Kingdom of Mannea Mannea
The historical territory of the state of Mannea
Capital	Izirtu
Religion	polytheism
Historical era	Antiquity
Today part of	Iran

History of Greater Iran
Pre-Islamic BCE / BC Prehistory Kura–Araxes culture c. 3400 – c. 2000 Proto-Elamite civilization 3200–2800 Elamite dynasties 2800–550 Jiroft culture Mannaea Lullubi/Zamua Gutians Cyrtian Corduene Bactria–Margiana Complex 2200–1700 Avestan period c. 1500 BCE – 500 BCE Kingdom of Mannai 10th–7th century Neo-Assyrian Empire 911–609 Urartu 860–590 Median Empire 728–550 Scythian Kingdom 652–625 Achaemenid Empire 550–330 Ancient kingdom of Armenia 331 BCE – 428 CE Seleucid Empire 330–150 Caucasian Iberia c. 302 BCE – 580 CE Greco-Bactrian Kingdom 250–125 Parthian Empire 248 BCE–224 CE Caucasian Albania 2nd century BCE – 8th century CE Roman Empire 27 BCE – 330 CE CE / AD Kushan Empire 30–275 Sasanian Empire 224–651 Afrighid dynasty 305–995 Hephthalite Empire 425–557 Kabul Shahi kingdom 565–879 Dabuyid dynasty 642–760 Bagratid Armenia 880s – 1045 Alania 8th/9th century – 1238 / 9 Kingdom of Georgia 1008–1490
Islamic Rashidun Caliphate 637–651 Umayyad Caliphate 661–750 Abbasid Caliphate 750–1258 Shirvanshah 799–1607 Tahirid dynasty 821–873 Dulafid dynasty 840–897 Zaydis of Tabaristan 864–928 Saffarid dynasty 861–1003 Samanid Empire 819–999 Sajid dynasty 889/90–929 Ziyarid dynasty 928–1043 Buyid dynasty 934–1055 Sallarid dynasty 941–1062 Ghaznavid Empire 975–1187 Ghurid dynasty pre-879 – 1215 Seljuk Empire 1037–1194 Khwarazmian dynasty 1077–1231 Sultanate of Rum 1077–1307 Salghurids 1148–1282 Ilkhanate 1256–1353 Kart dynasty 1231–1389 Ottoman Empire 1299–1923 Muzaffarid dynasty 1314–1393 Chupanid dynasty 1337–1357 Jalairid Sultanate 1339–1432 Timurid Empire 1370–1507 Qara Qoyunlu Turcomans 1407–1468 Aq Qoyunlu Turcomans 1378–1508 Safavid Empire 1501–1722 Mughal Empire 1526–1857 Hotak dynasty 1722–1729 Afsharid Iran 1736–1750 Zand dynasty 1750–1794 Durrani Empire 1794–1826 Qajar Iran 1794–1925

Manna(Akkadian: Mannai), Minni (Hebrew: מנּי)^[1] or Manas^[2] - b.c. IX century - b.c. In the VI century in the territory of historical Azerbaijan or north-west Iran (Azerbaijan (Iran)),^{[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]} on the shores of Lake Urmia, northwest of present-day Iran (or South Azerbaijan or Azerbaijanian Ostans)^{[11][12][13][14]} ancient state. The capital is Izirtu. Manna BC III millennium BC III - BC. The second millennium was the direct successor of the gutians, lullubi, turukkaeans tribes, other tribes and tribal alliances that existed in the region during the second millennium.^[15]

The state of Manna b.c. 615 - BC. It was annexed to Media between 613. Prof. G. Geybullayev notes that Manna is the first Turkic state in the history of ancient Turkic peoples.^[16] The history of the statehood tradition of Azerbaijanis begins with Manna.^[17][18]

Name

The name of Mannea and its earliest recorded ruler Udaki were first mentioned in an inscription from the 30th year of the rule of Shalmaneser III (828 BCE).^[19] The Assyrians usually called Manna the "land of the Mannites",^[20] Manash^[21], while the Urartians called it the land of Manna.^[22]

Describing the march of Salmanasar III in the 16th year (843 BCE), it was reported that the king reached the land of Munna, occupying the interior of Zamua. However, the chronicle does not mention any march or taxation on the state of Manna. It is possible that the Assyrians either failed to conquer Manna, or advanced only to the border of Manna, and then changed course and marched on the neighboring country of Allarabia.

