What was important for military success?
Complete the assignment using the PDF document (shared with you on Google Drive). You will post your answer/s in the comment box. I highly recommend that you draft your answer in a google document and then copy and paste your answer into the comment box.
Forum #1 “The Assyrian Military Machine”
Read and Contextualize: The Assyrian Empire - What was important for military success? - CHQ
Read Document: “The Assyrian Military Machine”
Answer Questions: Based on their own descriptions, what did Assyrian kings believe was important for military success? Do you think their account may be exaggerated? Why?
Follow the Forum Instructions and Grading Guide located in your Google Drive. You also have a hard copy of this handout.
Based on their own descriptions, Assyrian kings believed that being cruel, merciless, and brutal was important for military success. I mean for one, every example of quoted reading includes the total destruction and brutal, heartless torture the Assyrian kings happily and generously gave. Here’s an example in the text in the third page where King Ashurbanipal describes his treatment on Babylon: “I tore out the tongues of those whose slanderous mouths had uttered blasphemous against my god… I defeated them completely. The others I smashed alive with the very same statues of protective deities [(how ironic)]... I fed their corpses, cut into small pieces, to dogs, pigs…” Anyone can agree with me and say that that king is cruel and maybe sadistic, but that’s how the Assyrians were- they were cruel and brutal and especially on the battlefield.
ReplyDeleteWas it exaggerated? Yes and no. Yes because some things could’ve been altered to further glorify the king and/or prove the Assyrians reputation of being cruel to put fear into the enemies. No because, all in all, the Assyrians were really that cold hearted with the subject and they were undefeated until Cyrus and company attacked and destroyed Nineveh. In the text, the Assyrians would completely “assimilate” the enemy and basically destroy their entire population by torture, slavery, and even “ burning them in fire”. From what I’ve gathered, I can guess that if they had a motto, it would be “do what you need to to win” because at the time, kingdoms were unstable and were being conquered left and right, which meant that you either were conquering or being conquered. So basically, the Assyrians found a great way to rise to the top and knock out the competition, yes I will repeat once again- brutality, cruelty and complete destruction.
On the other hand (backing up my yes answer), in the main temples and palaces, the pictures and paintings of hunting and war, specifically involving the king, could be changed to make all the scenes successful because, like I said, they wanted to glorify their king and build their reputation.
I agree that some details of battle could have been altered to glorify the king. The text gives us gruesome details of the king’s policies which make the Assyrians look like a powerful civilization. However, historians now believe that their policies were no worse than those of other Near Eastern conquers. (Doc 1 R) Yes, the Assyrians had an organized and disciplined military but they were no different from other civilizations which led to the fall of their empire in 605 B.C.
DeleteI agree that the Assyrians were very brutal and it is supported throughout the entire article. The were an empire hungry for the conquering of new lands and would do whatever it took to accomplish that. I think in the end they realized that it took more than just war tactics to run an empire, which was what their entire empire was built around, and that led to their fall in 605 B.C.
DeleteBased on the information given in the text, the Assyrians believed that terror tactics, brutal war affairs, and torture were important for military success. On page 48 of The Assyrian Military Machine king Sennacherib writes in his point of view, "I cut their throats like sheep". This shows how ruthless and violent the Assyrians were when they went to war(Forum 1 D, F).The king of Jerusalem also looked at people and animals like objects.(Forum 1 G).
DeleteBesides the violence, the Assyrians had other ways to maintain their powerful military. The army was organized and disciplined , and they also had good communication. To communicate they established a network of posting stages that used relays of horses to carry messages through the empire. The army also had many warriors, as many as 120,000 men were in a campaign (Forum 1 C,H,I). The army also had all the right equipment to win a battle. They had horse drawn war chariots they would use as shooting platforms, and they were the first large army to have iron weapons. Lastly, the army had a planned way on how to break into a society and take complete control. They would hammer a city's walls with heavy wheeled siege towers and armored battering rams while snappers dug tunnels to undermine the foundation of the wall and cause them to collapse.
