Cities and Settlement in the Neo-Assyrian Period Eleanor Barbanes

 Neo-Assyrians emerged as formidable power (10th century)--> territorial expansion & political consolidation  Reached new levels of size and grandeur, funded by wealth of conquest (to about 600 BC)  3 categories of Assyrian cities:  Continuously existing settlement (Assur)  Re-founded settlement (Nimrud, Nineveh)  New foundation (Khorsabad)  Neo-Assyrians emerged as formidable power (10th century)--> territorial expansion & political consolidation  Reached new levels of size and grandeur, funded by wealth of conquest (to about 600 BC)  3 categories of Assyrian cities:  Continuously existing settlement (Assur)  Re-founded settlement (Nimrud, Nineveh)  New foundation (Khorsabad)

 New capitals created were located in close proximity to previous capital  “sufficient spatial distance was required to disrupt the existing patterns of socio- political organization, but not so much as to make the new capital inaccessible”  Previous capital never fully abandoned  Why move at all?  “momentous gesture of constructing new cities[/renovation]…furthered imperial goals by establishing legitimacy for the prevailing government and creating a new location for the symbolic representation of the king’s claim to power, wealth, and prestige”  New capitals created were located in close proximity to previous capital  “sufficient spatial distance was required to disrupt the existing patterns of socio- political organization, but not so much as to make the new capital inaccessible”  Previous capital never fully abandoned  Why move at all?  “momentous gesture of constructing new cities[/renovation]…furthered imperial goals by establishing legitimacy for the prevailing government and creating a new location for the symbolic representation of the king’s claim to power, wealth, and prestige”

Patterns in regional planning  Shift toward N. Mesopotamia--> late 10th century  Need for agricultural land--> large populations need sufficient water supply  Agricultural surplus possible  Greater degree of topographical variation  S. Mesopotamia--> flat, less water, not as much farmable land  “Southern versus a northern tradition”  Shift toward N. Mesopotamia--> late 10th century  Need for agricultural land--> large populations need sufficient water supply  Agricultural surplus possible  Greater degree of topographical variation  S. Mesopotamia--> flat, less water, not as much farmable land  “Southern versus a northern tradition”

 capital at forefront, complex hierarchy of smaller settlements (farmsteads, villages, etc.)  Capital received bulk of resources, most fortified, extravagant symbolic imagery  Dramatic increases in settlement  North Jazira Survey--> pattern of dispersed rural settlements (influx of people to countryside), assert/solidify Assyrian presence  Tell Beydar Survey--> high mounds abandoned by Assyrians, knowingly reject this practice  capital at forefront, complex hierarchy of smaller settlements (farmsteads, villages, etc.)  Capital received bulk of resources, most fortified, extravagant symbolic imagery  Dramatic increases in settlement  North Jazira Survey--> pattern of dispersed rural settlements (influx of people to countryside), assert/solidify Assyrian presence  Tell Beydar Survey--> high mounds abandoned by Assyrians, knowingly reject this practice

 Intentional avoidance of the high mound settlement?  Evidence in one inscription--> Sargon orders removal from mounds and re-build at bottom  Height reserved for cities of higher rank? Symbolic importance  Intentional avoidance of the high mound settlement?  Evidence in one inscription--> Sargon orders removal from mounds and re-build at bottom  Height reserved for cities of higher rank? Symbolic importance

Patterns in Urban Planning  Characteristics of Neo-Assyria  Massive size compared to previous  Complex central administration  Greater concentration of people  Size does not necessarily equal population--> space devoted to gardens,grazing land, etc.  Location near rivers--> control waterway  New urban form--> citadel with closely- linked temple-palace unit, separated from rest of town by height or walls  Characteristics of Neo-Assyria  Massive size compared to previous  Complex central administration  Greater concentration of people  Size does not necessarily equal population--> space devoted to gardens,grazing land, etc.  Location near rivers--> control waterway  New urban form--> citadel with closely- linked temple-palace unit, separated from rest of town by height or walls

New urban form--> Citadel (Palace/Temple)  Palace given increased space--> I.e.. importance?  Ramp--> bring king to door of his palace, easier for chariots to rush/defend citadel  Temple importance still relevant, ziggurat’s height still rivals other structures  Symbolic significance--> Close relations between administrative and religious institutions  King as high priest, national religion  Palace given increased space--> I.e.. importance?  Ramp--> bring king to door of his palace, easier for chariots to rush/defend citadel  Temple importance still relevant, ziggurat’s height still rivals other structures  Symbolic significance--> Close relations between administrative and religious institutions  King as high priest, national religion

Khorsabad: A Case study  Site not previously built upon  Uniquely Built--> continuous sequence  Records well kept--> Sargon  King closely involved in process  Provincial governor responsible for project  Borrowed funds from private lenders  Exalts grandeur of project & city  Choice of location (Reasons?):  Better Administrative control of Northern fertile land  Assert imperial presence  Close to Nineveh  Water supply--> no more advantage than elsewhere  Site not previously built upon  Uniquely Built--> continuous sequence  Records well kept--> Sargon  King closely involved in process  Provincial governor responsible for project  Borrowed funds from private lenders  Exalts grandeur of project & city  Choice of location (Reasons?):  Better Administrative control of Northern fertile land  Assert imperial presence  Close to Nineveh  Water supply--> no more advantage than elsewhere

 Why Khorsabad?  No topographical advantage  River location not unique  More irregularities (intentional?)  Temple of Nabu out of alignment with all other citadel structures--> planets?  Seven gates assymmetrical, uneven/random locations, no relation to road system outside city  Citadel meets fortification wall at slanted angle  Quadrilateral shape of Khorsabad  Most mesopotamian ground plans were square?  Why Khorsabad?  No topographical advantage  River location not unique  More irregularities (intentional?)  Temple of Nabu out of alignment with all other citadel structures--> planets?  Seven gates assymmetrical, uneven/random locations, no relation to road system outside city  Citadel meets fortification wall at slanted angle  Quadrilateral shape of Khorsabad  Most mesopotamian ground plans were square?

 Mesopotamian tradition of seeing universe as square, reflected in ground plans  Neo-Assyrians knowingly reject this, stands out--> new cosmological meanings for them?  New expression of Imperial ideology, identity, Organization--> unite administrative/religious roles of king  Mesopotamian tradition of seeing universe as square, reflected in ground plans  Neo-Assyrians knowingly reject this, stands out--> new cosmological meanings for them?  New expression of Imperial ideology, identity, Organization--> unite administrative/religious roles of king

Barbanes, Eleanor; Planning an empire: city and settlement in the Neo-Assyrian period,Bulletin of the Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies 38: Planning an empire: city and settlement in the Neo-Assyrian period Barbanes, Eleanor; Planning an empire: city and settlement in the Neo-Assyrian period,Bulletin of the Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies 38: Planning an empire: city and settlement in the Neo-Assyrian period