| History of Lebanon |
|---|
 |
| Timeline |
 Lebanon portal |
During the Middle Assyrian Empire (1392–1056 BC) and the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911–605 BC), Phoenicia, what is today known as Lebanon and coastal Syria, came under Assyrian rule on several occasions.[1]
Southern Canaan (in modern terms Israel, the Palestinian Territories and Jordan) was inhabited by a number of Semitic states speaking Canaanite languages, these being Israel, Judah, Ammon, Edom, Moab, the Suteans and Amalekites. In addition, the Philistines migrated into this region from the Aegean, a non-Semitic Indo-European speaking people. Northern Canaan (in modern terms Lebanon, the Mediterranean coast of Syria and the Hatay Province of Turkey) was also inhabited by Canaanite speaking peoples, who coalesced into city-states such as Tyre, Sidon, Berytus, Arvad, Simyra, Onoba and Tarshish. The term Phoenicia was applied to this region, but it is a later Greek application which was not used during the Assyrian period.[2]
To the east, in modern terms the interior of modern Syria (the Assyrian north east excluded), the region had since the 24th century BC been inhabited by the Canaanite speaking Amorites and for a time the East Semitic speaking Eblaites also, thus much of this region had been known as the Land of the Amurru. However, from the 12th century BC a new Semitic group appeared, in the form of the Arameans, and by the late 11th century BC this region was known as Aramea/Aram and Eber Nari and remained named as such during the latter part of the Middle Assyrian Empire, Neo Assyrian Empire, Neo-Babylonian Empire and Achaemenid Empire. The term Syria is in actuality originally a 10th-century BC Indo-Anatolian name for Assyria, centuries later applied by the Greeks during the Seleucid Empire (311–150 BC) not only to Assyria itself but much of the Levant (see Etymology of Syria).
The approach of the devastating Assyrian armies would more often than not result in the vassalage of these states. Similarly, any long absence would result in rebellion, often sponsored by another of Assyria's numerous opponents. The result is that numerous Kings of Assyria launched campaigns to bring these economically important regions under Assyrian rule. The rebellion after one King's offensive would result in his successor's next vengeful assault. When Tyre ceased to pay tribute to the Assyrian kings, rebellion broke out.[3]
YouTube Encyclopedic
-
1/5Views:4 525 6694 683 0128 10442064 000
-
Mesopotamia: Crash Course World History #3
-
The Persians & Greeks: Crash Course World History #5
-
The Assyrians - a reading lesson for kids
-
Babylonians and Phoenicians
-
When Rome Ruled Egypt (2008) Documentary
Transcription
Hi there. I'm John Green, you're watching Crash Course World History, and today we're going to talk about "Iraq" No, you purportedly smart globe. We're going to talk about Mesopotamia. I love Mesopotamia because it helped create two of my favorite things: Writing and taxes. Why do I like taxes? Because before taxes, the only certainty was death. Mr. Green. Mr. Green, did you know that you're referencing Mark Twain? I'm not referencing Mark Twain, me from the past, I'm referencing Benjamin Franklin, who was probably himself quoting the unfortunately named playwright Christopher Bullock. Listen. You may be smart, kid, but I've been smart longer. By the way, today's illustration points out that an eye for an eye leaves the whole world monocular. [music intro] [music intro] [music intro] [music intro] [music intro] [music intro] So 5,000 years ago in the land meso, or between, the Tigris and Euphrates potomoi, or rivers, cities started popping up much like they had in our old friend the Indus River valley. These early Mesopotamian cities engaged in a form of socialism, where farmers contributed their crops to public storehouses out of which workers, like metalworkers or builders or male models or whatever—would be paid uniform "wages" in grain. So, basically— MR GREEN MR GREEN WERE THERE REALLY MALE MODELS? CAN YOU DO BLUE STEEL? Oh younger version of myself, how I hate you. [Scoots to strike dramatic chair pose, laughs at own buffoonery] Oh the humiliation I suffer for you people... that was my best Blue Steel. That was as close as I can get. So anyway, if you lived in a city, you could be something other than a shepherd, and thanks to this proto-socialism you could be reasonably sure that you'd eat-- STAN, Is there any way we could get another globe in here? I feel like this shot is inadequately globed. Yes, much better. You know you can tell the quality of the historian by the number of his or her globes. But even though you could give up your flock, a lot of people didn't want to. One of the legacies of Mesopotamia is the enduring conflict between country and city. You see this explored a lot in some of our greatest art such as The Beverly Hillbillies and Deliverance, and the showdown between Enkidu and Gilgamesh in the Epic of Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh is one of the oldest known works of literature and I'm not gonna spoil it for you— there's a link to the poem in the video info—but suffice it to say that in the showdown between country and city, the city wins. So what were these city states like? Well, let's take a look at one such city-state, Gilgamesh's home town of Uruk, in the Thought Bubble: Uruk was a walled city with an extensive canal system and several monumental temples, called ziggurats. The priests of these temples initially