In the Bible (Jeremiah 51:27), Mannea is called "Minni". The Jewish Encyclopedia (1906), identified Minni with Armenia:

"According to the Peshiṭta and Targum Onkelos, the "Minni" of the Bible (Jer. li. 27) is Armenia—or rather a part of that country, as Ararat is also mentioned (Isa. xxxvii. 38; II Kings xix. 37) as a part of Armenia."^[23][24]

However, it can also relate to one of the regions of ancient Armenia, such as Manavasean (Minyas).^[25][26] Together with Ararat and Ashkenaz, this is probably the same Minni from the Assyrian inscriptions,^[27] corresponding to Mannea. The name "Armenia" has been theorized by some scholars as possibly deriving from "ḪAR Minni," meaning, the “mountains of Minni.”

According to examinations of the place and personal names found in Assyrian and Urartian texts, the Mannaeans, or at least their rulers, spoke, a non-Semitic and non-Indo-European language related to Urartian, with no modern language connections.^[28]

Location

Their kingdom was situated east and south of the Lake Urmia, roughly centered around the Urmia plain in this part of what is today's East Azerbaijan province of Iran.^[29] Excavations that began in 1956 succeeded in uncovering the fortified city of Hasanlu, once thought to be a potential Mannaean site. More recently, the site of Qalaichi (possibly ancient Izirtu/Zirta) has been linked to the Mannaeans based on a stela with this toponym found at the site.

After suffering several defeats at the hands of both Scythians and Assyrians, the remnants of the Mannaean populace were absorbed by the Matieni and the area became known as Matiene.^[30][31] It was then annexed by the Medes in about 609 BCE.

S. Gashgay notes that according to the sources, it was possible to trace the strengthening of the Manna state and its historical geography to some extent. The land of Mes/s/i (Misi, Misu), inhabited by a knightly tribe (or tribes) engaged in horse-riding and camel-breeding, cattle-breeding and cattle-breeding, was of great importance. Messi is associated with Zamua, Maday, Gizilbunda and Parsua. Later sources indicate that this province was at the southern end of Manna, and Manna later occupied it and annexed it. However, Messi's rulers also tried to behave independently. The mountain fortress where the rebellious people of the province of Messi were hiding was named after Mesu Ashurbanipal. b. Draws in the 80s of the IX century.^[32] After this country Shalmaneser III, V Shamshi-Adad,^[33] II Adadnerari ^[34] marched. According to the Assyrians, the territory of this province was very large. During the reign of Manna, the province of Mississippi was annexed to Manna. Sirdakka (Zirdiakka) fortress was built on its border.^[35] Q.A. Melikishvili believes that the city of Meishta, occupied by this Menua mentioned in the Urartu inscription in Tashtapa, is located in the Mississippi area, and that its population is ethnically related to the Manna.^[36]

The kingdom of Allabria was of great importance in the Lake Urmia basin. Allabria was first mentioned in the middle of the ninth century. Salmanasar III reports that Allabria captured the fortress city of Shurdirra and its fortunes there. There is some interesting information about Allabria society during the reign of the reign of Janziburiash.^[37] Assyria later subjugated Allabria, although it is known that in the time of Sargon II Ullus of Manna persuaded Itti, the ruler of the country, to "serve Urartu" and Itti revolted against Assyria at his command.^[38] However, the anti-Assyrian coalition was shattered, and Tsar Itti and his family were exiled to the Syrian city of Amatia. During the reign of Belapaliddina, ruler of Allabria, they paid tribute to Assyria.^[39] Later, it was conquered by the Assyrians during the reign of Tsar Ahsheri or even a little earlier.^[40]

On the eastern border of Manna was the province of Gizilbunda, known as the "mountainous land."^[41] Already e. b. In the last quarter of the ninth century, the Assyrians visited this country. There was no unity among the rulers of Gizilbunda. While the rulers of different regions of the country tried to show mercy to Shamshi-Ada V (823-810 BC) by paying tribute, Tsar Pirishati continued to resist. The Assyrian ruler destroyed the land. He occupied the "fortified city" of the surrounding settlements, ""painted the streets of the city in the blood of his warriors, killed 6,000 warriors, and captured Tsar Pirishati alive with 1,200 warriors. He took captives, confiscated their property, wealth, and cattle. He plundered his cattle, his horses, and his innumerable things made of silver, pure gold, and bronze. He destroyed them, destroyed them, and set them on fire...""^[42] Although one of the inscriptions of Adadnerari III (805–782 BC) states that he, along with other countries,^[43] referred to "Gizilbundani to its limits", Gizilbunda retained its sovereignty, and even Sargon II calls " people who do not recognize dominance over their heads.^[35] Although some of the rulers of Gizilbunda paid tribute, the Assyrians were unable to subdue them completely.

