by Eckart Frahm
(F. 1b (iii.2–4), Stronk 2010: 205–7)
Ctesias is clearly playing with Herodotus’s description of Babylon (Bichler 2011). For this reason, he even located Ninus on the Euphrates River. This is also true for his portrait of Semiramis, who in Herodotus’s Histories is said to be a Babylonian queen. The legend of Semiramis as an Assyrian queen was shaped by Ctesias and became part of the classical tradition (Rollinger 2011b). Semiramis was married to Ninus, with whom she had one son, who was named Ninyas. She founded Babylon, conquered Egypt, Libya, and most of Ethiopia, and ruled over Asia for forty‐two years. Only India could resist her advances. She became famous for her massive waste of lovers, whom she used to kill after a certain time. But aside from this misbehavior, her reign remained flawless. It is only with her son Ninyas that things changed substantially. Despotism began to characterize Assyrian rule and the king did not leave his palace anymore:
The fact that he was seen by no one outside the palace made everyone ignorant of the luxury of his manner of life. Because of their fear of him, as of an unseen god, nobody dared to show disrespect to him even in word. So by appointing generals, satraps, financial officers, and judges for each people and arranging all other matters as he felt to be to his advantage, he remained for his lifetime in Nineveh.
(F. 1b (xxi.7), Stronk 2010: 235)
According to Ctesias, all succeeding Assyrian kings would have followed this model. With two exceptions, these kings, thirty generations in which the son always followed his father on the throne, are not given names. Regarding the two kings who are named, Teutamus, the twentieth king after Ninyas, is said to have sent Assyrian troops to his vassal, King Priam of Troy. More important was the last king, Sardanapallus, who is characterized as representing the height of decadence and effeminacy. Ctesias claims that he was defeated by a coalition under the Median Arbaces and the Babylonian Belesys, who put Ninus under siege and finally conquered the city (Rollinger 2010b, 2011b). Sardanapallus committed suicide, setting himself on fire along with his treasures and entourage. Ninus was completely destroyed and the Assyrian empire came to an end. The length of time of this empire was measured by Ctesias to be about 1300 years (see Rollinger 2011a, 328–9). This is more than the double of what Herodotus claims.
Ctesias created an account of Assyrian history that had a great impact on later tradition. A substantial part of it was transmitted in an excerpt by the Greek historian Diodorus, who became very influential when his work was translated into Latin in the 14th century CE. Assyria, according to Ctesias, was not only the first world empire ruling all over Asia but was also connected with allegedly specific forms of “Asian” kingship, i.e. despotism, the seclusion of the ruler in his palace‐town, overwhelming luxury, revolts, and intrigues. Ctesias established an image of the Assyrian empire and its court that was informed by “orientalism” avant la lettre (Briant 1989) and that had little to do with historical reality (Rollinger 2010b, 68 with n. 31).
In antiquity, Ctesias’s work triggered a kind of “counter‐history,” but it was one that did not gain momentum in classical tradition. The work in question is the Babyloniaca of the Babylonian priest Berossus, published during the time of the Seleucid king Antiochus I (281–261 BCE). The fact that Berossus wrote his treatise in Greek shows that he was focusing on a “Western” readership. Yet, his work seems not to have been consulted very often and it only survived in some fragments (all fragments are now published online by Brill’s New Jacoby; for Berossus in general, see Kuhrt 1987 and Haubold et al. 2012). In contrast to Herodotus and Ctesias, Besossus’s conception of world history was not structured as a succession of world empires. Rather, he presented the history of Asia as a sequence of dynasties. Moreover, Assyria lost its “canonical” position as the first world empire. It was replaced by an age‐old Babylonia. In his account of postdiluvial history, Berossus notes the rule of Semiramis over Assyria (FGrHist 680 F *5 (25)) and claims that, thereafter, forty‐five kings ruled for 526 years. Whether these kings are regarded as Assyrian remains unclear. After this, Berossus adduces a Chaldean king, Phulos (Pulu, another name of Tiglath‐pileser III), who is succeeded by Senecherib (Sennacherib), king of the Assyrians. Senecherib waged war against Asia and Egypt and conquered Babylonia. In the surviving fragments, only his campaign against Cilicia is dealt with in more detail (Dalley 1999; Lanfranchi 2000: 23–31). Senecherib introduced his son Asordan (Aššur‐nadin‐šumi) as king in Babylonia. After reigning for eighteen years, Senecherib was assassinated. He was followed by his son, who ruled for eight years, and by a certain Sammuges/Samoges (Šamaš‐šumu‐ukin), who ruled for twenty‐one years. The latter was succeeded by his brother, Sardanapallus. Yet, he is not the last Assyrian king but rather Sarakos (Sîn‐šarru‐iškun) is, a man who is qualified as king of the Chaldeans. Sarakos’s general, Nabopolassarus, conspired with the satrap of Media, Astyages. Together they conquered Ninus, where Sarakos burned himself to death in his palace (for details see Rollinger 2011a: 331 f.). It looks as if Berossus was only interested in Assyria’s history when it came into contact with Babylonian history. At any rate, Babylonia proper was his central focus and the Assyrian capital Ninus was only worth mentioning when it was captured by the Babylonian‐Median coalition.