I agree, while the Assyrian were not to be rivaled with in their prime. They were backed up by the horrifying reputation that proceeded the and frightened enemies before they ever even attacked. It would likely make enemy soldiers unprepared for their battle and assure the Assyrian's victory.
DeleteBased off their descriptions Assyrian kings believed that brutality, terror, siege warfare, and large armies were important for military success. (Doc 1 B, K, G). The first Assyrian kings had policies of deliberate brutality that set a pattern for later rulers. The effectiveness of the Assyrian military machine came from its ability to create a climate of terror as an instrument of warfare. Assyrians laid waste to the land which they were fighting, smashing dams, looting towns, setting crops on fire, and even piled up the corpses of their enemies in front of the city walls. The art of siege warfare was their most renowned military tactic. Assyrians would hammer a city walls with armored battering rams and wheeled siege towers while sappers dug tunnels causing the walls foundation to collapse. Military leaders also had the ability to enlist and deploy hundreds of thousands of troops. In 845 B.C., Shalmaneser 3 led an army of 120,000 men across the Euphrates on a campaign. I do believe however that some of the accounts made by Assyrian kings were a bit exaggerated. A lot of the military conquests that were described by Assyrian kings seemed larger-then-life. King Sennacherib describes the battle with the Elamites in which he writes, “I rushed upon the enemy like the approach of a hurricane” he later writes, “My prancing steeds, trained to the harness, plunged into their welling blood as into a river.”
ReplyDeleteI agree for the most part, but for the other 45%, I feel that most of that wouldn't be possible without the influence of their god of war, whom they did all of that for, and the advanced and better technology that only a select few of civilizations even had at the time. Look at the things that the Assyrians used in war: iron chariots, iron weapons, a giant battering ram, and latter on a better understanding of working metals to what suits them (metallurgy). The Advanced tech is what gave these guys the upper hand against their opponent. Yes the numbers and the tactics were important but if the Assyrians didn't have the right tools, they would just be off as good as any of their neighbors with low grade equipment and weaponry. Lastly, the Assyrians were really crazy about Ashur, their god of war, because they were a war driven people and they really wanted to "carry out his will". So basically, i feel that the tools (iron) and the motives (serving/glorifying Ashur) are just as important as the tactics and the brutality.
DeleteI also agree with you, Marco, I agree because the Assyrians would have not been able to do their job without the influence of their god of war. I also agree with Martin because without the militaries advanced terror tactics they would of not been able to succeed and take over a territory. I also agree they were successful for their large armies and brutality because without them, they would of not controlled the territory they were taking over.
DeleteMarco i certainly agree with you. After reading the text it is obvious how much they wanted to please Ashur. On the other hand i find Martin's response also totally agreeable because as he had mentioned they were just such a big power that they could not be stopped. The Assyrians used sheer force and large numbers to over power their enemies. Martin i do also agree on the fact that King Sennacherib slightly exaggerated, but i feel that most of his statements and most of King Asherbanipal's statements were not exaggerated.
DeleteTido,I think your response is true and very well put, but I have to say that I don't think those were the main focuses for military success. What you said were physical necessities in creating a strong military. But you also need mental knowledge and common sense to organized and create a system of attacks for good results. For example, many kings used terror tactics to completely knock out other empires, (doc 1, F) while they also used discipline and policies on their own armies. By teaching everyone to worship and respect Ashur, the god of war, the Assyrians were basically trained to believe that their main purpose in life was to fight and win.
DeleteBased on the descriptions in the text, the Assyrians felt that advancements in weaponry, steady faith and belief, and expansions in territory were necessary for military success. The Assyrians used the advancements in their military weaponry to give them an advantage on their opponents. In the text it says that they had a reputation for having a mighty military machine and had the ability to use a variety of military tactics when they were fighting set battles, employing warfare, and attacking cities. For example, they were the first to develop iron metallurgy (doc. 1,f). With their technology advancements, they had an edge over their target by having better equipment.
