SARGON II. – One of the greatest kings of Assyria (Assyrian Šarru-ukēn[u] and Šarru-kēn[u]; Septuagint Ἀρχέανος, from arkā “the second,” which S. added to his name), whose reign (722–705 B.C.) was decisive for the history of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, which later came to a tragic end in 606 (v. NABOPOLASSAR).
Although S. cannot be called, as was once believed, the founder of a dynasty of “Sargonids,” nevertheless under him that valiant military and priestly Empire reached its apogee. The neighboring peoples (Media, and chiefly Elam and Urartu, the determined adversary of Assyria) were increasingly learning Assyrian industrial, administrative, and military technique and organization, turning them into a terrible weapon against Assyria. In the south the Merodach-Baladan (v.), a brilliant diplomat; in the southwest, with the Ethiopian dynasty, Egypt reappeared on the scene (with the sib'e of Pharaoh Šabaka); in the west Mita of Muški (the Phrygian king Midas of Herodotus and Ovid) allied himself with Rusas I, an energetic king of Urartu. Urartu threatened Assyria’s southeastern flank, allying itself with Median chieftains and seeking contact with Elam in the Zagros ranges. S. struck in every direction, but succeeded only in weakening Urartu with the aid of the Gimirrai and Ilguzai (the Cimmerians and Scythians of the Greek authors) and, as happens in history, destroyed not only an enemy but also a mighty rampart that protected Assyria and the ancient Semitic civilization against invasion from the Eurasian steppes. The consequence of this victory of his was, with the rise of the Iranian powers (v. MEDINA), the destruction of Nineveh, the annihilation of the Assyrian people (v. NABOPOLASSAR), and Cyrus’s entry into Babylon (v. NARBONA) in 539 B.C.
The Bible relates that S.’s turtanu besieged and stripped Ashdod (Ašdādh; Is. 20:1). The cuneiform inscriptions are so numerous that S. may be regarded as the best-known figure in the ancient Near East: chronicles, annals, and other accounts of his deeds, foundation stones, and slabs. Outstanding for its literary merit is the celebrated “eighth campaign,” which, in its rhythmic language, its use of parallelism, and its poetic descriptions of landscapes and festivals, has no equal in its genre. Yet the historian must not forget the propagandistic intention of that solemn (or sacred) “war communiqué”: it is a letter from the chief scribe to the god Assur, placing the army’s exploits in a fitting light. Besides reflecting S., it also reflects the character of his great adversary Rusas I: a portrait that inspires respect, despite the brutal words with which he is stigmatized on other occasions, much as Roman historians treated Hannibal. The number of these inscriptions is constantly increasing, owing to the excavations at Dur-Sarru-kēn (“Fortress of S.”), built by S. as a Nineveh (v.), to those in the city of Assur, and, in 1952, to those at Kalab (Nimrud), where the English found: a) half of a “prism” containing the more extensive historical annals of S.; b) a practically complete “cylinder” of Merodach-Baladan.
According to an enamelled slab published by E. Unger, S. was the younger son of Theglathpalasar III (v.). The spelling of the name also agrees with this, Šarru-ukēnu, characteristic of second-born sons: “The King made firm (stable, authentic, the dynasty).” The other spelling of the name, which generally occurs in ideograms, means “the firm (genuine, true, authentic) king.” There may well have been a slight alteration in the name when S., in 722, deposed his brother Salmanasar V (v.), who must have died in circumstances clarified by no historical document. The change of regime was accepted by Assyria without internal revolutions. If on this occasion S. restored the privileges of the ancient capital Assur, his birthplace, this does not signify a revolution of the “priests” against the “soldiers,” merely because the ancient privileges lost under Theglathpalasar III were recovered.
S. Merodach-Baladan (v.) and his ally Humbanigaš of Elam; in the newly discovered cylinder Merodach-Baladan celebrates with the greatest exultation as a complete victory for himself the battle of Dēr (720), through which he freed Babylonia from the domination of the “Subarians,” the name he gives the Assyrians. But S. had a good “secret service,” which kept him informed about the internal conditions of neighboring countries, and after the death of Humbanigaš, when internal dissensions arose in Elam, he drove Merodach-Baladan from Babylon, taking the hands of Bēl as “lieutenant” (Iakanakhu) in a symbolic rite on the New Year’s Day of 709.