As already stressed above, it was Ctesias’s view, more than any other, that shaped the later tradition. It was not only picked up by conventional historiography but was also integrated into new historiographical genres. One of these were chronicles that originated in Hellenistic times and that aimed at recording the history of the world from its beginning until recent times, structuring the events in a chronological order. As far as we know from the surviving fragments of these texts, one of their primary concerns was to separate “myth” from “history,” thus developing a kind of scientific approach (see Geus 2002). History traditionally began with the Trojan War or the first Olympic Games. In the beginning, the chronographiai shared a primarily Greek perspective, but after some time they started to broaden their view and inserted the whole history of mankind into one great chronological system. As a consequence of this, scholars increasingly drew upon works that opened up spaces and eras beyond Greek history and the traditional chronological framework. In this context, Ctesias’s work became a major source. One of the first authors to draw on Ctesias for this purpose was Castor of Rhodes (FGrHist 2B 250), who wrote a world chronicle that extended the historical horizon far beyond the Trojan War.
It is no surprise that it became standard to open studies of world history with Assyria and its king Ninus (Adler 1989: 17 f.). Traces of this chronographic conceptualization of world history can be found far beyond Antiquity, as exhibited by authors like Varro, Cephalion, Julius Africanus, Eusebius, Orosius, the Excerpta Barbari, and Syncellus (Schwartz 1885: 6–7; Adler 1989: 17; Adler and Tuffin 2002: 91; Wallraff 2007: 130–1). When reading the works and fragments of these authors, one can see a fairly uniform conception of Assyrian history. They all begin with Ninus and conclude with Sardanapallus, counting between thirty‐six and forty kings in total (for details see Rollinger 2011a: 323 f.). Only a few works have Ninus listed as the second king, starting Assyrian history instead with Belus, or even adducing a certain Ninus II as the last king. The Trojan War and King Teutamus, the twenty‐sixth or twenty‐seventh Assyrian ruler, provide an important chronological synchronism. Thus, two thirds of Assyrian history were considered to reach beyond this chronographic cornerstone of Greek history. There is only one major disagreement between the various authors, concerning the total amount of years of Assyrian history. The calculations fluctuate between 1240 and 1541 years.
The aforementioned chronographic works deviated from Ctesias’s conception in one central aspect: they did not consider world history as being structured by a succession of empires. But even in this respect Ctesias had his epigones. In the second half of the fourth century BCE, his model of three succeeding world empires – Assyria, Media, Persia – was picked up by Aristoxenus of Tarent and expanded to a
four empire scheme: Syria (i.e. Assyria2), Media, Lydia, and Persia (fr. III 1 20, lines 23–5: Kaiser 2010: 58; see Zecchini 1988). And, in the first century BCE, Rome was introduced as the fifth and latest empire (Wiesehöfer 2005).
A prominent example of this long‐lasting conception are the Historicae Philippicae of Pompeius Trogus. This historiographic work dates from the first century CE. It only survives as an abbreviated third‐century CE excerpt from Justin (Bertelli 1983; English translation: Yardley 1994; for references see Rollinger 2011a: 316–18). Trogus’s history of mankind begins with the Assyrians, who are succeeded by the Medes, the Persians, the Macedonians and, eventually, the Romans.