ReplyDeleteThe text also displays that the Assyrians considered their faith and belief to be important for military success. The document says that they were under the command of Ashur, the god of war, and were fueled to do some of the cruel things they did because they were trying to please him. They would,“ rush upon the enemy like a hurricane” and crush corpses, urine and excrete into their chariots and cause brutal pain by cutting throats. They showed appreciation of the god of war, and was literally named “the land of Ashur ”(doc. 1, g).
The Assyrians found the expansion to new territory very important to their military success even though expanded very violently. They conquered so much land through the brutal pain they put their prisoners and opponents through. They used terror to gain control of cities by burning and destroying people, cutting off appendages, and taking many into captivity. They manipulated the element of terror to gain control of the lands quickly (doc 1, a, b, j).
I feel that the Assyrians’ account was not exaggerated because of how much land they conquered and how long vivid the information we have about them is. The Assyrians first idea of conquering came from king Tiglath-Pileser, and they didn’t let up until they lost control.
I agree with the fact that the Assyrian king found land expansion to be successful, yet he did it in a cruel made it just a bit exaggerated, in my opinion the exaggeration helped him because it helped the military control the land they were going to conquer. I also agree that advancements in their military weaponry gave them an advantage over their opponents. They were the first ones to discover how to mobilize weapons and destroy city walls, this would catch the opponent off guard. The army's cruel tactics and advanced weapons is what made them successful.
DeleteI agree with Ambria, I felt that their weapon technology gave them an advantage in war and battles. As we can see in any war, having newer technology always gives an advantage to who ever posses it. The way you used that technology also determined the results of a war. The Assyrians were brutal and violent with their weapons and would have no mercy on their rivals.
DeleteI agree with how the weaponry was a big success in taking over a city or army. The Assyrians would use battering rams to knock down the walls or use armored siege towers to get over the walls. Due to the advanced weaponry they were technically unstoppable against any obstacle in their way.
DeleteI also think expansion was a great deal to them. "Internal strife intensified as powerful Assyrian nobles gained control of vast territories and waged their own private military campaigns." (doc 1, F) Assyrians were known for being responsible of the takeover of land and territories because of how much stronger they get everytime they gain more fighters.
DeleteI also agree with the expansion. Although the violence was very much drastic, it was also a scare tactic. If people heard that the Assyrians were fair with battle, then they would fight back more than they did. By being violent, people gave in easy letting the Assyrians successfully expand themselves.
DeleteI agree that Assyrian’s advancements in their military weaponry gave them an advantage over their opponents. Not only were they the first to discover iron metallurgy but they also created horse drawn chariots that were used as mobile platforms for shooting arrows. In siege warfare Assyrians would use wheeled siege towers and armored battering rams that were used to make a cities walls collapse. Yes, steady faith and believe and expansion of territory were important for military success but the thing that made the Assyrians so powerful was that they weren’t just an infantry charging a city with iron swords. Advanced military weaponry and the terror that they instilled into the enemy is what made them so powerful.
ReplyDeleteBased off the text the assyrian kings believed that the only way to have a successful army was for the army to be extremely well organized and deciplined (doc 1 j). They believed that the army had to be well orginized and disciplined because if they were not well orginized they would not be able to use the tactics the Assyrian kings would assign them to do. The assyrian kings also believed that the only other way for their armies to be successful was for them to be merciless and cruel to their enemies (doc 1 I).The Assyrian kings believed this because it was one of their tactics to over throw a territory and conquer it. One of their tactics was to terrify a village, destroy everything in it and torture the people they've captured,in the article it states, "Many I took alive; from some of these I cut off their hands to the wrist,". In my opinion, I believe that the Assyrian kings did exaggerate, but yet again they did not. I believe they exaggerated just a little bit because they did not need to torture the people they've captured especially if they were innocent. Yet I do believe that they were successful because of their cruel tactics, the armies could not of conquer a new territory if they could not control the previous one. So basically, the kings didn't exaggerate because they all got new land out of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree, they did believe organization and discipline was they way to have a successful army. With out that they wouldn't have a great army with a protective empire. I also agree with that they did exaggerate because of the harsh punishments they had for the people there.