The campaigns against Rusas (Assyrian Ursa), king of Urartu, were more arduous. Well informed, S. hastened with great speed in 719 to the aid of the king of the Manneans, attacked by a coalition of Rusas, Mitatti of Zikirti, and Bagdatti (an Aryan name) of Ušdiš, the latter two being recent immigrants. The danger was more serious in 717: the king of the Manneans who had succeeded to the throne was defeated among the peaks of Sabend and on the shores of Lake Urmia, and his brother Ullusunu led the army to the aid of the Urartians, together with two other kings from regions still farther south. S., having arrived, crossed the high mountain of Sabend, surprised his opponents, took them alive, and flayed Bagdatti. Ullusunu, pardoned, was confirmed as S.’s vassal. The greatest battle, however, took place in 715, when Dajakku (the Greek Deiokes) conspired with Rusas and seized twenty cities from Ullusunu, now a loyal vassal. S. reconquered the lost cities and imposed a heavy tribute on the King of the Nairi lands (between Assyria and Urartu proper). Dajakku, captured with his family, was deported to Hamšli in Syria. S. struck the strongest blow the following year, in the celebrated “eighth campaign”: with his cavalry he reached the shores of Lake Urmia with unexpected rapidity and annihilated Rusas’s army. It was then easy, amid incredible devastation (S. had no thought of annexing territories), to invade Urartu more or less along the Tabriz–Van route. Without daring to besiege Turušpaš, however, he devastated the country as far as north of Lake Van; thus he weakened that land, already shattered by the Cimmerians. On his return he committed an act of hierosylia, stripping the rich temple of the enemy’s national god Haldi at Musasir: this scene is also handed down to us in a fresco from his palace at Horsābād. The ruler of Musasir, however, took refuge almost alone with Rusas, who died soon afterward. Under Rusas’s son, Argjatis II (714–c. 680), Urartu slowly recovered from its double defeat in the north and south of the country and Sennacherib (v.).
In the west S. confronted Phrygia under Midas, at the height of its power and allied with Urartu. S.’s systematic policy aimed at eliminating vassal kings and reducing the entire region to a system of Assyrian provinces. B. Landsberger believes that many of the “revolts” narrated in S.’s “Annals” were merely pretexts fabricated by S.’s highly active secret service; in this way S. is said to have disposed even of his most faithful vassals. S. established himself particularly in the mineral-rich Taurus, where in 718 he defeated Kiakki of Sinuhti and gave the country to Matti of Atuna (Tiana). In 715 he seized twenty cities in the Taurus that Midas had occupied. Other campaigns restored order or served to establish Assyrian provinces farther north: in Commagene, Melitene, and Comana. He dealt Phrygia the decisive blow in 711: the Assyrian governor of Quē (modern Cilicia) invaded Phrygia, which submitted; Midas paid tribute. On this occasion S. came into contact with the Greeks on the coast. He also subjugated Cyprus, as attested by a stele found there.
S.’s campaigns in Phrygia and Palestine, which are of closer interest to biblical history, are more controversial in many particulars. It seems that S. completed the siege of Samaria (722). Others doubt this, as does E. R. Thiele for chronological reasons; in a serious study, restoring the historical authority of the books of Kings, he maintains that Salmanasar V (v.) captured the city. The great deportation of the Israelites took place only after 720, when, apparently, Jaubi'di of Hamšli (a usurper who deposed Eniš, while remaining a faithful vassal of Assyria) attempted to imitate Merodach-Baladan, who secured victory at Dēr through the intervention of the Elamites. He allied himself with Hanunu of Gaza, and the rebels from the provinces already established joined him: Arpad, Simirra, Damascus, Samerina. The second battle of Qarqar then took place (for the first, in 853, V. SALMANASAN III), and, since Hanunu and the sib'e of Pharaoh Šabaka (who had then for the first time conquered the Egyptian Delta) had not arrived in time, the allies were defeated. The Assyrian army penetrated southward, into the Palestinian plain. Another battle was fought near Rapihu (Raphia): Hanunu was captured alive, while the sib'e of the pharaoh, having been defeated, withdrew into Egypt. With the campaign of 715 he seems to have wished to secure the Transjordanian commercial route as far as Yemen. S. received tribute from the Haippa, Tamud, Ibadidi, and Marsimani, from Samsi, queen of the desert region of northern Arabia, and from It'amar of Saba.
Another punitive expedition mentioned in the Bible was directed against a “Greek,” an adventurer from Cyprus, who had killed Abi-miti, a faithful tributary of S. It seems that Hezekiah, king of Judah, also took part in that revolt, along with Philistia, Edom, and Moab. Upon the arrival of S.’s turtana, Gath, Ašdod, and Ašdudimmu (probably the “maritime district” of Ašdod) fell. The “Greek” took refuge with the Ethiopian pharaoh, who, however, wishing to consolidate the Delta recently reconquered and not to spoil his good relations with S., sent him back to him in chains.
It is not without significance for the history of the future that this mighty King had to die on a military expedition, probably in Tabal, in the Taurus, where he clashed with Ešpai of Kullum, probably a Cimmerian chieftain (others think of the East). His reign, which initiated an entire age of splendor, including cultural, literary, and artistic splendor, raises an important question: perhaps, by continuing a policy of rapprochement with Urartu, he might have avoided Assyria’s tragedy. An age of prosperity and artistic taste has also been revealed to us by the ruins of Horsābād, brought to light by the Americans; it was the residence he conceived and perhaps also supervised in the details of its construction.