The Inscriptions of Nabopolassar, Amel-Marduk and Neriglissar

Riva, Rocío Da

doi:10.1515/9781614513551

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…22 Nonetheless, some Neo-Babylonian royal sources are available to us. Such, for example, are rock-engraved public inscriptions that were placed in strategic locations as propaganda; see Da Riva 2008Riva , 2012aRiva , 2012bRiva , 2013aRiva , 2013b It is well known that Neo-Babylonian kings did not, for the most part, address political and military aspects in their public inscriptions. 24 Nonetheless, and despite the absence of direct, unmitigated Babylonian narrativization of their imperial policy, the inscriptions themselves are in fact evidence for Babylonian presence in the Levant; especially the rock inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar at e.g.…”

Section: Royal Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Neo-Babylonian Empire: The Imperial Periphery as Seen from the Centre

Levavi

2020

Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper examines the cuneiform evidence from sixth-century Babylonia (and beyond) for information on the form and aims of Neo-Babylonian imperial rule over its western provinces. While new texts, which hitherto have not been considered in this context, can be brought to bear on the issue, direct evidence from these provinces is still scarce. These documents will thus be supplemented by drawing on the rich information concerning state institutions and resource extraction in the imperial centre. It is argued that in the first half of the Neo-Babylonian period, until ca. 585 BCE, Babylonian imperial rule in the western periphery can be conceptualized primarily as a straightforward exploitative tributary regime. From about the mid-reign of Nebuchadnezzar onwards, however, there is a shift towards a more sustainable resource extraction through the creation of stable pockets of Babylonian presence in the periphery. This diachronic shift was meant to steady and organize the initial ad hoc Babylonian approach. These measures, however, did not prevail, and the chaotic years which followed the 43 years reign of Nebuchadnezzar illustrate the fragility of the relatively short-lived Babylonian imperial age.

show abstract

Section: Royal Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%