Zikertu province is located in the modern Miyana - Ardabil city district.^[44][45][46] It is already mentioned in the sources as an area dependent on Manna. According to Sargon II, Zikertu was headed by a successor to the Mannaeans. This successor was probably Zikertu's own ruler, who depended on Manna and was confirmed by Manna. The province of Zikertu had its own "ruler city" in Parda. Zikertu's name is equated with the name of the Sagartis mentioned in ancient sources.^[47] Zikertu may have actually settled with the Iranian tribes at that time. This province is mentioned much later than the neighboring provinces mentioned in written sources 100–200 years ago. In the 3rd, 6th, and 8th years of his reign (719, 716, and 715 BC), Sargon II made military campaigns against Zikertu, who rebelled against the Manna ruler Aza. He reports the capture of three fortified cities, along with surrounding settlements, and the looting of the capital, Parda. Apparently the province of Zikertu was renamed Manna again by Sargon II e. b. He was subdued in 714 during the 8th march. During that march, Sargon II dealt a devastating blow to Zikertu, looting 13 of its cities and 12 fortified settlements with 84 surrounding settlements.^[48]

The most remote province on the eastern border of Manna was the province of Andiya, located in the lower and middle reaches of the Golden River basin. Andy's name is first mentioned in inscriptions dating to the end of the reign of Salmanasar III, whose troops marched on Andy and received tribute from the Andes.^[49] Adadnerari III also mentions Andia, which stretches as far as the "Great Sea at Sunset" among the occupied countries.^[50] This sea is considered to be the Caspian Sea.^[51][52][53] The state of Manna seems to have taken Andia back from the Assyrians in its heyday and brought it into its sphere of influence. During the reigns of Aza and Ullus, the Andiians, along with other provinces, rebelled against the Mannaeans in order to regain their independence.^[54] Sources mention Telusina, the ruler of Andijan. The island, which is considered Hurrian, and the province of Andijan, formed by the suffix Hurri-Urartu, belong to the Hurrian-speaking ethnic groups.

Among the provinces under Manna is the province of Uishdish (Assyrian - Uisdis, Urartuja - Ugisti), located in the territory of the modern Maragha region. Manna was his successor. The province of Uishdish, along with the provinces of Zikertu and Andiya, rebelled against Aza of Manna. However, with the help of the Assyrians, he was again subject to Manna. In the northeastern part of the Urmia Basin, Subi and Bari provinces were located on the border of Manna and Urartu. He was also called Sangibutu. From time to time, these provinces were subordinated to one side or the other.^[55] Sargon II mentions the well-fortified fortresses of Tarun and Tarmakis (Tabriz^{[56][57][58][59]}) in the province of Bari, rich in horse stables and barn-filled barns. was located on the border with.

Ethnicity

According to the Encyclopædia Iranica:^[60]

Manneans were a Hurrian group with a slight Kassite admixture. It is unlikely that there was any ethnolinguistic unity in Mannea. Like other peoples of the Iranian plateau, the Manneans were subjected to an ever increasing Iranian (i.e. Indo-European) penetration. Boehmer's analysis of several anthroponyms and toponyms needs modification and augmentation. Melikishvili (1949, p. 60) tried to confine the Iranian presence in Mannea to its periphery, pointing out that both Daiukku (cf. Schmitt, 1973) and Bagdatti were active in the periphery of Mannea, but this is imprecise, in view of the fact that the names of two early Mannean rulers, viz. Udaki and Azā, are explicable in Old Iranian terms.

According to the Archaeological Institute of America, 1964:^[61]

The Mannaeans, a little known people related linguistically to the Urartians and the Hurrians of northern Mesopotamia, were settled on the southeastern shore of Lake Urmia and southward into the mountain area of Urmia.