DeleteI agree on how they soldiers needed to be well disciplined. If they weren't, then they would have trouble going into the battle field, and most likely not do their job correctly. The soldiers needed to be prepared mentally and physically in order to do battle.
DeleteI do agree that the Assyrian kings believed that it was important to be organized and disciplined, but they focused more on sheer brutality and being merciless. They would surely plan their attacks but sometimes they did not, sometimes they would just throw large numbers at their opponents and over power them like that.I do also agree that they did not exaggerate their actions.
DeleteI do agree They state that they were an extremely organized empire, that was a huge factor in allowing the empires to be over run. Large numbers in a small town can cause a huge impact on that civilization. The tactics they used were extremely smart and well thought out. They were an over powering empire because of the fear they gave to everyone else. Weaponry was also a key factor in this operation of destruction which was why they were so successful in military relations.
DeleteI also think being cruel to their enemies was the Assyrians main focus. They were no fearful of mixing in with other people (doc 1, K) I think that since they were all born and raised to glorify war, leadership, and power, most of them are well-educated on how to torture others. Not only did this make them successful in their attacks, but it also created their image. If I were not an Assyrian back then, I would look at them as these deadly human beings that I should definitely not mess with. This may be why they were able to conquer so many empires easily to expand their own land.
DeleteI agree with you Stephanie. I agree because in (Forum 1 I) they needed to be disciplined and organized. All together, the way the Assyrians were successful was a ricochet effect. If they weren't violent, organized, and disciplined then they wouldn't have been such a strong army.
DeleteIt's true, in order for the army to be cruel, they had to be disciplined. If you were a ruler you would need people to do as you say without whining or backing down. Also, if they weren't fearless and couldn't handle all the gore, they wouldn't have gone far.
DeleteI agree, in order to execute such efficient battle plans the army must have been well disciplined and organized. Everyone must be well prepared and equipped for the battles and gore they were to witness and cause.
DeleteBased off the text, the Assyrian kings believed that size, violence and leadership was key in military success. They had to have lots of men in their armies to have conquered so much land and seizure of many cities. Violence was a major factor in the military tactics. They had to be brutal and extreme with their enemies to show others they were intimidating and not to be dealt with unless you were willing to be killed in war against the Assyrians. Lastly, leadership played a key role in the Assyrian's military success the most out of everything. If the soldiers didn't have any leadership, they wouldn't know what to do, how to do it, and where to do it, they'd be an unorganized mess. The leadership brought organization and their courage. The leaders would be the ones the soldiers would look up to and they would give them their sense of direction.
ReplyDeleteI agree on how they would use army size to conquer their enemies. Shalmaneser 3 had an army up to 120,000 men and the were well organized and in formation to go on a campaign. I do believe that leadership was a big role because without it the men would be lost and may be defeated.
DeleteI agree with the size of the army was a key to military success.If they didnt have a big enough army they would of been conquered many times and would of lost their land.If they did not have a big enough army they would of lost many of the battles they were in and they would of lost a lot of men and would of had to bring in more men from their empire to fill in for them.
DeleteI agree that the Assyrians felt that the size of their army was important. Even today, everyone knows that strength in numbers is very important to winning anything from a silly argument to a war. Also to make sure the strength in numbers is efficient, organization and leadership is a must have that the Assyrians did use. This combination of size, and leadership led the Assyrians to conquer plenty of land and win multiple wars.