had all the power, because they were able to communicate directly with the gods. That was a useful talent, because Mesopotamian gods were moody and frankly pretty mean—like, according to Gilgamesh they once got mad at us because we were making too much noise while they were trying to sleep so they decided to destroy all of humanity with a flood. The Tigris and Euphrates are decent as rivers go, but Mesopotamia is no Indus Valley, with its on-schedule flooding and easy irrigation. A lot of slave labor was needed to make the Tigris and Euphrates useful for irrigation; they're difficult to navigate and flood unpredictably and violently. Violent, unpredictable, and difficult to navigate: Oh, Tigris and Euphrates, how you remind me of my college girlfriend. So I mean given that the region tends to yo-yo between devastating flood and horrible drought, it follows that one would believe that the gods are kind of random and capricious, and that any priests who might be able to lead rituals that placate those gods would be very useful individuals. But about 1000 years after the first temples we find in cities like Uruk, a rival structure begins to show up, the palace. This tells us that kings—and they were all dudes—are starting to be as important as priests in Mesopotamia. The responsibility for the well-being and success of the social order was shifting from gods to people, a power shift that will seesaw throughout human history until...um, probably forever actually. But in another development we'll see again, these kings, who probably started out as military leaders or really rich landowners, took on a quasi-religious role. How? Often by engaging in "sacred marriage" -- specifically skoodilypooping with the high priestess of the city's temple. So the priests were overtaken by kings, who soon declared themselves priests. Thanks, Thought Bubble. So how do we know that these kings were skoodilypooping with lady priests? BECAUSE THEY MADE A SKOODILYPOOPING TAPE AND PUT IT ON THE INTERNET. No, because there's a written record. Mesopotamia gave us writing, specifically a form of writing called cuneiform, which was initially created not to like woo lovers or whatever but to record transactions like how many bushels of wheat were exchanged for how many goats. I'm not kidding, by the way; a lot of cuneiform is about wheat and goats. I don't think you can overestimate the importance of writing but let's just make three points here: 1. Writing and reading are things that not everyone can do. So they create a class distinction, one that in fact survives to this day. Foraging social orders were relatively egalitarian; but the Mesopotamians had slaves and they played this metaphorically resonant sport that was like polo except instead of riding on horses you rode on other people. And written language played an important role in widening the gap between classes. 2. Once writing enters the picture, you have actual history instead of just a lot of guesswork and archaeology. 3. Without writing, I would not have a job, so I'd like to personally thank Mesopotamia for making it possible for me to work while reclining in my lay-z-boy. So why did this writing happen in Mesopotamia? Well the fertile crescent, while it is fertile, is lacking the pretty much everything else. In order to get metal for tools or stone for sculptures or wood for burning, Mesopotamia had to trade. This trading eventually led Mesopotamia to develop the world's first territorial kingdom, which will become very important and will eventually culminate in some extraordinarily inbred Hapsburgs. So the city state period in Mesopotamia ended around 2,000 BCE, probably because drought and a shift in the course of rivers led to pastoral nomads coming in and conquering the environmentally weakened cities. And then the nomads settled into cities of their own as nomads almost always will unless—wait for it— ...You are the Mongols. These new Mesopotamian city states were similar to their predecessors in that they had temples and writing and their own self-glorifying stories but they were different in some important ways. First, that early proto-socialism was replaced by something that looked a lot like private enterprise, where people could produce as much as they would like as long as they gave a cut, also known as taxes to the government. We talk a lot of smack about taxes but it turns out they're pretty important to creating stable social orders. Things were also different politically because the dudes who'd been the tribal chiefs became like full-blown kings, who tried to extend their power outside of cities and also tried to pass on their power to their sons. The most famous of these early monarchs is Hammurabi or as I remember him from my high school history class, "The Hammer of Abi". Hammurabi ruled the new kingdom of Babylon from 1792 BCE to 1750 BCE. Hammurabi's main claim to fame is his famous law code which established everything from like the wages of ox drivers to the fact that the punishment for taking an eye should be having an eye taken. Hammurabi's law code could be pretty insanely harsh. Like if a builder builds a shoddy building and then the owner's son dies in a collapse, the punishment for that is the execution of the builder's son. The kid's like, that's not fair! I'm just a kid. What did I do? You should kill my dad. All of which is to say that Hammurabi's law code gives a new meaning to the phrase tough on crime, but it did introduce the presumption of innocence. In the law code Hammurabi