Population

According to written sources, from the territory of Urmia basin e. b. It is about the second half of the third millennium. The oldest ethnic name for the area is Guti. By the time they were first mentioned in the sources, a tribal union had already formed in the boxes, whose main occupation was cattle-breeding.^[63] İ. H. Aliyev belongs to the Kuti language to the Caucasian-Hurrian language group.^[64] İ. M. Dyakonov believes that the Kuti language could be, to some extent, close to the group of Elamite languages that spread throughout the province of Zagros. On the other hand, he thinks that the Kuti language is close to the Hurrian language, which has a complex phonetic structure.^[65] Subsequent research attributed it to the East Caucasian language family.^[66] Q.A. Melikishvili belongs to the "Zagrosh-Elam" group of the Kuti language.^[67] Acad. M. Ismayilov,^[68] Prof. Q. Qeybullayev,^[69] Prof. F. Jalilov^[70] and others consider the gutians to be Turkic-speaking.

Akkadian sources speak of the Lullubi tribes living in the southeastern provinces of Lake Urmia in the 3rd millennium BC.^[71] GA Melikishvili claimed that Lullubu and Elamite languages are related. He, in turn, considers the languages of the "Zagrosh-Elam group" to be close to the modern Caucasian language, but G. Geybullayev studied the Lulubi ethnonyms, theonyms and toponyms and suggested that they could be Turkic.^[72]

In the ethnic formation of the population of the Urmia basin e. b. The Hurrians, known since the end of the third millennium, played an important role. They spread over a wide area of Central Asia, from northern Mesopotamia and Syria to Lake Urmia. The Kur-Araz culture, which is widespread in the area, as well as in much of the Caucasus and northwestern Iran, is associated with the scattering of the Hurrians.^[73][74] We have received a large number of written monuments of different periods in the Hurrian language.^[75] Linguistic research in recent years has provided new evidence that Hurrian and the nearby Urartu language belong to the eastern branch of the North Caucasus.^[76]

E. b.c. At the beginning of the first millennium, the area south of Lake Urmia became known as Zamua.^[77] This name is considered a local name belonging to one of the Lullubi tribes.^[78] Later, mannai rose in those parts of the territory. Under this name, of course, separate related tribes are united.^[79][80] However, much later, even when the Manna state reached its peak, the area retained the name Lullubu. It was used as an archaic form in the Assyrian rulers' appeal to the oracles, or as a synonym when they described their military campaigns in the provinces of Urmia in a high style.

İ. M. Dyakonov refers to the population of the southern provinces of the Manna state up to the upper reaches of the Diyala River as the kuti - lullubi ethnic group, and the population in the upper reaches of the Diyala and Karkha rivers as the Kassi ethnic group.^[81] Mixi studied the materials of written and ancient sources. H. Aliyev e. b. It tries to justify the linguistic and ethnic-cultural closeness of the peoples inhabiting the territory of South Azerbaijan in the III-I millennia with the Zagrosh-Elam and Hurrian ethnoses.^[82]

R. M. Böhmer considers the population of Manna to be free. It gives a complete list of personal names and geographical names mentioned in the Assyrian and Urartu texts belonging to the state of Manna. Analyzing these names, he concludes that most of them belong to the Hurrians, some to the Kassis, and some to the Iranians.^[83]

Q.A. Melikishvili believes that the Hurrian elements, which advanced far to the east, existed among the population of the Zagrosh-Elam language group in the form of islands in the Mountainous Zagros. However, the influence of Hurri on the state of Manna can be traced to the names and toponyms of some of the Hurrian etymologies chosen.^[84]

Along with the Manna people, the majority tribe in Manna, there were other tribes, such as the Sunnis, the Taurians, and the Dali. However, signs of ethnic consolidation were already visible. For example, the king of Manna not only took care of the recapture of the lands conquered by the king of Urartu, but also tried to "return" the scattered manna to its place.

A study of the bone material found in Teppe Hasanlu in 1957–1958, as well as the material excavated by O. Stein in 1936, shows that the locals are mostly long-headed, Mediterranean-type. T. A. Ratbun concludes that for a long time the physical type of the population here was homogeneous and stable, and there was no sign of such a difference between the representatives of different cultures.^[85] R. Dayson is also of this type. b. At the beginning of the first millennium, in Teppe Hasanlu, Goytapa and so on. indicates compatibility with spreads. He notes that only e. b. In the ninth and eighth centuries, short-headed, even short-headed individuals began to appear in Tepe Sialk, as well as on the shores of the Caspian Sea.^[86]