DeleteI do agree army size was a key factor to be able to control the empires they did. They were able to outnumber the opponent which made it easy to capture enemies from war. These outnumbers opponents had no chance to overpower the Assyrians. They were unstoppable at that point in time. They were able to torture and use harsh war tatics to make them feared.
DeleteI agree with you my fellow classmate that size, violence and leadership were important to the kings for military success. They had armies great in size and leadership was needed in order to make those big numbers work. Also violence was important to them because they needed that feeling that they had absolute power, that other people’s lives were decided by them therefore people were afraid of them and they were not likely to rebel against them.
DeleteSize was definitely important for the Assyrian Empire when it came to conquering other places (Assyrian Empire; Shalmaneser led an army of 120,000). Another point you brought up was also very true, people shouldn't have rebelled against the Assyrians If they wanted to remain alive. The Assyrians were a very brutal group and would not have any tolerance for rebellions. (The Assyrian Empire; After conquering another city...I fixed up a pile of corpses in front of the city’s gate. I flayed the nobles, as many as had rebelled, and spread their skins out on the piles. . . .extreme cruelty to prisoners Was not used against all enemies but was' reserved primarily for those who were already part of the empire and then rebelled against Assyrian rule) Leadership, also, was very important. The whole empire abided the king’s absolute power (The Assyrian Empire; Empire was ruled by kings Whose power was considered absolute). This is also a reason why the city was ruled so violently. Since there was no one who would stand up to these rulers without being killed, the city was unnecessarily violent.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAssyrian Kings mainly believed in cruelty and no mercy in becoming a successful military group and tactic. There are many cases of these kings showing how brutal and evil they can be to other people in the article. For example, King Ashurbanipal 2 was one of the strongest Assyrian rulers due to his cruelty. This quote will show how he treated his prisoners, “3000 of their combat troops I felled with weapons… Many of the captives taken from them I burned in a fire. Many I took alive; from some of these I cut off their hands to wrist, from others I cut off their noses, ears, and fingers."
ReplyDeleteThe Assyrian Tactics were also a big help in creating this military success. They created guerrilla war tactics and siege warfare to dominate their enemies. Here is a quote of how they accomplished there efforts “They would hammer a city’s walls with heavy, wheeled siege towers and armored battering rams while sappers dug tunnels to undermine the walls’ foundations and cause them to collapse.” Also the Assyrians would cut off the food supply to their city and starve them into submission. You can see how these kings would become very successful in dominating their foes.
I agree with you they did use a lot of cruel tactics and showed no mercy no matter who you were. They simply didn’t care they were set on their goal of conquering and winning the war. Their descriptions describe how merciless they were, but I would have to say they had reasons, but not very good ones to do what they did. In their world everything was still developing maybe they didn't know how evil they were being, they could have been ignorant, but they also could have known what they were doing and making everything they do more sinister.
DeleteBased on the text the Assyrians believed that discipline, large armies, and expansion in the territory were important for military success ( Doc 1 g,h,c). The Assyrians thought discipline was important so they would follow their rules and respect them. They thought since they disciplined them it would teach and show them that they should obey their rules and not break them. In the text it quotes “I cut off their hands to the wrist, from others I cut off their noses, ears, and fingers; I put out the eyes of many of the soldiers… I burned their young men and women to death” (Doc 1 L). The quote explains they type of punishments that would happen if they disobeyed them in anyway they thought was wrong. Large armies were important because it helped them when they went into battles. Having a large army gave them the advantage of out numbering another territory. They had the opportunity of having their first large army supplied with iron weapons which helped them in many ways. Assyrians believed expansion in the territory was important because it gave them more