According to Trogus, Ninus and Semiramis were the first rulers of an empire that comprised all of Asia. The empire’s expansive phase comes to an end with Semiramis’s son Ninyas, and an era of decadence begins. The king remains in his palace, surrounded by his concubines, and becomes inaccessible. Even though claiming that the Assyrian empire lasted for 1300 years, Trogus does not mention any kings between Ninyas and Sardanapallus. According to his account, there was no change anymore: “history” had stopped. The Assyrian empire had become a symbol for stagnation and despotic power. When Sardanapallus came to power, he behaved like a woman and proved too inept to counter the revolt of Arbactus, the governor of Media. In the end, he committed suicide on the pyre, taking all of his treasures with him.
One of the most influential authors who drew on the same traditions as Trogus was Orosius, though there is one seminal difference between them: Orosius offers a Christian view on the history of mankind, also taking into consideration Biblical sources (Goetz 1980; Kaletsch 1993; Bellen 1998; English translation: Raymond 1936). In this regard, he followed the example of the Christian chronographer Iulius Africanus (around 200 CE).
Orosius’s Historiae adversum paganos, written between 416 and 418 CE, would shape the Western view on world history considerably for the next centuries. Assyria remains the first empire in world history, but it is integrated into a Biblical‐Christian framework – for Orosius history can only be understood as salvation history. Ninus becomes a contemporary of Abraham and both are said to have lived 3184 years after Adam (1.1.5), and 2015 years before the birth of Jesus Christ (1.1.6). Orosius also associates Ninus chronologically with Roman history by dating him to 1300 years before the foundation of the city of Rome (1.4.1). Ninus’s reign is presented along traditional lines – only the claim that he defeated Zoroaster, king of the Bactrians (1.4.3), is entirely new. For Semiramis, Orosius draws a picture imbued with Christian morals: sexual libertinage and incest become substantial components of the queen’s life (1.4.7f). Similarly to Trogus’s work, the only Assyrian rulers Orosius explicitly refers to are Ninus, Semiramis, and Sardanapallus. Apart from these, only one king is mentioned by name: Baleus, who is said to have reigned when Joseph was in Egypt, 1008 years before the foundation of the city of Rome (1.8.1 and 10). All together, Orosius counts 1160 years of Assyrian domination with “about 50 kings” (Rollinger 2011a: 313). Though Orosius keeps silent about most of the Assyrian kings, he does not seem to consider Assyrian history a period of deadlock, since wars are reported to have been an ongoing feature of it throughout the centuries (1.12.2). This only changes with Sardanapallus, “a man more corrupt than a woman” (1.19.1). Here we encounter the already well‐known conception of an effeminate king, staying in his palace with his concubines until the Median governor Arbatus‐Arbaces takes over his throne and kingship (1.19.1). Later in his work, Orosius seems to refer to a different tradition when he mentions Ninus’s father Belus, who is said to have been the first ruler of the Assyrian empire (7.2.13).
As important as Orosius was for future views of world history in the West, in the east it was the first Byzantine world chronicle by John Malalas that influenced the historical perspective of the following generations. Malalas’s chronicle encompassed eighteen books, starting with the creation of the world and ending in 563 CE (Thurn 2000: 1*–4*, Thurn and Meier 2009: 1–27; English translation: Jeffreys et. al. 1986). Like Orosius’s, Malalas’s chronicle is characterized by a Christian worldview. But unlike Orosius and Trogus, Malalas also integrates Greek myths into his work, which he interprets in a euhemeristic manner. Thus, history does not start with Assyria but rather with succeeding generations of giants. One of these giants was Nimrod, who founded Babylon (12 [I.7]).3 Yet, with Kronos, the first proper ruler, Malalas again refers to Assyria, since Kronos is also characterized as the first king of the Assyrians (12 [I.8]). His wife is Semiramis‐Rhea. The couple has three children: two sons, Picus‐Zeus and Ninus, and one daughter, Hera. After Kronos conquers the West, Picus‐Zeus follows his father on the throne. Yet, from this time onwards, kingship seems to have been divided between two lines since Picus’s son Belus becomes king of Assyria. He is succeeded by Ninus, who marries his mother, Semiramis‐Rhea. The latter founds Ninus, the “city of the Assyrians” (15 [I.11]).