Human images were found on various artifacts found during the Teppe Hasanlu excavations. It is found in pottery, seals, and a bronze support as a means of embroidering human figures. Their broad noses were flat on their foreheads, and their eyes were wide apart; they kept their short beards and long hair down to their shoulders. Based on the skeletal remains, W. Crawford concludes that they were of medium height (about 1.65 m (5 ft 5 in)).^[87] T. A. Ratbun shows a more accurate measurement: the average height of men is 1.68 m (5 ft 6 in), that of women 1.5955 m (5 ft 3 in).^[88]

History

The Mannaean kingdom began to flourish around 850 BCE. The Mannaeans were mainly a settled people, practicing irrigation and breeding cattle and horses. The capital was another fortified city, Izirtu (Zirta).

By the 820s BC they had expanded to become the first large state to occupy this region since the Gutians, later followed by the unrelated Iranian peoples, the Medes and the Persians. By this time they had a prominent aristocracy as a ruling class, which somewhat limited the power of the king.

Beginning around 800 BCE, the region became contested ground between Urartu, who built several forts on the territory of Mannae, and Assyria. During the open conflict between the two, c. 750–730 BC, Mannae seized the opportunity to enlarge its holdings. The Mannaean kingdom reached the pinnacle of its power during the reign of Iranzu (c. 725–720 BCE).

In 716 BC, king Sargon II of Assyria moved against Mannae, where the ruler Aza, son of Iranzu, had been deposed by Ullusunu with the help of the Urartians. Sargon took Izirtu, and stationed troops in Parsua (Parsua was distinct from Parsumash located further southeast in what is today known as Fars province in Iran. The Assyrians thereafter used the area to breed, train and trade horses.

According to one Assyrian inscription, the Cimmerians (Gimirru) originally went forth from their homeland of Gamir or Uishdish on the shores of the Black Sea in "the midst of Mannai" around this time. The Cimmerians first appear in the annals in the year 714 BCE, when they apparently helped the Assyrians to defeat Urartu. Urartu chose to submit to the Assyrians, and together the two defeated the Cimmerians and thus kept them out of the Fertile Crescent. At any rate, the Cimmerians had again rebelled against Sargon by 705 BCE, and he was killed whilst driving them out. By 679 BCE they had instead migrated to the east and west of Mannae.

The Mannaeans are recorded as rebelling against Esarhaddon of Assyria in 676 BCE, when they attempted to interrupt the horse trade between Assyria and its colony of Parsuash.

The king Ahsheri, who ruled until the 650s BCE, continued to enlarge the territory of Mannae, although paying tribute to Assyria. However, Mannae suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of the Assyrians around 660 BCE, and subsequently an internal revolt broke out, continuing until Ahsheri's death. Also in the 7th century BCE, Mannae was defeated by the advancing Scythians, who had already raided Urartu and been repelled by the Assyrians. This defeat contributed to the further break-up of the Mannaean kingdom.

King Ahsheri's successor, Ualli, as an ally of Assyria, took the side of the Assyrians against the Iranian Medes (Madai), who were at this point still based to the east along the southwest shore of the Caspian Sea and revolting against Assyrian domination. The Medes and Persians were subjugated by Assyria. However, the Neo-Assyrian Empire, which had dominated the region for three hundred years, began to unravel, consumed by civil war after the death of Ashurbanipal in 627 BCE. The upheavals in Assyria allowed the Medes to free themselves from Assyrian vassalage and make themselves the major power in ancient Iran at the expense of the Persians, Mannaeans and the remnants of the indigenous Elamites whose kingdom had been destroyed by the Assyrians. At the battle of Qablin in ca. 616 BCE the Assyrian and Mannaean forces were defeated by Nabopolassar's troops. This defeat laid open the frontiers of the Land of the Manneans which fell under the control of Media between 615 BCE and 611 BCE.^[89]

Period of small kingdoms

In Assyrian sources,^[90] the southern part of the Urmia region has long been known as Zamua. His name is first mentioned in the writings of Adadnerari II (911–891 BC) among the states he conquered.^[91] Already e. b. At the beginning of the ninth century, a union was formed here that encompassed the whole of Zamua, or in any case a large part of it, headed by Nur-Adad, the chief of the tribe of Dagara province.^[92] Dagara was a kind of gateway to the north-east and east of the province, so the Assyrians took a special interest in occupying it. BC Ashurnasirapal II (883–859 BC), who marched on Zamua in 881, reported that the Zamuls had built a defensive wall on the Babit Pass (now Derbent Bazian^[93]) to block the invaders. However, they were unable to prevent the invasion, and Ashurnasirapal II occupied the fortresses of Birutu, Uze, and Lagalaga in the Dagheran country, along with the surrounding settlements, seized a large amount of booty, and took captives. Nur-Adad strengthens his position by using the Assyrian attacks on the neighboring provinces of Daghestan and capturing the cities of Bara, Bunasi and Larbusa. However, the Assyrians won again, this time burning the fortress of Birutu.^[94]

