Abraham Samuel Anspacher.

Tiglath Pileser III online

. (page 1 of 6)
Online LibraryAbraham Samuel AnspacherTiglath Pileser III → online text (page 1 of 6)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook















No. V.







Set up and electrotyped. Published November, 1912,

J. 8. Cushing Co. Berwick & Smith Co.
Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.


The following thesis by Dr. A. S. Anspacher gives the
most succinct account of the reign of Tiglath Pileser III
which has yet been attempted. The author has systemat-
ically endeavored to place a number of localities, men-
tioned in the documents of this great Assyrian king, and
in so doing he has made a distinct contribution to ancient
geography. Tiglath Pileser's map has always been some-
what uncertain, and, in his work, Dr. Anspacher has
succeeded not only in establishing several new locations,
but he has traced, more carefully than has been done
hitherto, the routes of march of the principal campaigns
inaugurated by this notable conqueror.

In compiling the tale of an ancient nation, it is neces-
sary to specialize on the material of each period, and also
on that of each important reign ; and this is what Dr.
Anspacher has done. While it is true that all the riddles
of the history of a vanished people can never be satisfac-
torily solved, a careful study, such as this dissertation
undoubtedly is, cannot fail to be of value to the historian.




The attempt to solve all the problems connected with
the life and history of Tiglath Pileser III can never be
fully successful as long as we remain without new in-
scriptional material by means of which to fill in the
lacunae which so unfortunately abound in the existing
tablets. With but one exception, all the inscriptions
which we now possess were found by Layard in the South-
west Palace of Nimrod. Some of the tablets came
originally from the Northwest, some from the Central
Palace; and since all three of the mounds which mark
the sites of these three palaces have been thoroughly
explored, it is perhaps too much to hope that more records
of Tiglath Pileser's reign will come down to us.

This thesis is an attempt to fix in some detail the prin-
cipal facts in the history of Tiglath Pileser III. Although
every standard work on Assyrian history has some pages
devoted to this theme, no author has treated it with such
detail as to present the full story. The entire subject
has appealed to me as one deserving far more considera-
tion than is usually accorded to it in the histories. The
reign of Tiglath Pileser III was from one point of view
the most important in Assyrian history, and the revolu-
tionary tendencies which characterized it are of as much
importance to civilization as they were to the then welfare
of Assyria itself. It needed a revolution to make the



conservative Assyrian politicians of the time realize that
the very existence of the state was in danger. To curtail
the immense revenues of the priests so that sufficient
means to carry on the extensive military operations always
necessary to Assyria's safety might never be lacking was
the immediate aim of the revolution. That result it
speedily achieved. But from the viewpoint of world
history it also accomplished a far more valuable work,
in that it gave Tiglath Pileser the opportunity so to shape
Assyria's policies as to give her a longer lease of life than
would otherwise have been hers.

When Tiglath Pileser III came to the throne, Assyria
was already beginning to succumb to the forces of decay.
Her dependencies were being gradually taken from her,
and her armies were meeting frequent reverses. It
needed a great warrior and statesman to save her, not
only for herself, but for the accomplishment of her cul-
tural work. The value of this king to civilization, there-
fore, lies not in the fact of his extensive conquests
themselves, but rather in the fact that without him
Assyria would not have endured long enough to bequeath
anything to the world.

The proper fixing of the geographical locations men-
tioned in the inscriptions is of prime importance. I have,
wherever possible, tried to determine these and also the
routes of march by the aid of all the historical inscrip-
tions that were available to me, and believe that I have
fixed some of these with exactness. One fact I wish to
note here. At first thought it would seem that the Arabic
geographers should yield material for the determination
of some of the localities in question, but on the contrary
no such aid is forthcoming. They deal with a later


period of the history of Western Asia, and only a very
few of the geographical names of the times of which they
treat preserve even a reminiscence of old Assyrian nomen-

In conclusion I wish to thank Professor Prince, under
whom I have studied my major subject, Assyriology, and
whose aid and suggestion as well as able instruction have
given to my work whatever value it may possess.

