Were the Assyrians at Ecbatana?

International Journal of Kurdish Studies, Jan, 2002 by I.N. Medvedskaya

Since Kastaritu is described by Esarhaddon as the main figure of the tripartite coalition, it is possible to presume that when relating in his annals how he "trod under foot ... the inhabitants of the land of Til-Ashuri (39), Esarhaddon meant the land ruled by Kastaritu, where his city of Kir-kassi was located. The fortresses of Til-Ashuri and Silhazi are mentioned together in connection with the events of 737 B.C. as one in the region of Sagbat (40). I.M. Diakonoff suggested that in the first millennium B.C., the ethnonyms "Kassites" and "Babylonians" became confused. Therefore the "fortress of the Babylonians," or Silhazi in the 7th century sources, could as well be called Kir-kassi "the Kassite colony" (41).

It appears that the part of the province of Kishesim, which rebelled against the Assyrians, was the land added to it in 716 B.C. Initially it had been part of the Median territory. As early as the 9th century B.C., Sagbat belonged to the land of Madai. Bit-Kiri, from where the Assyrian raids were launched into the unconquered central parts of Media not long before the rebellion (Nos. 64-71), could be a new name given to the district of Sagbat--it is known that sometimes the Assyrians did rename their newly acquired cities and provinces. From Saparda, which had become part of Harhar since 716 B.C., similar raids into Median territory were also undertaken on the eve of the rebellion.

It is more difficult to find out from whence comes Mamitiarsu, the third rebel chief. He is the only one titled the "city-lord of the Medes." Diakonoff assumes that Madai was an Assyrian province (42). There is nothing, however, in the Assyrian sources concerning the appointment of any royal governor to Media, which should have meant the institution of this new province. Actually, it was E. Forrer who first presumed the existence of such a province. He thought that the letter HABL 208 mentioned the Assyrian governor in Media (43). Meanwhile neither the old translation of the letter by L. Waterman, nor the recent one by G. B. Lanfranchi (44), contain anything to suggest that the Mede mentioned there had anything to do with the land of Media. The obscure context can in no way be used to prove the existence of a province of Madai in the time of Sargon (45). It is obvious that if Sargon really managed to create this province, he would have mentioned it several times in his well-preserved annals, as was done in connection with the provinces of Harhar and Kishesim founded in his reign to serve as strategic bases for campaigns directed specifically against Media.

It is noteworthy that the title of Mamitiarsu is the least well defined and not connected with any particular city or region. Probably the Assyrians had rather vague ideas about him. Maybe that is why he is called "the lord of the Medes," not subject to the Assyrians, unlike the other two men, two rebel chiefs revolting against their sovereign and involving some part of the population of the Assyrian provinces in the uprising. It is quite probable that Mamitiarsu originated from the part of Media neighbouring Bit-Kiri and Saparda, often raided by the Assyrian magnates who came there to take tribute (Nos. 64-73). It is not clear if Mamitiarsu actually became the ally of Kastaritu, as the queries put to Samas speak only of the possibility of such an alliance in the future (No. 41). In the description of military campaigns, Median troops figure along with those of the Mannaeans and the Cimmerians, but the names of their commanders are not mentioned.