BC In 880, the people of Zamua fought the troops of Ashurnasirapal II, who were marching again. By this time, Zamua was already headed by Ameka. Sources call it the "Tsar" and say that the capital is the city of Zamri.^[95] Ameka stubbornly resisted the invaders, but in the face of defeat, he left the capital, the "tsarist city" Zamri, and retreated with his army to the mountains of Etini. Although Ashurnasirapal II continued his persecution and devastated the country, he could not capture the tsar himself. It is clear from the inscription that Ameka took the opportunity to fortify her place on Mount Sabua. Apparently, Ameka's territory was quite large. The mountains of Etini and Sabua were far apart, for Ashurnasirapal had to cross the rivers Lallu and Edir, and the mountains Su and Elaniu. As a result, the Assyrians were unable to subdue Ameka. Although the book mentions the capture of Zamri's capital, Zamri, the fortresses of Arazitku, Ammaru, Parsindu, Iritu, and Suritu, along with 150 surrounding settlements, there is no information about a decisive victory over Ameka. The population retreats to the Aziru and Simaki mountains, consolidating their position in the city of Mesu.^[96][97]

Arashtua, the ruler of the fortified city of Ammali, joins Ameka against the Assyrians. According to the book, in addition to the cities and fortresses mentioned, several other cities and fortresses were occupied. These were the city of Kisirtu, ruled by Sabine, and the ten surrounding settlements, as well as the cities of the Bareanites ruled by Kirtiara. It is probable that they were also subject to Arashtua, for it is said in the book that Ashurnasirapal left the cities of Arashtua after these cities were plundered.^[98] However, it seems that Arashtua himself depended on Ameka, who was much stronger than him; the Assyrians only called Ameka "tsar." The spoils of war in the tsarist cities of Ameka were richer and more colorful than those of other cities. The Assyrians have repeatedly reported that Zamri had "his (Ameka's) property and possessions," many "copper objects, vases, utensils, copper glass, trays, gold-plated chests, the treasures of his palace, and the treasures he had amassed." held.^[99]

In addition to the city-fortresses in the Ameka kingdom, the presence of the "tsar" city, Zamri, and the highly developed professional arts seen in the descriptions and lists of captured booty show that a class society and early state structure emerged in the Zamua provinces. As Ashurnasirapal II stayed in the Zamua zone for a long time, he encamped there and periodically raided various cities in the Zamua area. The Assyrians established a province in the occupied part of Zamua and built the fortress of Dur-Assyria for permanent control. They later called this part of the country Zamua or Mazamua.^[101] The rest of the province was called Inner Zamua ( Zamua sa bitani ).^[102]

Nikdiara's name is again mentioned in the inscription of V Shamshi-Adad (823-810 BC) in the form of Macdiara^[103][104]. The book tells about the struggle against Mekdiara's son Sharsina. V Shamshi-Adad e. b. During his military campaigns in 821-820, he captured 300 settlements in Sharsina.^[105] E. ə. IX əsrdə Urmiyayanı rayonunun qərbində mühüm bir siyasi qurum çar II Tukulti-Ninurtanın (e. ə. 890–894-cü il) səlnamələrində adı ilk dəfə çəkilən Gilzan dövləti idi.^[106]

During the Ashurnasirapal march against Zamua, Gilzan Khubushkiya and Hartish, together with the 'countries, paid tribute to the Assyrians and prevented looting, destruction, and massacre130. The frequent marches of the Assyrian rulers on Gilzan show how important this country was to the Assyrians. The country was ruled by tsars. Here e. b. In the first half and middle of the ninth century, Asu and then Upu ruled.^[107][108] Asu, who ruled for a long time. b. In 856, Salmanasar III came to the forefront with his brothers and sons. This proves that Asu is no longer a tribal leader, but a sovereign heir. Despite the fact that Salmanasar III placed a stele of victory in the temple in Gilzan, the Assyrians did not plunder the country this time either. were content to buy.^[109]

At the end of the ninth century, the strengthened Urartu state occupied Gilza and annexed it.^[110] The above-mentioned institutions were not yet able to resist the Assyrian aggression; he was defeated and dependent on it. However, it was also possible for them to succeed in the fight against the Assyrians - Assyrian sources never report the victories of rivals. Joint speeches of some provinces, their long-term defenses e. b. At the beginning of the first millennium, the economic level that ensured the unity of the Urmia provinces and the possibility of independent military-political existence was already quite strong.