land and it gave them more power since their territory was larger. It quotes in the text “Assyrian nobles gained control of vast territories and waged their own private military campaigns” (Doc 1 p) which indicates that they gained more power over land and it helped them in many ways. I believe they account was and was not exaggerated. I believe it was because they had to harsh of punishments for the people that lived there and for the people involved. I also believe it was not exaggerated because they did some of the things to keep they empire under control and to just not lose the empire to anyone else. They wanted to make sure they had everything under control and organized so nothing would go wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe Assyrian kings believed that expansion, large armies, force, and no mercy were important for military success. While attacking the Elamites in 691 King Sennacherib used brutality, force, and fear to conquer his enemies. King Sennacherib felt he was carrying out the will of Ashur, the god of war, by attacking the Elamites. (Doc 1, G). He wanted to intimidate his enemies and if he did not first strike fear into their hearts with just his presence he did it by his actions, King Sennacherib and his army sliced the opposing armies throats. The king and his army struck fear into the lords of the Chaldeans like he had intended and they “abandoned their tents and fled for their lives, crushing the corpses of their troop as they went.” (Doc 1, J). During King Sennacherib’s siege of Jerusalem he first sent a warning to Hezekiah but he did not heed the warning so the king began his siege. King Sennacherib laid siege to 46 strongly guarded cities and many other smaller towns and villages. He used battering rams to break down the walls and had troops underground in mines and finding breaches in defence constantly attacking. In the end Sennacherib made Hezekiah a “prisoner of Jerusalem.” (Doc 1, N). When King Ashurbanipal conquered Babylon he wanted to make sure he was feared so he would retain power so he protected his own name and the name of Ashur by tearing out the tongues of those that spoke bad of either of them or plotted against either of them. (Doc 1, O). Ashurbanipal also wanted to keep peace with the gods so he made sure that all the people who had defied him were put to death and fed to the animals as tribute to grace the gods and quite their hearts. (Doc 1, P). All of these examples were just ways that the kings felt they had to show they were in power helping them maintain a strong military and a successful one. I do not believe that the stories of the kings were exaggerated. I would not doubt that these fierce and brutal leaders left their enemies scared for their lives. I also would not doubt that they punished those that defied them or the gods.
ReplyDeleteBased on their own description, the assyrian kings believed to have military success they needed cruelty and large armies. There was a policy of of deliberate terror which carried out for later kings. The leaders were harsh to their own men and cruel to their enemies. One stated, “ I smash them alive with the very same statues of protective deities.” They tore the enemies tongues out who had blasphemies against god. The Assyrian military was very strict but on the other hand extremely disciplined. Upon each enemy they brought terror, if it was cutting their throats or feeding their corpses to dogs pigs and vultures.
ReplyDeleteThese tactics lasted for many years and were very useful for conquering land, it seemed the more harsh the ,military became the more power was brought upon to them.The had the ability to create a climate of terror as an instrument of warfare. They smashed through dams, destroyed towns, and and even torturing their captives. These are the types of actives that scared off other empires. the Assyrians became one of the most feared empired because of the way they ran the military.
I agree with you that Assyrian’s military supply benefited them over their enemies. Their creation of things such as chariots and iron metallurgy allowed them to be more advanced in war. Assyrians would use the knowledge they have to build even more powerful weapons such as batterying rams and siege towers to destroy cities. I believe that they wanted to win and only win. Having power over other cities made them feel as if they completed their task of pleasing Ashur, the god of war whom they worshipped. "...Assyrian empire was ruled by kings whose power was considered absolute. Under their leadership, the empire became well organized." (doc 1, B) This tells us that their main focus was leadership and ruling. Leaders and fighters were needed to make their tactics and plans organized and successsful.
