin-Sîn (Llop 2013: 554).

S. JAKOB184

As for the Ḫarbe area, the further development is only recognisable in outline. There is no eponym dating after Abī-ilī, son of Katiri – if that year is really the last one – (Jakob 2009: 3; Llop 2013: 558). The archaeological evidence suggests a hiatus in the use of the official Assyrian building, but the Assyrian inhabitants appear to have continued to occupy the site for various decades. Then the city was finally abandoned (Jakob 2009: 6-7). It cannot be excluded that the increasing aridity in the Ğazira, which is attested for the 12th-9th century BC by palynological data (Kirleis and Herles 2007) was of decisive importance.6 Nevertheless, it seems that the fate of Ḫarbe was similar to that of other Assyrian settlements in the west, until finally the Ğazira was transformed into a no man’s land, claimed inter alia by nomadic groups such as the Sutī’u or Aramean tribes.

Nevertheless, the declining Assyrian occupation doesn’t seem to be replaced by alternative state structures. An indication for this may be the fact that the dunnu of the Grand Vizier’s family remains inhabited by Assyrians, located even further to the west than Ḫarbe (Wiggermann 2006: 93). The Assyrian occupation is now presumably reduced to some ‘islands’. Thus, the western realm of Assyria may have become a ‘network empire’ in this period (Liverani 1988: 85).

In the end, the Assyrian possessions west of the Ḫābūr Triangle had to be abandoned one by one. A considerable amount of time had to pass before Assyria was able to make a new attempt to tame the ‘wild west’ up to the Euphrates River. History thus repeated itself. Tiglath-pilesar I, however, did not only reach this ancient frontier, but marched on to the Mediterranean Sea where he received tribute from several cities. Once more, it was the debilitating conflict with Babylonia, that almost led to the failure of the Assyrian state. If the second Babylonian campaign of Tiglath-pilesar I, that resulted in the pillaging of Babylon, really was occasioned by the desire for revenge for the murder of two princes (Llop 2003), Assyria was drawn into an unnecessary warfare on two fronts. As was the case in the time of Tukultī-Ninurta I, the military means to be used for national defence and security were not sufficient to prevent a second ‘imperial overstretch’ (Kennedy 1988: 515) and, consequently, another decline of the Assyrian state for decades.

9.8 Conclusion The regions west of the Assyrian heartland are continually referred to in Middle Assyrian royal inscriptions. Tukultī-Ninurta I emphasises that he has deported thousands of people from the opposite bank of the Euphrates and Tiglath-pilesar reports that he has even reached the Mediterranean Sea where he received tribute in several cities. But it does seem, however, that the resources expended often were inappropriate to the needs.

Putting together information from public communications and administrative documents one gets the impression that the Middle Assyrian kings usually set their priorities elsewhere, i.e., inter alia, the Eastern Tigris area and the Assyrian-Babylonian border. Further, prestigious building projects should also be mentioned here.

In any case, without massive support from the centre the western periphery could not withstand the challenges posed by a persisting resistance of autochthonous groups against the Assyrian rule on the one hand, and deteriorating environmental conditions, on the other.

It took a few more centuries for the Wild West of Assyria to be turned into an integral part of the Empire. Only in the first millennium BC was the Assyrian administration able to establish a widely uncontested rule over Syria as a whole.

6 It should be noted that such a climatic change could be demonstrated for the eastern Mediterranean coast as well (Kaniewski et al. 2010). Added to this was the fact that the problem of the chronic shortage of staff continued, at least in the public sector. It is interesting to note that the granary of the Grand Vizier’s dunnu in Tell Sabi Abyad had considerable amounts of barley in stock (Wiggermann 2000: 205). Obviously, there still was enough manpower to cultivate the fields regularly.

DAILY LIFE IN THE WILD WEST OF ASSYRIA 185

Abbreviations BATSH 4/1 = Cancik-Kirschbaum 1996. MARV I = Freydank 1976b. MARV II= Freydank 1982a. MARV IV= Freydank and Fischer 2001. MARV VIII= Freydank and Feller 2007. RIMA 1 = Grayson 1987.

Bibliography Cancik-Kirschbaum, E. C. 1996: Die mittelassyrischen Briefe aus Tall Šēḫ Ḥamad. Berlin. Duistermaat, K. 2008: The Pots and Potters of Assyria. Turnhout. Foster, B. R. 2005: Before the Muses. Bethesda. Freydank, H. 1974: ‘Zwei Verpflegungstexte aus Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta’ Altorientalische

Forschungen 1: 55-89. ― 1976a: ‘Untersuchungen zur sozialen Struktur in mittelassyrischer Zeit’ Altorientalische

Forschungen 4: 111-30. ― 1976b: Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte. (MARV I) Berlin. ― 1982a: Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte. (MARV II). Berlin. ― 1982b: ‘Einige historische Nachrichten in mittelassyrischen Rechts- und Verwaltungsurkunden’ in H. Klengel (ed.), Gesellschaft und Kultur im Alten Vorderasien. Schriften zu Gesellschaft und Kultur des Alten Orients 15. Berlin: 41-6. ― 2009: ‘Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta als Agrarprovinz’ Altorientalische Forschungen 36: 16-84 Freydank, H., and Fischer, C. 2001: Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte IV. Tafeln aus Kār-Tukultī-Ninurta. (MARV IV). Saarbrücken. Freydank, H., and Feller, B. 2007: Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte.

