Assyrian Army

[JP Vieira]

Hello
Besides the Roman army, the Assyrian one allways fascinated me.
The Assyrian army was, perhaps, the first truly organised (in every aspect) army of History.
As said, the Assyrian had infantry, both nationals
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/jp_vieiras_portfolio/picture35544.aspx
and foreign auxiliary
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/jp_vieiras_portfolio/picture35546.aspx
The use of the horse would that be in chariots or as cavalry
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/jp_vieiras_portfolio/picture30728.aspx
Was also a weapon that helped the Assyrian to achieve their maximum glory.
The Assyrian exceled also and notably at siege warfare.
Besides all the major components of an army (until the advent of gunpowder), the Assyrian made great use of psychological warfare.
Their method was simple but very effective: to inspire the terror on your foe is almost to win the war; after each action of intimidation the Assyrian made sure that everyone possible knew about it.
So, even before Rome was anything else than a small city, Assyrian had a professional, highly trained, ruthless and efficiently army.
Best regards
JP Vieira

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

I also find it very annoying that people say that God's intervention saved Jerusalem from the Assyrian army. I think that's a load of BS. Babylon started revolting during this time, and Babylon had far greater importance on many levels (especially economically and tactically).

So it would make good sense to regain a pivotal city of your empire. You may then say that Jerusalem would've survived because it had better fortifications. Nope, according to several articles I've read, Jerusalem had defenses VERY similar to that of Babylon, and the Assyrians wiped those out with relative ease.

I will see if I can find those articles again and give some sources. I want to say one was Military History Magazine (I think it was one of their quarterly or biannual issues, I'd have to check again).

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Why do you feel so strongly about it, though? I will grant that it is not what could be called a historically rigorous statement, but then again as a matter of faith it makes as much sense as anything. Are there a lot of historians saying this? I mean, can't God inspire a revolt anyways?

Not to get too Off Topic, I hope.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

Why do you feel so strongly about it, though? I will grant that it is not what could be called a historically rigorous statement, but then again as a matter of faith it makes as much sense as anything. Are there a lot of historians saying this? I mean, can't God inspire a revolt anyways?

Not to get too Off Topic, I hope.

I don't feel too strongly about it, but looking at it from a matter of maintaining/building an empire, Babylon would have been the logical choice to take. So it was economics/military strategy that saved Jerusalem in my mind.

No, not really he can't. At least in my opinion, as he does not exist, hence it was a humans quest for independence or power that caused the revolt of Babylon, saving Jerusalem from the brutality of the Assyrians.

By brutality I mean tearing out your eyes, nose, tongue, flaying you alive, impaling you, beheading you, etc.

Also, didn't the Bible make some mention of there being a plague that caused the Assyrians to retreat? I think I remember something like that in the article.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Actually, the Book of (I think) Kings referred to an angel, although apparently it is generally understood to be a plague. And I have even heard distinctly non-religious historians say that it was the destruction of the Assyrian Army before Jerusalem that was the deciding factor, but then again this isn't exactly my area of expertise.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

Actually, the Book of (I think) Kings referred to an angel, although apparently it is generally understood to be a plague. And I have even heard distinctly non-religious historians say that it was the destruction of the Assyrian Army before Jerusalem that was the deciding factor, but then again this isn't exactly my area of expertise.

Both the Israeli accounts, and the Taylor Prism confirm that many of the Israeli cities fell to the Assyrians, and that Hezekiah paid a butt load of treasure to Sennacherib. He still "caged in" Hezekiah with towers, piling things up against the cities gates so nobody could leave, etc.

I'd have to check to be positive, but I'm 98% positive there was a Babylonian revolt in this small time period.

But let's set aside the religious details of this, as the arguement will only get more and more heated. Shall we agree to disagree? As we both appear to be set in our ways?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it was II King's, somewhere in the upper teens.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Heck, I never said that I thought religion had anything to do with it, so sure . . .

 

[RE Lee]

I also find it very annoying that people say that God's intervention saved Jerusalem from the Assyrian army. I think that's a load of BS. Babylon started revolting during this time, and Babylon had far greater importance on many levels (especially economically and tactically).

So it would make good sense to regain a pivotal city of your empire. You may then say that Jerusalem would've survived because it had better fortifications. Nope, according to several articles I've read, Jerusalem had defenses VERY similar to that of Babylon, and the Assyrians wiped those out with relative ease.

I will see if I can find those articles again and give some sources. I want to say one was Military History Magazine (I think it was one of their quarterly or biannual issues, I'd have to check again).

Maybe God caused the Babylonians to revolt by putting it into their minds. If there is a God, couldn't he do that.

 

[sydhe]

The exact phrase from 2 Kings 19:35 (King James Version) is

And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the LORD went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses.

From which I assume the Assyrians were turned into zombies, which must have affected their ability to maintain a siege.

 

[Illdisposed]

The exact phrase from 2 Kings 19:35 (King James Version) is



From which I assume the Assyrians were turned into zombies, which must have affected their ability to maintain a siege.

This event, which a passage in Herodotus suggests may have been an outbreak of bubonic plague, saved Jerusalem, but did not prevent Sennacherib from subsequently imposing a hefty increase in tribute.

In regards to the Assyrian empire, its terror policy - one of its successful assets - proved to be one of the reasons of collapse. Unable (unwilling) to be friends with anyone eventually it had to face a coalition of enemies, too strong to be successfully resisted. The armies of Medes, Scyths and Babylonians converged on Nineveh, took the hated city and gutted it, along with every other place of any importance in the country around. Assyria became an empty land.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Yeah, terror ends up in the long run not being a sustainable strategy. it may work in the short term but it makes diplomacy harder.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Maybe God caused the Babylonians to revolt by putting it into their minds. If there is a God, couldn't he do that.

This is usually my answer when people say "it can't be a miracle from God because X explains it." X would merely His method for causing said miracle to happen, be it blowing the top off of an island in the Cyclides to get the Israelites out of Egypt, or seeding rebellion in the minds of the Babylonians.

 

[JP Vieira]

Terror was never an enduring strategy and the fate of the assyrians lets us know that: I agree with you, Eran. Other civilizations realised that and use, towards the conquered people a policy of benevolence.