tried to portray himself in two roles that might sound familiar: shepherd and father. "[I am] the shepherd who brings peace. My benevolent shade was spread over the city, I held the peoples of Sumer and Akkad safely on my lap." So again we see the authority for protection of the social order shifting to men, not gods, which is important, but don't worry, it'll shift back. Even though the territorial kingdoms like Babylon were more powerful than any cities that had come before, and even though Babylon was probably the world's most populous city during Hammurabi's rule, it wasn't actually that powerful, and keeping with the pattern is was soon taken over by the formerly-nomadic Kassites. The thing about Territorial kingdoms is that they relied on the poorest people to pay taxes, and provide labor and serve in the army, all of which made you not like your king very much so if you saw any nomadic invaders coming by you might just be like "Hey nomadic invaders! Come on in; you seem better than the last guy." Well, that was the case until the Assyrians came along, anyway. The Assyrians have a deserved reputation for being the brutal bullies of Mesopotamia. The Assyrians did give us an early example of probably the most important and durable form of political organization in world history, and also Star Wars history, the Empire. Let's define empire as the extension by conquest of control over people who do not belong to the same group as the conquerors. The biggest problem with empires is that by definition they're diverse and multi-ethnic, which makes them hard to unify. So beginning around 911 BCE, the neo-Assyrian Empire grew from its hometowns of Ashur and Nineveh to include the whole of Mesopotamia, the Eastern Coast of the Mediterranean and even, by 680 BCE, Egypt! (INSERT MAP)They did this thanks to the most brutal, terrifying and efficient army the world had ever seen. More adjectives describing my college girlfriend. For one thing the army was a meritocracy. Generals weren't chosen based on who their dads were, they were chosen based on if they were good at Generalling. Stan, is generalling a word? [pauses, two thumbs up w answer] It is! The armies also used iron weapons and chariots and they were massive. Like the neo-Assyrian Empire could field 120,000 men. Also, they were super MEAN. Like they would deport hundreds of thousands of people to separate them from their history and their familes and also moved skilled workers around where they were most needed.Also the neo-Assyrians loved to find would-be rebels and lop off their appendages. Particularly their noses for some reason. And there was your standard raping and pillaging and torture, all of which was done in the name of Ashur, the great god of the neo-Assyrians whose divine regent was the King. Ashur, through the King, kept the world going, and as long as conquest continued the world would not end. But if conquest ever stopped, the world would end and there would be rivers of blood and weeping and gnashing of teeth. You know how apocalypses go. The Assyrians spread this world view with propaganda like monumental architecture and readings about how awesome the king was at public festivals, all of which were designed to inspire awe in the Empire's subjects. Oh that reminds me, ITS TIME FOR THE OPEN LETTER. An Open Letter to the Word Awesome: But first lets see what's in the Secret Compartment today. [opens door] Oh, Stan is this yellow cake uranium? You never find that in Mesopotamia... Dear Awesome, I love you. Like most contemporary English speakers in fact, I probably love you a little too much. The thing about you, awesome, is that awesome is just so awesomely awesome at being awesome. So we lose track of what you really mean, awesome: You're not just cool, you're terrifying and wonderful. You're knees-buckling, chest-tightening, fearful encounters with something radically other- something that we know could both crush and bless us. That is awe, and I apologize for having watered you down. But seriously, you're awesome. Best wishes, John Green So what happened to the Assyrians? Well, first they extended their empire beyond their roads, making administration impossible. But maybe even more importantly, when your whole world view is based on the idea that the apocalypse will come if you ever lose a battle, and then you lose one battle, the whole world view just blows up. That eventually happened and in 612 BCE, the city of Nineveh was finally conquered, and the neo-Assyrian Empire had come to its end. But the idea of Empire was just getting started. Next week we'll talk about mummies—oh, I have to talk about other things too? Crap, I only want to talk about mummies. Anyway, we'll be talking about [tapping stylus to talking globe replying Sudan] No! Dangit! We'll actually be talking about [taps globe to reply Egypt] Thank you, Smart Globe. See you next week. Crash Course was produced and directed by Stan Muller. Our Script supervisor is Danica Johnson. The show is written by Raoul Meyer my high school history teacher and myself and our graphics team is ThoughtBubble. Last week's phrase of the week was "Better Boyfriend." If you want to take a guess at this week's phrase of the week, you can do so in Comments where you can also suggest new phrases of the week. And if you have any questions about today's show, leave them in Comments and our team of semi-professional quasi-historians will endeavor to answer them. Thanks for watching and as we say in my hometown: Don't forget to be awesome.
