What Catalysed Imperial Expansion & Female Seclusion in Assyria?

Assyria was the world’s first empire. Powerful kings marshalled professional armies, conquered vast territory (from Anatolia to the Persian Gulf), presided over a complex bureaucracy, deported thousands of workers, and accumulated harems of concubines.

In the previous millennium, its capital (Ashur) was actually a bit more egalitarian, with checks on executive dominance. What changed and why?

In this Substack, I discuss Eckhart Frahm’s fascinating new book (Assyria) alongside globally-comparative new research on imperial expansion and authoritarianism.

Ashur - in the 2nd millennium - was led by a ruling dynasty. But their powers were circumscribed, insists Frahm. Lacking economic privileges, they traded like other merchant families. Nor did they have a palace or royal court. They were not even permitted to call themselves ‘kings’. Hereditary ‘princes’ were merely firsts among equals, governing in collaboration with male citizens. The City Assembly was headed by an official, called ‘limmum’ (selected annually by lot). Together, they met in an open space, near the temple where a stone stela was inscribed with laws. The right to complain was held by all citizens.

It was only a partial democracy. The Assembly was only for male citizens, excluding women and slaves (comprising over 50% of the population).

Ashurian citizens were traders, not fighters or religious zealots. Caravans of tin and textiles were sent across Mesopotamia to Anatolia. 25,000 cuneiform tablets were found in Ashurian merchants’ homes in Kanesh. Almost all relate to business.

Conquest in 19th Century BCE changed everything. Shamshi-Adad I (an Amorite from eastern Babylonia) was victorious. He constructed a large palace, called all the shots, and named himself King of Upper Mesopotamia. The polis was rebuked. “Since you are merchants, go about your trade as best you can. As for us, we are mighty kings. Why do you interfere?”. He left an important legacy: authoritarianism.

Amorite conqueror Shamshi-Adad I

Indo-Aryan Hittites (from Anatolia) perfected the chariot and built the Mittani kingdom in the mid-2nd millennium. Ashur became under foreign dominion.

Ashurian control was only restored in the 14th century, under King Ashur-uballit. Seeking to eradicate the Hurrian influence (Mittani), he built diplomatic links with Babylon (giving his daughter in marriage to their king).

Kingdom of Mitanni at its greatest extent under Parshatatar c. 15th century BC

From 14th century BCE, Ashur’s kings amassed greater economic, political and sexual power. The City Assembly was replaced by a royal court. Assyrian monarchs proclaimed themselves “king of the world.”

Kings owned large agricultural estates - which they assigned to temples, administrators, and military officers. Trade continued, but increasingly under the authority of the state. Gone were the days of independent merchant families. Ambitious men now aspired to become bureaucrats [just like ancient China]. Officials were ‘servants of the king’.

Conquering more territories was now the over-riding objective, emphasised in coronation ceremonies. Once captured, thousands were deployed to construction and agricultural projects. Assyrian rulers organised professional armies and built the world’s first empire (shown below).

The royal harem (a new institution) was guarded by eunuchs. Infringements on the king’s (female) property were strictly punished. If an official permitted a non-eunuch to enter the king’s inner quarters of concubines, his foot would be cut. Another decree declared,

“If a woman of the palace has bared her shoulders and is not covered with even a kindabašše-garment, and she summons a court attendant, saying: ‘[C]ome hither, I wish to give you an order,’ and he tarries to speak with her—he shall be struck one-hundred blows, and the eyewitness who denounced him shall take his clothing.”

Alongside imperial expansion, authoritarianism and statism, there was also a shift in culture. Briefly departing from Frahm’s book, allow take you down a gender rabbit hole...

Back in 3rd millennium BCE, Southern Mesopotamian women held official positions, were economically independent and unveiled. (If you’re curious to see how mortal women dressed, see my video). The deity for writing was female, the Goddess Nisaba.

Goddess Nisaba - of writing, accounting, surveying and grain

From 2000 BCE, women retreated from the public sphere. As Frahm notes, married women were expected to stay home, make wool and veil.

Writing also became monopolised by men. Even though cuneiform tablets were found in a third of Ashurian homes (indicating widespread literacy), these were almost all written by men.

Why did Ashur become more authoritarian, statist and patriarchal?

Frahm’s book is heavy on detail, less so on explanation. Let’s consider several hypotheses:

In “The Rise and Fall of Democracy”, David Stasavage argues that authoritarianism thrived when writing technologies and geography to accurately predict crop yields without ceding power. But this does not seem like a full explanation of change in the 2nd millennium, since it was long predated by cuneiform and irrigation.

Military innovations are an alternative hypothesis. Peter Turchin and colleagues show that advances in military technology (chariots, iron cavalry, gunpowder) systematically predict subsequent imperial expansion. Around 2000 BCE, Mesopotamians started using chariot warfare. Pulled by several horses, archers could now shoot from mobile platforms. To protect themselves, others made shields and helmets. Armies could now traverse a much larger terrain.

Turchin et al 2022

Building on Turchin, I’d add that chariot warfare enabled rulers to accumulate more wealth from conquered territories and gain political pre-eminence. All things equal, we should expect imperial expansion to promote authoritarianism. Learning from Stasavage, rulers would have little incentive to cede power if crops and irrigation enabled accurate prediction of crop yields. Together, this may help explain why Ashur’s City Assembly was replaced by a Royal Court.

Ashurnasirpal II hunting lions, by chariot. 9th century BCE. (British Museum)

Ashurbanipal’s palace (British Museum)

What explains the rise of female veiling?

Let’s consider 3 hypotheses:

• Increased warfare and mass rape led to women being hidden.

Tbh, this doesn’t fit the facts. First, warfare wasn’t new, it long predated chariots. Second, other regions had large empires (like South East Asia, shown below) but women continued to move freely. Third, veiling wasn’t motivated by safety, but piety and concern for men’s honour. Female seclusion is a cultural innovation, not entailed by states or war.

Turchin et al 2022

• Amorites (from Arabia) became militarily dominant in Southern Mesopotamia.

In 19th century BCE, Ashur was conquered by Shamshi-Adad I (an Amorite). Amorites may have idealised seclusion. Prestige bias may have motivated wider adoption of veiling. Men sought to status by acting like ruling elites.

• Indo-Aryan Hittites (from Anatolia) perfected the chariot and built the Mittani kingdom. This is another cultural influence, via prestige bias.

Generative AI may enable us to test these hypotheses. A multidisciplinary team of archaeologists and computer scientists has developed artificial intelligence that can translate ancient Akkadian cuneiform. We’re meeting next month. I’ll keep you posted!

So what led to imperial expansion, complex bureaucracy, authoritarianism and seclusion?

My money is on military innovations, writing technology, conquest by Amorite kings, and prestige bias.

Comments and correctives are always welcome.