DeleteAssyrian kings believed that force, torture,organization, and intimidation were important to military success.Terror tactics seemed to be the most popular for them to use(Doc1 A,F). I believe they used terror tactics in order to make everyone afraid of them, afraid of standing up to rebel against them.Organization is needed for any military to succeed without it they’re nothing there’s no communication, no one knows what is going on or what they’re suppose to do, along with this there is also discipline also without it there is a lot of chaos (Doc 1 C).I can fairly say that their terror tactics were over the top in their descriptions they describe ripping people’s tongues out and burning them alive no matter if the were young, old, men or women they did not care, if they were on the enemy’s side they were to be killed.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteDenise, I have to agree with you. These Assyrian kings did have very gruesome methods of intimidation. However, I stand my opinion that the Assyrian king's method was a double edged sword. On one side, the people were so terrified that they wouldn't rebel. (The Assyrian Empire; the Assyrian Empire expanded in large part due to its brutal military methods. lt maintained its rule through use of a common language and with extremely violent suppression of internal revolts).This ,however, didn't mean that people never thought about it. People having to see deaths nearly every day had to have at least thought about it. If the empire was in trouble, and if given the chance (I believe)the people would help the conquering group against their own king. The only problem was that if the conquering group lost the fight, sure death is assured for the rebels. Also, organization was indeed key role when they were attacking others. However, most of this communication occurred before they rushed the place; not during the attack (Textbook; Advance planning and technical skill allowed the Assyrians to lay siege to enemy cities. When deep water blocked their passage, engineers would span the rivers with pontoons, or floating structures used to support a bridge. Before attacking, the Assyrians dug beneath the city’s walls to weaken them. Then, with disciplined organization, foot soldiers marched shoulder to shoulder. The foot soldiers approached the city walls and shot wave upon wave of arrows. Meanwhile, another group of troops hammered the city’s gates with massive, iron-tipped battering rams). It’s this sense of organization that kept the Assyrians alive while they were around.
DeleteI agree that intimidation was one oft he big ways for Assyrians to stay successful. Without showing how violent the could be, people would waste the energy of the Assyrians which had no point. So instead they just showed how violent they could be to scare away anyone that wanted to battle them.
DeleteVivica Magana WHAP 2 Bravo
ReplyDeleteBased on their own descriptions, Assyrian kings believed that violence was the key to military success. They believed that the more violent they were to the people they conquered, the more they would fear them and, bow down to them. I do thing that their acount might be exaggerated because, King Ashurbanipal said that he, "fed their corpses, cut into small pieces, to dogs, pigs... vultures, the birds of the sky and also to the fish of the ocean." I think that is very exaggerated because, I don't think that a person would be so cruel enough to go to those extends to show their hatred for a person.
I completely agree with your idea of the Assyrians using violence as a way of being the key to military success. They basically just put fear into the ones who dead to challenge them and pursue to battle them. I also believe that some of the things that they used to scare people were exaggerated. There is no way a sane man would just cut out a man's tongue for "uttering blasphemies" against his god or whatever.
DeleteAssyrian kings belived in large numbers high power and organization. they developed efficient ways of minipulating the enemys defencese. they would find the enemys weakness and hit it with no mercy. with concering many terratorries they expanded there kingdom with their highly organized military. they also had a advantage over the other military forces by being one of the first to be equipted with iron weapons (DOC.1 L).they also had a high advanced way of communication (doc.1 I). i do think that there was a bit of exaggeration because the way that they discribe their conquests were just larger than life.
ReplyDeleteTerror tactics, trade, and expansion were very important for military success. Terror tactics were used by the king and his military; these were meant to suppress any peoples thoughts of turning on their new (lunatic) ruler (the Assyrian empire; B). Trade is a very important factor in all empires and civilization that helps create the city’s economy and the city’s weaponry ,mostly from raw metals, which provided the military with more than one advantage over the others. The most important thing for military control is how much land is available. Territory provides the city with more space (obviously) and people. In the Assyrian empire, this was not a good thing, the people were terrified of the king.
ReplyDeleteAssyrian kings believed that terror and expansion were very important factors in military success (the Assyrian empire; A). The Assyrians terrorized conquered cities into their dominion. The act of conquering supplied the empire with more people, resources, and cultural diversity (too bad the king killed like…..everyone). Faith, in my opinion, wasn’t important for Assyrian military success. I see the Assyrians as blood thirsty monsters scaring the bagiznits out of people minding their own business. “Faith” as other have mentioned it, is not more than the kings excuse to make his prehistoric terrorist tactics seem sane. The only other reasoning behind this god is that it might have helped keep the soldiers motivated.