To Professor Richard Gottheil I also owe a debt of
gratitude for many helpful suggestions, and have much
pleasure in expressing my appreciation and gratitude.



I. THE SOURCES ......... 1

II. ACCESSION .......... 10



V. MEDIA AND URARTU ........ 54




Assy. Can. . . . G. Smith, Assyrian Eponym Canon, 1869.

Disc G. Smith, Assyrian Discoveries, 1875.

Br Rudolph E. Briinnow, Classified List, 1889.

Rost Paul Rost, Die Keilschrifttexte TiglatnPileser's HI.

Band I : Einleitung, Transcription und Ueberset-

zung, Worterverzeichniss mit Commentar. Band II :

Autographierte Texte, 1893.

Ann Annals : in Rost, Band I. pp. 2 ff.

Th. A Die Thontaf elinschrift, obverse ; in Rost, Band I.

pp. 55-69.
Th. R Die Thontafelinschrift, reverse ; in Rost, Band I.

pp. 70-77.
PI. I Platteninschrift von Nimrud, No. I ; in Rost, Band I.

pp. 42-47.
PI. II. . o . . . Platteniuschrift von Nimrud, No. II ; in Rost, Band I.

pp. 48-53.

Kl. I Kleinere Inschriften ; in Rost, Band I. pp. 78-83.

Kl. II Kleinere Inschriften ; in Rost, Band I. pp. 84-85.

KAT. 2 Schrader, Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament,

2d ed., 1883.

KB Schrader, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, Vols. I-IV.

KGF Schrader, Keilinschriften und Geschichtsforschung,

Kritik Schrader, Zur Kritik der Inschriften Tiglath-Pileser's

II, des Asarhaddon und des Ashurbanipal, 1879.

Forsch Winckler, Altorientalische Forschungen.

Untersuchgn. . Winckler, Untersuchungen zur altorientalische Ge-

schichte, 1889.

Lay, Layard Inscriptions in the Cuneiform Character, 1851.



Paradies. . . . Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies ? 1881.

Sulm Billerbeck, Das Sandschak Suleimania, 1898.

R Rawlinson, Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia.

RP Records of the Past.

PSBA Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology.

ZA Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie.

JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.




From the time of the destruction of the Babylonian
Empire until the middle of the last century, when Layard
began his excavations, Tiglath Pileser III 1 was known
only because of the mention of his name in a few Biblical
verses. 2 Nothing was certain about him, except that a
king of that name had ruled in Assyria and had made his
power felt in Palestine. All knowledge of his history
had passed from human memory, and even the inscrip-
tions which finally proved to be his, when they were
unearthed and deciphered, presented many a puzzling
problem. The mutilated condition in which the tablets
were found did not, at the time, promise much for a
future solution of the difficulties ; besides which, one
of the tablets the longest inscription was so badly
cracked and broken in shipment to the British Museum
that many attempts to correct the first faulty piecing
together were for a long time unsuccessful. When this

1 Schrader, KAT? p. 240 and note, reads the name "Tu-kul-ti
(Tuk-lat)-habal-i-sarra " ; he translates, "Trust (i.e. Object of Trust) is
the Son of thelSarra Temple." Note ABK. p. 148, No. 9, and p. 151 :
the "Son of the Sarra Temple is the God Adar" ; the basic meaning
of the name, therefore, is " Trust is Adar."

2 2 K. xv. 29 and xv. 7 ; 1 Chr. v. 6, 26; 2 Chr. xxviii. 20. The
form Tiglath Pilneser in Chronicles is due to "an accidental corruption
of the familiar name at the hands of the Chronicler or of his Midrashic
source." (Kittel, Chron. Heb. SBOT. 68.) He was known as Tiglath



had finally been accomplished, it was discovered that
about a hundred lines were missing altogether.