Background
Prior to the rise of the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the late 10th century BC, much of the land known today as Syria and Lebanon was ruled by various independent Canaanite speaking city states. Trade established between these cities and those of the Mediterranean gave some of these cities great wealth.
During the Middle Assyrian Empire, after gaining ascendancy over much of the ancient Near East and Asia Minor at the expense of the Hittite Empire, Hurri-Mitanni, Egyptian Empire, Babylonia and Phrygia, the Assyrians turned their attention to the East Mediterranean coast. Tiglath-Pileser I (1115–1077 BC) invaded the region and conquered the Canaanite-Phoenician states of Byblos, Tyre, Sidon, Simyra, Berytus (Beirut), and finally Arwad.[4] However, Assyria went into a period of comparative decline from 1055 BC onwards, its territories shrinking dramatically, and although one Assyrian king is recorded as having campaigned in the region in the late 10th century BC, Phoenicia was essentially lost to Assyria.[5]
King Adad-nirari II (911–891 BC) ascended to the throne and immediately began consolidating the domains of Assyria and punishing rebellious vassals, giving rise to the Neo-Assyrian Empire.[6] After the death of Adad-nirari II, Tukulti-Ninurta II (890–884 BC) began expanding against Assyria's enemies to the north and east in Asia Minor and Ancient Iran.[6] The expansion into the north meant that the next Assyrian King, Ashurnasirpal II (883–859 BC) was in a position to greatly expand Assyria's political and military influence out of Mesopotamia. After crushing the revolt of the city of Suru, invading the Levant and defeating the Aramaean King of Bit Adini and mercilessly mutilating other rebels along the Upper Tigris river,[7] Ashurnasirpal II turned his attention to the West, to the land of the Phoenicians.
Campaigns of Shalmaneser III, 858–824 BC
Shalmaneser was the son of Ashurnasirpal II and like his father, expended much of his energies into fighting and expanding in the name of Ashur. However, while he did campaign for 31 years of his 35 years on the throne,[8] his death was met with unrealized dreams and ultimately civil conflict and another short period of instability within the empire. The cities of Aramea and Canaan once more began to rebel and in 853 BC. Shalmaneser III led an army to cross the Euphrates and into northern Aram. After taking Aleppo,[9] he encountered on the plains of central Syria a coalition of Aramean and Canaanite states, including forces sent by King Ahab of Israel. The outcome of the battle was most likely a stalemate for Shalmaneser III[9] – although some vassal states were brought back into line, and later he campaigned on three more occasions against his opponents in 849, 845 and 838 BC, conquering much of the Levant. He failed to take Damascus but devastated much of its territory [9] however many of the Phoenician cities received a respite from Assyrian attacks during the reign of Shamshi-Adad V and the regent queen Semiramis.[10][11]
Adad-nirari III proved a vigorous king. Among his actions was a siege of Damascus in the time of Ben-Hadad III in 796 BC, which led to the eclipse of the Aramaean Kingdom of Damascus and allowed the recovery of Israel under Jehoash (who paid the Assyrian king tribute at this time) and Jeroboam II.[12]
Campaigns of Tiglath Pileser III, 745–727 BC
Tiglath Pileser III brought the Assyrian empire out of the period of instability it had entered after the death of Adad-nirari III in 783 BC, much to the fear of Assyria's enemies. His reforms in administration and in the military included the introduction of a standing army (allowing for extensive campaigning and siege warfare), greater lines of communication and supply of horses, metal, arrows and other necessities of war.[13] Upon conquering a new territory, an Assyrian official would be put in charge to supervise and ensure Assyrian interests and tribute were maintained.
