TIGLATH-PILESER III. — Assyrian king from 745 to 727 B.C. (Assyrian *Tukkulti-apil-Ešarra* «My trust is the heir of Ešarra» or the warrior god Ninurta, of whom Enlil is the father [v.] under the name of Ešarra; Heb. *Tiglath-Pelšer* [2 Kings 16:7] or *Tilgath-Pilnēšer* [1 Chron. 5:6; 2 Chron. 28:20] or *Tilgath-Pilnēšer* [1 Chron. 5:26]). The true founder of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, «he may be considered the most notable figure in Assyrian history» (S. Smith).
Relatively few cuneiform inscriptions concerning him survive (editions: Luckenbill, Oppenheim), so that many details of his brilliant achievements remain obscure. In the year 1131 (the *jijār* of 745 B.C., during the revolts of Kalab), he inherited from his predecessors «a long series of disasters» and Assyria’s internal weakness. In the northeast and northwest, the hegemony of Urartu had been established; Sarduris II was recognized as «king of Syria» by vassal states; Aramaean and Chaldean tribes were infiltrating the south and Babylonia. Assyria was on the brink of ruin; in the cities, revolts followed one another among a largely unemployed population. T., a brilliant statesman, administrator, and also a military leader, quelled internal uprisings in 745. He launched a lightning campaign as far as the «Land of the Sea» (on the Persian Gulf), punishing and partially deporting Aramaean and Chaldean tribes; returning as «king of Sumer and Akkad», he secured the loyalty of Nabonassar, king of Babylon (748–734). With the south secured, he systematically and relentlessly undermined Urartian power. In 744 he conducted a campaign in the northeast, where he MEDINA (v.); a column even reached the Caspian Sea; he took particular care to procure good war horses.
In another campaign in the west (743–740), Mati’ilu of Agusi, who had fortified Arpad, was besieged (743); Sarduris came to his aid with a large army and many allied vassals; all were defeated by T. in the region of Kummub (classical Commagene), which forced the kings of Damascus, Tyre, Kummub, Quê (Cilicia), Gurgum, and Carchemish to pay tribute. The siege of Arpad fell in 740, and the city, its king, its people, and its gods were severely punished, so that later the Rabshakeh (v.) Sennacherib (v.) used this example to inspire terror (Isa. 36:19). In 739 T. prepared his blow against Urartu; he took the regions of Ulubu and Kirbi under direct Assyrian administration. In 738 he dealt with Azri’â, the usurper of the kingdom of Ja’udi or Sam’al, who led a coalition of 19 other rebel cities in Syria and Phoenicia. It is debated whether this Azri’â is identical with Azariah (or Uzziah [v.]) king of Judah; it is more likely, however, that they are different. Azri’â was defeated, and Panamu II, a loyal servant of T., who «ran (close) to the wheel of his lord’s chariot... among great kings» (inscription of Bar-Rekub, cf. B. Landsberger, *Sam’al*, Ankara 1948, pp. 68–72), regained possession of Sam’al. At this point, Rezin (or Razon [v.]) of Damascus and Menahem (v.) of Samaria also sent tribute, as did Zabibiah, queen of Arabia.
In 737 T. made another raid into Media to procure horses, pushing as far as the region of Tehran and Mount Demavend («lapis-lazuli mountain»). In 735 he marched on the capital of Urartu. Sarduris was defeated at the gates of Turušpaš (or Tušpaš), on Lake Van; but T. did not achieve a definitive success: the rocks on which the city was built were impracticable for siege engines, and the defenders were supplied by water.
The severe blow dealt to Urartu allowed T. to turn to the southwest: in 734 he marched on Gaza; he took Gezer (reliefs), after which Hanun of Gaza fled to Egypt. By occupying the region, he isolated the Palestinian and Cilician powers from Egyptian aid. He then exploited the situation reflected in Isa. 7 and ACAZ (v.), king of Judah, as reported in 2 Kings 16:7: Rezin of Damascus and Pekah (v.) or Pêqah of Israel had hemmed him in by besieging Jerusalem, to force him into their coalition. The Assyrian king did not delay in invading Samaria, conquering a great number of cities (2 Kings 15:27–30). At this point, Hoshea (v.) rebelled against Pekah, who fled alone but later returned to Samaria, where he was murdered by Hoshea. Hoshea was confirmed as king by T., but Galilee, the Plain of Esdraelon, and Gilead were taken from the Kingdom of Israel to form the provincial seats of Magidu (Megiddo) and Gal’aza (Gilead). With incredible devastation of the surrounding region, the fate of Rezin and Damascus was sealed the following year (732) when T. took the city: it was the end of Aramean independence. The impression was such that, upon hearing the news, Mitinti of Ashkelon went mad, and his son hastened to submit as a vassal. While T. held court in conquered Damascus, envoys from Tyre and Samsi, queen of the Arabs, arrived after suffering a raid. Even Ahaz (*Pauḥazi*), zealous for his lord and master, brought such tribute that he had to melt down the last metal ornaments of the temple and palace furnishings; he even opened Judah to Assyrian religious influence, as shown by the altar affair (2 Kings 16).
In Babylonia, however, a confused situation was developing after the death of Nabonassar (734). His son Nabu-nidân-zer was killed in 732, the second year of his reign, by the rebel Nabu-šum-ukin (who reigned in 731), who in turn was removed (730) by Marduk-mukin-zer (Assyrian *Ukîn-zer*), chief of the Bit-Amukkani, a Chaldean tribe. T. arrived in 729 and besieged Ukîn-zer in Sapia, his strongly fortified capital, the capture of which is uncertain. But at its gates he received the submission Merodach-Baladan (v.). At the Babylonian New Year, he led Bel in procession, thereby becoming, through this rite, king of that city under the name of *Phul* (v.).
T. was, in many respects, an innovator and reformer. He systematically prepared his enterprises. He improved the armament of his troops, making it lighter and more practical; he paid special attention to chariotry. The art of reliefs from his time onward shows greater realism and provides more landscape details. To unify his empire, he systematically transferred large portions of the populations of conquered lands; though he was not the first to use this method, it did not seem as strange in the Ancient Near East as it does to us (S. Smith): its purpose was to provide employment for the people, to reclaim the land, and to amalgamate the various peoples. T.’s administration, harsh in punishment but prudent in peacetime works, brought about a revival of industry and agriculture and took care of the fate of the transferred populations. Peoples were transferred, whenever possible, to regions where they shared a similar language, e.g., the Arameans of Damascus were settled among the Arameans east of the Tigris. Desert regions were reclaimed through irrigation, which allowed a certain prosperity for the settlers. Trade and industry also flourished in the cities of Assyria and between the various regions. It does not appear that patriotism suffered greatly: the fall of Nineveh in 612 did not occur because of betrayals by that heterogeneous population, which, with the exception of Babylonia, which became independent, fought to the last man.
— See pl. II.