When Layard had in the course of his excavations
reached what he afterwards called " the Southwest Pal-
ace of Nimrod," he found that the whole interior of one of
the large halls remained " fairly intact," 3 and that it was
panelled with slabs brought from elsewhere. Some of the
slabs came originally from the Northwest, some from the
Central Palace. " The bas-reliefs always, when left entire,
turned toward the wall of sun-dried brick, . . . and
upon the faces of most of the slabs forming wall E were
the marks of a chisel; . . . the bas-reliefs had been
purposely destroyed. Only parts of the wall F had been
finished. Many of the slabs not having been used and
still lying in the centre of the chamber, ... it was evi-
dent that these were entire, having only suffered from fire.
They were, moreover, arranged in rows with great regu-
larity, and, in one or two instances, heaped the one above
the other."

The analysis of these inscriptions, at whose interpreta-
tion several partial attempts were made before Schrader's
authoritative work, was all rendered secondary by that
scholar's investigation. 4 Schrader divided the inscrip-
tions into Annals and the so-called Prunkinschriften: the

Pileser II, until, in 1886, Th. G. Pinches, in "Guide to the Kouyunjik
Gallery," p. 9, No. 72, described an inscription of Ramman-Nirari II,
which showed that a grandfather of that king was also called Tiglath
Pileser. This is the second king of the name, and our king is, therefore,
the third. Winckler published the inscription in KB. 1 pp. 48-49, and
in ZA. II. p. 311.

3 " Nineveh and its Remains," vol. II. pp. 27 ff.

4 Zur Kritik der Inschriften Tiglath Pileser 's II, des Asarhaddon und
des Asurbanipal, in Kong. Akademie der Wissenschaft zu Berlin, 1879.
A description of all the inscriptions published up to 1886 is given in


last being arranged not chronologically, but geographically.
Both have been published, transliterated, and translated
in part, by many scholar's. Schrader divides the Annals
into those composed of 7, 12, and 16 lines, respectively.
Of the seven-line inscriptions (seven in number), Layard
published five. 5 They are those which in his collection
are designated as 69, A, 1 ; 69, A, 2 ; 69, B, 1 ; 69, B, 2;
and 34, B. The last was translated by Smith, 6 and the
remaining two inscriptions of this set were published by
the same author. 7 The second group is made up of twelve-
line inscriptions, although one, Lay. 45, B, in its present
condition contains only eight lines, the first four being
broken away. Another, III R 9, No. I, 8 is so badly muti-
lated that not a single Kne remains intact. Lay. 50, A
(III R 9, No. 3, p. 41-52) is in a very fair condition and
is continued in Lay. 50, B, and Lay. 67, A ; both these last
being written on one stone ; while Lay. 67, B, is a con-
tinuation of Lay. 67, A ; making of the four inscriptions
a complete sub-group. Lay. 51, A, and 51, B, 9 are writ-
ten on tablets the last half of which is entirely broken
away, but what remains is perfectly legible; Lay. 51, B,
being damaged to the extent of only a small lacuna in
the last line. Lay. 52, A, and Lay. 52, B, 10 are fairly
well preserved and form a continuous narrative. 11 The

Bezold, Kurzgefasster Vberblick uber die Babylonisch-Assyrische Litera-
tur. (Leipzig, 1886.)

6 " Inscriptions in the Cuneiform Character," 1851.

6 Disc. pp. 266 ff.

7 In III R 10, No. 1, a and b. He translated them in Disc. pp. 281 ff.

8 Translated by Smith, Disc. pp. 274 ff.

9 Translated in Disc. pp. 269 ff.

10 Translated in Smith, Disc. pp. 267 ff.

11 This group also includes two fragments, Lay. 19, B, and Lay. 29, B ;
the last was translated by Smith, Disc. pp. 283 ff.


third group (16 lines), is made up of inscriptions which
are badly mutilated ; viz. Lay. 71, B, which is continued
in Lay. 73, A, 12 the merest fragment. Only about a third
of the original tablet has come down to us. Lay. 71, A
is scarcely in a better condition, and is continued on the
same stone by Lay. 71, B. The two inscriptions are
separated by a perpendicular line through the width of
the stone, so that Lay. 71, B, line 1, is the continuation
of Lay. 71, A, line 16.