From Hasanli A typological comparison of artifacts found during the excavations, as well as a radiocarbon analysis, shows that most of the buildings in the ancient fortress were e. b. It shows that it was built in 1000.^[111] The city cuneiform found in Hasanlu has not yet been identified with any of the cities mentioned in the written sources. However, the excavations allow us to say that at that time there was a magnificent city-fortress in the area with high construction equipment and craftsmanship - this area is significantly developed culturally and economically. A comparison of archeological findings with the data of cuneiform sources shows that early state institutions were formed in the provinces of Urmia long ago.

Establishment of a centralized state

[[BC I millennium | BC From the beginning of the first millennium, as confirmed by written sources, the process of establishing a centralized state in the territory of present-day South Azerbaijan began. From the Mixe written sources, we know the names of various tribes, many small communities that gradually became dependent on their stronger neighbors. BC From the ninth century onwards, the kingdom of Manna began to differ in this area. Later, this state annexed all the territories of South Azerbaijan and actively fought against the invasions of Assyria and Urartu.

BC R. Girshman calls the beginning of the first millennium a dark period in the history of the Iranian plateau. BC The first centuries of the first millennium are characterized by the fusion of elements of different cultures from an archeological point of view, the emergence of new features in the manufacture of ceramics and metal products. In written sources, this is reflected in the names of individuals and ethnotoponymic names that appear in a language different from the languages ​​of the ethnic groups that previously lived here.

All these changes This was due to the "infiltration" of various ethnic groups - Iranians - into the area, which began to play an important role in the following centuries from the beginning of the first millennium. However, long before these events, BC. At the beginning of the first millennium, the formation of various associations in the Zagros region near Urmia paved the way for the formation of the first major political union - the Manna state.

The state of Manna was formed in an area with ancient traditions, in an area that was economically and culturally advanced for a large part of ancient history. Manna b.c. He was the direct successor of the Kuti, Lulubi and cassis, which existed in the region in the 3rd and 2nd millennia.

Udaki's attempts to centralize

When describing the march in the sixteenth year of the reign of Salmanasar III (843 BC), it was reported that the tsar reached the land of Manna, occupying the interior of Zamua. However, the chronicles do not say a word about the looting and occupation of Manna or the collection of taxes from it. Apparently, the Assyrians were unable to conquer Manna, or they only reached the borders of this country, and then returned and marched on neighboring Allabria. E. b.c. In the chronicles of 829, Manna is mentioned among the names of the destroyed countries.^[112]

Salnamasar III was already old, and this time the Assyrian army was led by Dayan-Assyria. It is written in Assyria:

I approached the mandala of Udaki. Terrified by the gleam of my weapon, Udaki of Manna left his tsarist city of Zirta to save his life. I followed him. I took countless cattle, sheep, and property. I have devastated and destroyed their cities, and set them on fire.^[113]

Despite the defeat, Manna did not give up. The Assyrians were content to seize the spoils. Beginning with the reign of Salmanasar III, cuneiform sources mention the names of the Manna rulers and their capital, Zirta (later known as Izirtu).

Iranzu's authority

After the ruler Udaki b.c. 737 in connection with the marches of Tiglath-Pileser III and Sargon II b.c. His inscriptions of 718 mention the ruler of Manna, Iranzu.^[114] Manna reaches its heyday, apparently at the beginning of the reign of ruler Iranzu and his own reign. We do not know the names of the predecessors of Iranzu, as the ruler of Urartu, who clashed with Manna more at that time, does not mention the names of the rulers of Manna in his inscriptions. They generally rarely name their competitors. However, the fact that Manna attacked Urartu at that time shows that Manna became stronger. This was due to the fact that the Assyrians did not conduct military operations in Manna. The Assyrian ruler Tiglath-Pileser III was already engaged in the struggle against the Assyrians, who greatly disturbed Assyria. III Tiglath-Pileser b.c. 744 and b.c. The analysis of I.M. Dyakonov's military campaigns against the Madais in 737 shows that the routes of these campaigns passed along the eastern borders of Manna, but did not touch its territory.^[115]