(MARV VIII). Saarbrücken. Grayson, A. K. 1975: Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles. Locust Valley. ― 1987: Assyrian Rulers of the Third and Second Millennia BC (to 1115 BC). Toronto. Janssen, Th. 2012: ‘Die mittel- und spätkassitische Chronologie im internationalen Kontext: eine

Revision’ Akkadica 133: 123-45. Jakob, S. 2003: Mittelassyrische Verwaltung und Sozialstruktur. Leiden-Boston. ― 2009: Die mittelassyrischen Texte aus Tell Chuēra in Nordost-Syrien. Wiesbaden. ― 2013: ‘Sag mir quando, sag mir wann’ In Ll. Feliu, J. Llop, A. Millet, and J. Sanmartín (eds.),

Time and History. Proceedings of the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale. Winona Lake: 509-23.

Kaniewski, D., Paulissen, E., van Campo, E., Weiss, H., Otto, T., Brettschneider, J., and van Lerberghe, K. 2010: ‘Late second-early first millennium BC abrupt climate changes in coastal Syria and their possible significance for the Eastern Mediterranean’ Quaternary Research 74: 207-15.

Kennedy, P. M. 1988: The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. Frankfurt am Main. Kirleis, W., and Herles, M. 2007: ‘Climatic change as a reason for Assyro-Aramaean conflicts?

Pollen evidence for drought at the end of the 2nd millennium’. State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 16: 7-37.

Liverani, M. 1988: ‘The growth of the Assyrian empire in the Ḫābūr/Middle Euphrates area: A new paradigm’ State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 2: 81-98.

Llop, J. 2003: ‘Die persönlichen Gründe Tiglat-pilesers I. Babylonien anzugreifen’ Orientalia 72: 204-11.

― 2007: ‘Das Wort rīmuttu, „Geschenk“ in der mittelassyrischen Dokumentation’ In P.A. Miglus, and J.M. Córdoba (eds.), Assur und sein Umland. (ISIMU VI). Madrid: 115-28.

S. JAKOB186

― 2010: ‘Barley from Alu-ša-Sîn-rabi. Chronological reflections on an expedition in the time of Tukultī-Ninurta I (1233-1197 bc)’ In J. Vidal (ed.), Studies on War in the Ancient Near East: Collected Essays on Military History. Münster: 105-16.

― 2012: ‘Middle Assyrian letters: A new survey’ Aula Orientalis 30: 289-306. ― 2013: ‘The Eponym Bēr-nādin-apli and the documents referring to the expeditions of the city of

Tille in the reign of Tukulti-Ninurta I (1223-1197 BCE)’ In Ll. Feliu, J. Llop, A. Millet, J. Sanmartín (eds.), Time and History. Proceedings of the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale. Winona Lake: 549-59.

Moortgat, A., Moortgat-Correns, U. 1976: Tell Chuēra in Nordost-Syrien. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Siebente Grabungskampagne 1974. Berlin.

Nashef, Kh. 1982: Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der mittelassyrischen und mittelbabylonischen Zeit. (RGTC 5). Wiesbaden.

Orthmann, W., Hempelmann, R., Klein, H., Kühne, C., Novak, M., Pruß, A., Vila E., Weicken, H.-M., Wener, A. 1995: Ausgrabungen in Tell Chuēra in Nordost-Syrien. Vorbericht über die Grabungskampagnen 1986 bis 1992. Saarbrücken.

Radner, K. 2004: ‘Fressen und gefressen werden. Heuschrecken als Katastrophe und Delikatesse im Alten Vorderen Orient’ Die Welt des Orients 34: 7-22.

Walker, C. B. F. 1982: ‘Babylonian Chronicle 25: A chronicle of the Kassite and Isin II Dynasties’ In G. van Driel, Th.J.H. Krispijn, M. Stol, and K.R. Veenhof (eds.), Zikir Šumim: Assyriological Studies Presented to F.R. Kraus on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday. Leiden: 398-417.

Wiggermann, F. A. M. 2000: ‘Agriculture in the northern Balikh Valley: The case of Middle Assyrian Tell Sabi Abyad’ in R.M. Jas (ed.), Rainfall and Agriculture in Northern Mesopotamia. Istanbul:171-231.

― 2006: ‘The seal of Ili-padâ, Grand Vizier of the Middle Assyrian empire’ In P. Taylor (ed.), The Iconography of Cylinder Seals. London/Turin: 92-9.

Yamada, S. 2003: ‘Tukultī-Ninurta I’s Rule over Babylonia and its Aftermath’ Orient 38: 153-77.

DAILY LIFE IN THE WILD WEST OF ASSYRIA 187