With these and with his energetic campaigning, the Levant and many of the Phoenician cities were doomed to lose their independence once again to the brutal yet effective Assyrian armies.
After taking care of the troublesome Chaldean and Sutean tribes who had migrated into Babylonia to the south, and re-affirming Babylon's vassalage to Assyria,[14] Tiglath led a campaign against the northern opponents of Urartu[15] – Urartu had been extending their influence into the eastern Mediterranean by carving out a number of vassal states along the fertile crescent and into southern Canaan. Consequently, Tiglath's moves against Aramea and Canaan served to aid him in his war against Urartu.
Upon hearing of the advancing armies of Assyria, the vassal states in northern Syria called for the forces of Urartu to protect them.[15] In a crushing defeat in the Upper Euphrates Tiglath ensured that no troops would come to their aid; an unsuccessful siege of the capital of Urartu, Turushpa meant that Tiglath concentrated his efforts in the West. The Syrian city of Arpad was placed under siege in 747 BC. While most armies of the time would not be able to lay siege for more than half a year (the seasonal change demanded the soldiers return to their farms and tend to their fields and livestock) the reforms of Tilgath mean that his standing army would take the city in the third year of the siege.[15]
In 738 BC, Tiglath mirrored the moves of his predecessor, Ashurnasirpal II by accepting the tribute of many of cities in Canaan and Syria. The fruits of the conquests ensured once again a good supply of raw materials to feed the Assyrian war machine. When Tiglath placed a trade embargo on exporting Phoenician cedar to Egypt, Egyptian-backed rebellions broke out throughout the region,[16] all crushed and all made to recognize the suzerainty of nation of Assur.
Shalmaneser V, 726–722 BC and Sargon II, 721–705 BC
Sargonid dynasty
The succession of Sargon II to Tiglath is surrounded by mystery – his campaigns against Babylon mention a previous conquest of Jerusalem, the capital of the Israelite Kingdom of Judah and the mass deportation of some 27,000+ inhabitants to the lands of Media.[17] The most likely result is that another King before Sargon II, Shalmaneser V may have launched campaigns in the provinces of Syria and Palestine before being overthrown by Sargon II – whose rebellion would have encouraged others throughout the Empire, including the secession of Babylon from Assyria vassalage. Sargon II therefore claims the glory of his usurped predecessor's conquest of Israel.
In any case, the Assyrians under Sargon II were once more forced to campaign in the immediate vicinity of Assyria, resulting in an outbreak of rebellion in Syria (no doubt in order to take advantage of the pre-occupied status of the Assyrian army). After defeating her opponents, Sargon II decided to head west rather than completely defeat Elam, being content with reducing her ability to campaign for some time.
The Syrian rebellion was backed by the Egyptians[18] (Hanunu of Gaza was encouraged by them and so rebelled) and led by the ruler of Hamath. The cities of Damascus, Samaria and a few of the Phoenician cities also broke away and allied once again to face the threat of Assyria. The rebellion was ultimately doomed; the coalition lacked the military ability to stop Sargon's rapid advance south. After taking Arpad, Sargon II smashed the coalition army at Qarqar,[18] thereby avenging the stalemate of Shalmaneser III. Hamath fell, followed by Damascus and then Samaria. Sargon then went on to take Gaza where he brushed aside an Egyptian expeditionary force. Hanunu was captured and flayed.[18]
Another attempt by the Egyptians in 712 BC to foment a rebellion failed when Ashdod, the prime mover of this rebellion was defeated by Sargon's pre-emptive action.[18] Thereafter Palestine and much of the Phoenician cities were secure.