There remain a few Annal Inscriptions which cannot
be classified by the number of their lines : viz. III. R. 9,
No. 2 ; a fragmentary 19 line tablet ; 13 III. R. 9, No. 3,
lines 22-41 (Lay. 65), a 20 line inscription ; 14 the very
badly broken 18 line tablet, Lay. 66 ; 15 III. R. 10, No. 2,
consisting of the broken parts of an originally 47 line
inscription, 16 and III. R. 10, No. 3, composed of 24 lines.

Schrader's second division, the Prunkinschriften, includes
a long fragment of a tablet which was inscribed on both
sides, the middle portion (about 50 lines on the obverse,
and 50 on the reverse, i.e. about 100 in all), being missing.
It was published II. R. 67 ; and translated by Smith, 17
Eneberg, 18 and S. Arthur Strong. 19 The duplicate of this

12 Translated by Schrader, EAT* pp. 261 ff.; and Smith, Disc. pp.
282 ff.

13 Translated by Smith, Disc. pp. 275 ff. ; Rodwell, EP. V. p. 45 ; and
Schrader, KAT* pp. 217 ff.

14 Translated by Smith, Disc. pp. 276 ff.; Menant, Annales, p. 146 ; and
Rodwell, EP. V. pp. 46 ff.

is Translated by Smith, Disc. pp. 285 ff.

^Translated by Schrader, KAT. 2 pp. 225 ff.; Kodwell, HP. V. pp.
61 ff.; and by Smith, Disc. p. 284.

17 Disc. pp. 256 ff.

1 8 Journ. Asiatique, VI, pp. 441 ff.; cf. KAT* p. 224, lines 23-28, and
p. 257, lines 57-62.

19 EP. V. pp. 115 ff.


inscription (Brit. Mus. D. T. 30) is of special interest,
having been found by Smith at Kalah in the Temple of
Nimroud, and is apparently a Babylonian copy. 20 It was
published by Schrader, 21 and translated by Smith. 22
Lay. 17, F, is a 36 line tablet, translated by Schrader, 23
Menant, 24 and Oppert. 25 In 1893 P. Rost supplied the
need of a complete edition of all the inscriptions, with a
new set of autographs, a transliteration, and translation. 26
In it he publishes for the first time three small tablets. 27
He was fortunate enough to discover a squeeze of Lay.
17/18 ; which was made before the tablet was broken.

To what kings these mutilated sculptures and tablets
belonged was for a long time a puzzling question. Layard
himself, 28 having compared them with a pavement slab of
the same period and with reliefs of the Central Palace,
concluded that they all belonged to the same king. After
Hincks 29 had deciphered on one of the reliefs the name
of Menahem, king of Israel, as a tributary to the Assyrian
king in the eighth year of the latter's reign, on the basis
of a reference to 2 K. xv. 19 and 20, and 1 Chr. v. 26,
Layard concluded that this king must be " an immediate
predecessor of Pul, Pul himself, or Tiglath Pileser."
With the discovery of the Eponym Canon the possibility

20 Rost, vol. I. p. 11.

21 Kong. Ak. d. Wiss. 1879.

22 Disc. pp. 264 ff.

23 Lines 20-25 in KGF. p. 206, and lines 4-10 in KGF. p. 106.

24 Annales, pp. 138 ff.

25 Expedition des Hois d'Assyrie, p. 336.

26 Keilschrifttexte Tiglat-Pileser" 1 s III in two volumes. All references
to the inscriptions hereafter are to this work.

2 ? Vol. II. p. 15, PI. No. 24, and Kuj. Gallery, No. 66 and No. 64 ; also
K 2469.

28 " Disc, in Nineveh and Babylon," p. 617.