This indicates the existence of Manna as a military force, as well as its friendly relations with Assyria.^[116] Tiglath-Pileser III was also at war with Urartu at that time, and as a result of the weakening of the latter, Manna's condition was relieved.^[117] We can get an idea of the greatness of the state of Manna from the detailed information about the dependent provinces and the provinces under his control, which are trying to get rid of the control of Sargon II. Urartu apparently could not succeed with Manna on his own, and therefore sought support among the provinces that were subject to Manna and sought independence. The close cultural ties traced in the archeological finds in Nakhchivan and Manna suggest that at certain times the borders of Manna stretched north from the Aras River and that the Manna state covered a large area during its heyday.^[118] At the end of the reign of Iranzu, the position of the ruler of Manna weakened. Along with Zikertu province, the cities of Shuandaxul and Durdukka also oppose it. With the help of Sargon II, they were again subordinated to Manna.

The rise of Manna

The coming to power of the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III changed the political situation in Central Asia. His administrative and military reforms strengthened the Assyrian state, turning its army into an instrument of state aggression. He resumed traditional military campaigns to raise Assyria's international prestige. BC In 743, the Assyrians dealt a heavy blow to Urartu's armies, ending the Urartu kings' campaign against Manna. In the following years, new strikes on the Urartu lands put an end to the Urartians' interest in some of the provinces of Manna.^[119]

The hand of the rulers of Manna was opened. The heyday of the state began. The ruler of Manna Iranzu skillfully took advantage of the situation. He became close to the Assyrian king at a time when the Assyrians were overcoming Urartu. Taking advantage of this, he recaptured the provinces of Manna captured by Urartu. Manna was no longer far behind Urartu in military and economic conditions. Tiglatpalasar b.c. During the Medes in 737, Manna crossed only the southern mountains and did not descend to the lands of Manna in the Jagatu Plain and the valley of the Red River. The sources do not mention Manna among the countries occupied by Tiglath-Pileser. Apparently, the Assyrians did not want to gain another powerful enemy in the war with Urartu. On the contrary, Assyria and Manna were considered natural allies in the joint struggle against Urartu. The fact that Sargon II's writings refer to Tiglath-Pileser's personal meeting with Iranzu also shows this.

At the time of Iranzu, almost all the lands of South Azerbaijan were under his rule. Remote areas: Carall, Allabria, Andia, Zikertu depended on Manna and were considered his successors. Iranzu subordinated the Manna provinces to the central government and created a system of substitution in the country. In his time, the northern boundaries of Manna reached the Araz River, and the southern boundaries of Parsua and Media. Gilzan province, located west of Lake Urmia, also joined Manna. Thus, Manna was able to settle within the future Atropatena state, becoming one of the four great powers of the ancient East.

The strengthening of the Manna state in the time of Iranzu displeased some dependent tribes. They tried to leave Manna. There was ambiguity about Manna's foreign policy. The provinces that supported the policy of proximity to Assyria were in the majority. This political orientation protected the integrity of Manna and thwarted the desire for occupation in the Lake Urmia region of Urartu. At the head of these forces was Iranzu himself. He preferred the military-political power of Assyria and maintained allied relations with it. Regions such as Andia, Zikertu and Uishdish follow Urartu's conspiracy and try to unite at his instigation. The tendency of these substitutions to separate could break Manna's integrity.

Tsar Urartu I Rusa was able to raise Zikertu's successor Metattini against Iranzu. From 719 BC, the cities of Shuandahul and Durdukka in Manna revolted with the help of Metatti's infantry and cavalry. The Assyrian king Sargon II did not break his alliance with Manna. At Iran's request, he intervened and sent troops to help the ruler of Manna, who had weakened in the last years of his rule. Iranzu was able to suppress the revolt and subjugate those cities again. According to ancient union tradition, the inhabitants of these cities were sent to Assyria with their shaky possessions. In addition, the inhabitants of the cities of Sukka, Bala and Abitikna, which had a treaty with the Tsar of Urartu, were relocated to Syria.

See also

• History of Iran
• Median Empire

References

External links

• Mannaean glazed bricks from Bukan