A characteristic feature of his work is that Malalas does not really distinguish between Assyrians and Persians. Thus, even Zoroaster becomes a member of Ninus’s family. After Ninus, the warrior Thouras‐Ares, a nephew of Semiramis, becomes king, and after him Lames, and after Lames Sardanapallus the Great. Though Sardanapallus is defeated by Perseus, the Assyrian empire continues to last until the time of Alexander the Great, with local kings newly in charge. One of them is Senakherim, whose rule is described in detail following the Biblical tradition of the Assyrian king’s siege of Jerusalem (144–9 [V.70–2]). After his assassination, his son Nachordan becomes king. The next “Assyrian” kings that are mentioned are Nabukhodonosor (150 [VI.1]) and his son Baltasar. Only with Alexander the Great does the empire of the Assyro‐Persians crumble (Rollinger 2012b: 321). A succession of world empires does not play any role in Malalas’s chronicle.
Assyrian Rulers in Classical Sources
As we have seen above, Assyria had a firm place within classical tradition, at least from Herodotus onwards. It was defined as an empire with one capital, Ninus. Regarding its history, legends were circulating about the very first rulers and the last king. About the period in between, however, classical tradition had almost nothing to say, giving a list of anonymous kings at best, even though the Assyrian empire was held to have been the longest lasting of all world empires. The author primarily responsible for this picture was Ctesias, as his treatise had, according to Walter Burkert, “undeserved success” (“unverdienter Erfolg”). Burkert considered Ctesias’s work a “scandal,” since “practically nothing is right” (“Es stimmt so gut wie nichts”; Burkert 2009: 504). This is true but it is not the point. It is evident that reports and stories about Assyria in classical tradition must be viewed as a discourse embedded within a tradition created for a Greek and Latin speaking audience. It is a discourse from an outside perspective that has little to do with “history” as we understand it today. Yet, classical tradition at least kept alive the knowledge that Assyria played a major part in world history and that the establishment of the Assyrian empire was a seminal achievement.
There are a few historical “facts” regarding Assyria that the classical authors did get right. One of them is the notion of an Assyrian capital called Ninus, as the Greek and Roman authors put it, a name obviously derived from Assyrian “Ninua” (Nineveh). Whether this Ninus is really a representation of Nineveh, however, or just an amalgam of several Assyrian residential cities, including Ashur and Kalḫu, is another question. Apparently, the name of Assyria’s first king, the fictitious Ninus, was simply derived from the city’s name. Concerning historical events linked to the city of Ninus, there is only one that was faithfully preserved by classical tradition: Ninus was conquered by the Medes (and Babylonians), though the way this was achieved, again, was colored by fiction.
The importance of storytelling also becomes evident if we look at the rulers of the Assyrian empire. There are only four for whom we receive some kind of information. Two of them, Ninus and his son Ninyas, are apparently
fictitious figures. Most of the extant stories, not only told within accounts of Assyrian history but also independently, concern the two others, Semiramis and Sardanapallus. Modern scholarship has made many efforts to “historicize” these rulers to a certain extant by connecting their names with two historical figures, Sammu‐ramat and Assurbanipal. But even if one agrees that there is an etymological connection, this does not automatically mean that Semiramis and Sardanapallus are “historical” in a strict sense. They are, again, products of classical tradition and part of a specific discourse. By studying this tradition, we can learn much about this discourse but close to nothing about Assyrian history. Both Semiramis and Sardanapallus are presented as typical examples of Asian kingship and both are connected paradigmatically with specific events, namely the beginning and the end of an empire. Both are dazzling figures characterized not solely in a negative manner. Excessive sexuality plays a major role in both cases, but the two rulers are also praised for their astonishing efforts and achievements.
Semiramis, although an Assyrian queen, has special ties to the city of Babylon and is presented as an archetypal “builder”: with the first list of world wonders, probably originating in Hellenistic times, she became famous as the creator of the walls of Babylon. The Hanging Gardens, in contrast, were only ascribed to her in the early modern age; attempts to locate these gardens in Nineveh (Dalley 2013) are, hence, problematic (Bichler and Rollinger 2005; Rollinger 2008b, 2010a).