29 Athenaeum, June 3, 1852.


of this king being an immediate predecessor of Pul was
obviated. But on the other hand, the difficulty was not
lightened, because Pul is mentioned in 2 K. xv. 19, as
the conqueror of Menahem, and again, together with
Tiglath Pileser in 1 Chr. v. 26. He was not recorded
in any Assyrian inscriptions, and, of course, not in the
Eponym Canon. It would have been easy to have as-
cribed the tablets to Tiglath Pileser without further
debate. But although no name was found upon what
afterwards turned out to be the mutilated Annal Inscrip-
tions of the king in question, 30 yet to have thus arbitrarily
assigned them to Tiglath Pileser still left the question of
the identity of Pul undecided.

George Smith 31 conjectured that Pul was, . . . "either,
Vul-Nir&ri III, who might still have been reigning in 772,
or a monarch immediately succeeding Ashurdan II or
III, or that Pul and Tiglath Pileser are identical." This
last theory had already been propounded by Sir Henry
Rawlinson, 32 and independently by R. Lepsius. 83 It was
finally established as the correct one by Schrader. 34 We
may add here what is the clinching proof. In one of the
Babylonian King Lists, 35 we read, Col. iv : *

30 Lay. 17 and 18, and II. R. 67 are not Annals.

81 " The Assyr. Ep. Can.," p. 76. Smith still placed some faith in the
Ussher Chronology, according to which Menahem began to rule in 773-
772. Then, of course, Vul-Nirari (Ramman-Nirari) would have to
reign until 772. Smith himself inclines to the identity of Pul and Tiglath

82 H. Rawlinson in G. Rawlinson's Herodotus, 1862, I., p. 382; and
Athenceum, Aug. 22, 1869, p. 245.

33 Uber d. Chronologischen Werth d. Assy. Eponymen, 1869, p. 56 ; also
Schrader, KAT. 2 p. 227, and KGF. pp. 442 ff.

34 JT.Ar.2p. 227.

6 Pinches, PSBA. May 6, 1894.

36 Translated, Sayce in BP. New Series, I, pp. 18 and 23.


line 5. Ndbu-sum-ukin his son for one month and 12

line 6. The 31 (years) of the dynasty of Babylon.

line 7. Ukin-zira of the dynasty of Sasi for three

line 8. Pulu for 2 (years).
Compare this with the Babylonian Chronicle, 37 Col. I. 36

line 17. For 2 months and . . . days Suma-ukin reigned
over Babylon.

line 18. Ukin-zira seized upon the throne.

line 19. In the 3d year of Ukin-zira, Tiglath Pileser.

line 20. When he had descended into the country of

line 21. Destroyed Bit-Ammukani and captured Ukin-
zira. 38

line 22. For three years Ukin-zira reigned over Babylon.

line 23. Tiglath Pileser sat upon the throne of Babylon.
A comparison of lines 7 and 8 of the first inscription with
lines 17 ff. of the second proves conclusively the identity
of Tiglath Pileser and Pul, showing that the impartial
Babylonian historian gave him the respective names he
bore in both Assyria and Babylon. 39

All this is in perfect accord with the entry in the Ptole-
maean Canon, 40 which notes for the year 731, the year in
which Tiglath Pileser was crowned in Babylon, " Ohinzi-
rus and Porus." This is, of course, the Ukin-zira and the
Pulu of the Babylonian King Lists; Porus being a Persian

87 Winckler in ZA. II. 23.

38 Th. A. 23, where the name is Ukinzir.

89 Similar changes of name are the following : Shalmaneser IV and
Ashurbanipal are in the Babylonian King Lists called Ululai and Kandulu
respectively. For comment, see Winckler, Geschichte, p. 221, n.

* See Smith, "Assy. Eponym Canon," p. 102.


corruption of Pul.- The fact that Berosus tt makes Pulus,
" Rex Chaldaeorum" is in agreement with the above evi-
dence. It simply means that Tiglath Pileser III came to
the throne of Babylon only after having conquered Ukin-
zira, head of the Bit-Amukkani, a powerful Chaldean
tribe. Finally, Schrader 43 settled for all time that all the
inscriptions belong to Tiglath Pileser.