I strongly believe that their military tactics were exaggerated. there just isn't any sense in taking over territories and then feeding the people to animals (the Assyrian empire; king Ashurbanipal- the treatment of conquered Babylon). I mean, sure, the king was going to scare people into obeying him but it was only going to be a matter of time before the people decided to revolt; his terror strategy was only going to get him angry people. Besides, what good is an empire if everyone is focused on being a pile of dead corpses at the city’s gate?
I agree with you that the Assyrians were too harsh when they fed their enemies' organs to animals. There was no point, they were already dead. Also, you're right, he was just making the victims furious and once they had enough power, of course they would rebel against them. They could only take so much.
DeleteBased on the text, the main components involved in the Assyrian military were location, leadership, and tactics. “Assyria, with its hills and adequate, if not ample, rainfall, had a different terrain and climate.” (doc 1, A) The first Assyrian empires were located on the upper Tigris River. This allowed their cultural and political contact with other rulers and empires. By 1114B.C. they had conquered and expanded into kingdoms such as Mitanni and became independent in themselves to march forward. (doc 1, B) Their warfare in the mountains was able to destroy cities easily.
ReplyDeleteLeadership was important because it gave direction to the fighters. How else would an army of 200+ men know what to do in war? In doc 1, H, it read “The Assyrian army was extremely well organized and disciplined.” The kings who ruled the empire gained control of the empire, developing a network of effective communication. (doc 1, E) Communication is a way orders were made.
Being famous for terror tactics, the Assyrians used there threats to scare off others to gain power. (doc 1, F) The rulers were the ones who usually came up with the tactics, making them brutal and gory. It could be that when an empire shows no fear to fight, their enemies will want to back down. Assyrians were brutal, and wanted to come off as that as much as they could.
According to the text, many Assyrian kings believed that to be successful, they had to show no mercy. They tortured their enemies with brutal deaths such as beheading them and even starving them in their own cities until they came out to surrender. Other than their ferocious manners, their advance weaponry was a major contribution to their many successes. The Assyrians were the first large army to get their filthy hands on iron, which was great for armor and swords. Their chariots were almost impossible to break and too fast to catch up to. Last but not least, their strategy on conquering cities and normal warfare was impeccable. They used guerrilla warfare to surprise their enemies and siege towers to knock down the enemies' barriers. Back to their brutality, the Assyrians did exaggerate because they killed many innocent women and children in their attacks and disrespected a dead man's body.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe Assyrians believed that fear and pure violence was the most important tactic for military success. For example, the way king Sennacherib describes a battle with the Elamites in 691 B.C. states that he " cut their throats like a sheep." They way he described the battle was probably to put fear to anyone that would question him or possibly want to try to battle with his troops. Another example would be king Ashurbanipal saying that he "tore out the tongues" of those who had plotted against him and "had uttered blasphemies against my god Ashur." The Assyrians used violence to scare away anyone who would question them, plot against, or challenge them. I believe that it was partially exaggerated because would a sane man really "feed their corpses, cut up into small pieces, to dogs, pigs,... vultures, the birds of the sky and also to the fish of the ocean."?
The Assyrian kings believed that fear and cruelty were a important tactic. They killed many people and they did it with unjust brutality. "Panic from my onslaught overwhelmed them like a demon" King Sennacherib described how people were filled with fear as his men killed them. "They abandoned their tents and fled for their lives" he tells how his people made flee for their lives and take nothing because of his overwhelming reputation of cruelty. Another tactic they found important was their mobility. They could move more freely with the use of chariots and horsemen. They were more efficient in the invasion and destruction of cities, because they moved faster than just foot soldiers. The Assyrians were exaggerated, they did everything with more brutality when it was not needed. They made a big point out of not having people insult their empire.
ReplyDelete