Wednesday, July 3, 2024

Ancient History - Part 36: The Lesser of Two Men


[KING MARDUK-NADIN-AKHE OF BABYLONIA]


The time for peace expired by the end of Tiglath-pileser's reign as the despot of the Orient waged battle with the king of Babylonia, Marduk-nadin-akhe (1116-1101).

If a word could be said about Marduk-nadin-akhe it might be "bold", as the king order a raid upon Assyria in the year 1107 B.C, where his soldiers murdered and stole two major religious artifacts, the statues of the Assyria gods Shala and Adad. The greater crime was not the slaying of the citizens within close proximity to the statues, but rather the grave offense to their religious customs that brought the two nations to war.

At first there were a series of excursions leading the armies to clash in small skirmishes. This was a way for both sides to gauge the other side's mettle. However, it was the most heavily documented and largest of the early battles that bore significant results.

Both armies met for a full-scale collision at Lower Zab, stomping grounds the Assyrians had become extremely familiar. It was at this battle site that they routed the Babylonian forces, sending a large remainder in retreat, as they reclaimed the mountain territory and regrouped. The time for a subsequent battle yielded even more definitive results as the old king of Assyria fought the encroaching army near his own city of Akkad (specifically, Upper Akkad).

Tiglath-pileser not only defeated king Marduk-nadin-akhe's army, destroying every unit to the last man, but in retaliation, counter-attacked, launching a full-scale invasion upon Babylonia, who without a standing army, could no longer defend herself. First Dur-Kurigalzu fell, before Babylon and Opis soon followed. More towns and smaller cities were plundered and the Assyrian king had one final day of celebration to end his legendary time of rule.

The massive strategic error of Marduk-nadin-akhe's decision in attacking Assyria is the reminder that weaker men tend to pose within the shadows of truly great leaders. It's a pattern that usually sees the pettier of two rulers to act out as a bratty child might against their elder, leading to a violent confrontation, ultimately dooming the lesser individual's very subjects. They alone bear the price of their king's petulance and the king of Babylonia in this case highlights such a historic example.


[DUR-KURIGALZU]



No comments:

Post a Comment