There is in all these sources of Tiglath Pileser's reign
scarcely any specific reason for doubt as to the accuracy
and trustworthiness of the reports which they give us.
We have not, for instance, as is the case with Sargon, 44
any variant records and versions of the inscriptions; and
while they are, of course, subject to such doubt as always
attaches to the official records of a time which so far lacks
the historical sense and the morale of the scientific historian,
as to glorify a king or a nation at the expense of exact
truth, still, we find no contradictory testimony in them.
Even the figures in the records of captives and of tribute
furnish scant reason for doubt.

If we possessed contemporaneous documents from other
nations to control the official records, there could be no
hesitancy in using them to check the inscriptions, but in
the one instance where we do possess such a contempora-
neous inscription, an inscription mentioning the name of
Tiglath Pileser, 46 the latter's reports are confirmed. And
this is also true of the Biblical references to him. The

KAT* p. 238, and Pinches, PSBA. 1883-84, pp. 190 ff.
42 Polyhistor ap. Eusb. Chrn. I. 4.

48 Eritik, pp. 10 ff. Although previously he had denied the identity of
TP. and Pul, in ZDMG. XXV, p. 453.

44 Olmstead, " Sargon of Assyria," p. 7.

45 Published by Eduard Sachau, in Mitthl. aus d. Orientalischen
Sammlungen, Kong. Mus. zu Berlin, Heft XI. p. 55.


clues given us in the Eponym Canon, the Assyrian Chron-
icle, the Ptolemaean Canon, the Babylonian Chronicle,
and the Babylonian King Lists, refer, of course, mainly to
the fixing of dates, and in the case of Tiglath Pileser at
least, confirm each other, although they are independent

The reign of Tiglath Pileser III is especially important,
because with him began a new era in Assyrian history.
This king prepared the way for that period of his country's
progress in which Assyria attained her greatest territorial
extent. Perhaps in his time it was not yet evident that
Assyria was too small a nation to hold her own against
the half civilized hordes which later on accomplished her
downfall. The fact that Assyria remained intact long
enough to establish much which has become valuable and
even essential to civilization and culture is in no small
degree a credit due to this great warrior, who founded a
well organized Empire upon foundations which his prede-
cessors had enfeebled, and who was a personality great
enough to have dominated his day. This was so not only
because the times into which he was born invited revolu-
tion and change, but because his own power as warrior,
statesman, and organizer, forced even the priesthood, al-
ways a tremendous influence, to bow to his energy and
will. A great pity it is that his " literary remains " fell
prey not only to the ravages of time and accident, but
also to the desecrating hand of one of his great successors,
Esarhaddon, who wilfully mishandled the records of
Tiglath Pileser and is mainly responsible for the sadly
mutilated condition in which they have come down to us.



The Eponym Canon for the year 745 announces that
on the 12th day of Airu, Tig]ath Pileser III ascended the
throne of Assyria. Because of the entry for the previous
year 746, " rebellion in Kalah" it has been assumed that
his accession was due to a military revolution, and every
known fact tends to corroborate that view. Certain it is
that Tiglath Pileser only gained the throne because of
the condition of Assyrian affairs, and not because he was
the legitimate successor to the royal office. The Empire
was in very deep trouble. Its prestige was at low ebb.
Abroad its influence was fast waning, and at home all the
elements of a vast political upheaval had for some time
been steadily tending toward revolution. The land was
priestridden. Its wealth swelled the coffers of the temple
treasuries, and its soldiers nourishing the traditions of
ancient prowess had to be content with feeding upon the
memories of former national glory. There was crying
need for a leader of real ability. The land was not a
victim of natural impoverishment. There were means

1 3 4 5 6

Online LibraryAbraham Samuel AnspacherTiglath Pileser III → online text (page 1 of 6)