Sargon's military expeditions against Urartu and Phrygia allowed him to exert greater influence in northern Syria and Phoenicia.
Sennacherib, 704–681 BC
It is unknown how rebellious the cities of Tyre and other Phoenician cities were under the reign of Sennacherib. It is however known that in 701 BC, Sennacherib marched south down the Mediterranean coast to suppress the rebellions by their Philistine vassals,[19] backed by the kingdom of Judah. After defeating yet another Egyptian expeditionary force,[19] the Philistine cities surrendered and tribute once again offered, with records speaking of bringing many hostile "cities" (some of which were much more like villages) "to embrace his [Sennacherib] feet".[19] This may well have included a number of Phoenician cities in Lebanon. Nonetheless, the vassals in the region would not stop rebelling while Babylon, Elam or Urartu too rebelled against Assyria, and not while Egypt continued to provide aid to the rebels.
Esarhaddon 680–669 BC
Esarhaddon's reconstruction of Babylon[20] and his vassal treaty imposed upon the Persians and Medes allowed him to turn his attention to the rebellious city of Tyre (which had rebelled with Egyptian aid). In 671 BC, Esarhaddon went to war against Pharaoh Taharqa of Egypt, the head of a foreign Nubian dynasty. Part of his army stayed behind to deal with rebellions in Tyre, and perhaps Ashkelon. The remainder went south to Rapihu, then crossed the Sinai, a desert inhabited by dreadful and dangerous animals, and entered Egypt. In the summer, he took Memphis, and Taharqa fled back to Nubia . Esarhaddon now called himself "king of Egypt, Libya, and Kush", and returned with rich booty from the cities of the delta; he erected a victory stele at this time, showing the son of Taharqa in bondage, Prince Ushankhuru.
Ashurbanipal 668–627 BC
Ashurbanipal would be the last Assyrian King to have the ability to campaign in Phoenicia and much of Aram. Marching his army into Egypt (in order to safeguard Syria) he defeated the rebellious opponents there and installed puppet princes on the throne.[21] Egyptian attempts at taking Memphis ended miserably with Ashurbanipal marching south into Upper Egypt and taking Thebes "like a floodstorm".[21] His campaigning against Egypt coincided with another attempt to stop Tyre and Arvad from rebelling without being punished for it afterwards. With the death of Ashurbanipal in 627 BC, Aramea and Phoenicia gradually fell from Assyrian rule as Assyria was engulfed in bitter civil war which would see its downfall by 605 BC. Ironically, it would be the Assyrians former vassals, the Egyptians, who would attempt to aid the Assyrians as they moved the capital of their collapsing kingdom to Harran.
The destruction of the Assyrian Empire meant that Babylon and then Persia would rule Phoenicia, Canaan and Aramea until Alexander the Great of Macedon would initiate the Hellenistic period.
See also
Notes
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. pp. 8–53.
- ^ "Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, φοῖνιξ". Perseus.tufts.edu. Retrieved 2017-03-18.
- ^ Carter, Terry; Dunston, Lara; Humphreys, Andrew (2004). Syria & Lebanon – Terry Carter, Lara Dunston, Andrew Humphreys – Google Boeken. ISBN 9781864503333. Retrieved 2012-08-17.
- ^ The encyclopædia britannica: a dictionary of arts, sciences, literature and general information, Volume 26, Edited by Hugh Chrisholm, 1911, p. 968
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 5.
- ^ a b Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 6.
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. pp. 6–10.
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 10.
- ^ a b c Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 11.
- ^ Georges Roux – Ancient Iraq
- ^ "Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser II". Mcadams.posc.mu.edu. Retrieved 2017-03-18.
- ^ Ancient Near Eastern History and Culture by William H. Stiebing Jr.
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. pp. 17–24.
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 24.
- ^ a b c Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 25.
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 26.
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 28.
- ^ a b c d Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 30.
- ^ a b c Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 45.
- ^ Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. p. 48.
- ^ a b Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey. pp. 50–51.
References
- Healy, Mark (1991). The Ancient Assyrians. New York: Osprey.
External links
- Lebanon Assyrian and Babylonian domination of Phoenicia
- Lebanon Under Assyrian Rule – The Phoenicians Rebel Against the Assyrians
This page was last edited on 5 December 2023, at 18:04