The Assyrians are known in world history as powerful conquerors and rulers of Mesopotamia. At the same time, historians often focus on their main emphasis on military force and brutal methods of annexing new territories. Many also say that this strategy ultimately proved to be not the most successful. I partially agree with this opinion for several reasons.
On the one hand, the military strength of the Assyrians was effective in creating such a vast empire at the time. First, the Assyrian soldiers were very disciplined. The warriors went on the attack in a well-coordinated formation, with clear tactics, and each had his own place in the army. Secondly, after the reform of Tiglatpalasar the Third, the state threw a lot of forces and funds into the armament of the army. Thus, in the end, the Assyrians turned out to be the most well-armed in the territory of Mesopotamia and the entire Middle East.
But on the other hand, brute force alone is not enough for an empire to last long. Apparently, the Assyrians did not understand that the army alone would not be able to keep the conquered territories in check, and therefore did not bother themselves with a diplomatic attitude towards the enslaved peoples. It is known that it was customary for the Assyrians to burn the conquered cities, and to deport the inhabitants. Moreover, those who survived were forced by the conquerors to change their religion to Assyrian. Such cruelty and lack of understanding with the subjects of the peoples could not hide in the shadow of the strong army of the Assyrian Empire.
In the end, I would like to say that although a strong and trained army was a good tool for annexing new territories, it could not be the force that would hold the entire empire together. Combined with cruelty and rejection of foreign cultures, it was military power that became both the reason for the greatness of Assyria and the reason for its decline.
The Assyrians
are known
in world history as powerful conquerors and rulers of Mesopotamia. At the same time, historians
often
focus on their main emphasis on military
force
and brutal methods of annexing new
territories
.
Many
also
say that this strategy
ultimately
proved to be not the most successful. I
partially
agree
with this opinion for several reasons.
On the one hand, the military strength of the Assyrians was effective in creating such a vast empire at the time.
First
, the Assyrian soldiers were
very
disciplined. The warriors went on the attack in a well-coordinated formation, with
clear
tactics, and each had his
own
place in the
army
.
Secondly
, after the reform of
Tiglatpalasar
the Third, the state threw
a lot of
forces
and funds into the armament of the
army
.
Thus
, in the
end
, the Assyrians turned out to be the most well-armed in the
territory
of Mesopotamia and the entire Middle East.
But
on the other hand
, brute
force
alone is not
enough
for an empire to last long.
Apparently
, the Assyrians did not understand that the
army
alone would not be able to
keep
the conquered
territories
in
check
, and
therefore
did not bother themselves with a diplomatic attitude towards the enslaved peoples. It
is known
that it was customary for the Assyrians to burn the conquered cities, and to deport the inhabitants.
Moreover
, those who survived
were forced
by the conquerors to
change
their religion to Assyrian. Such cruelty and lack of understanding with the subjects of the peoples could not
hide
in the shadow of the strong
army
of the Assyrian Empire.
In the
end
, I would like to say that although a strong and trained
army
was a
good
tool for annexing new
territories
, it could not be the
force
that would hold the entire empire together. Combined with cruelty and rejection of foreign cultures, it was military power that became both the reason for the greatness of Assyria and the reason for its decline.