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)
 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”
 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
 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
 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
 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
 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
Barbanes, Eleanor; 2003.
Planning an empire: city and settle
ment in the Neo-Assyrian period
,Bulletin of the Canadian Society
for Mesopotamian Studies 38: 15-
22.