Paper short abstract:

The Mediterranean was always perceived as a challenge by the Mesopotamian kings. Sometimes it was the last border, other times it was only a distant aspiration. Thus, how was it seen by Middle-Assyrian kings, who led an inland empire, but who were drawn to its shores?

Paper long abstract:

At least since Akkadian period the Mesopotamian rulers were drawn to the Mediterranean, the "upper sea". It was the final frontier whose control allowed kings to repeat the mythical deeds of Sargon of Akkad (c. 2340 BC), who accomplished the first unification of Mesopotamia.

During the second half of 2nd millennium BC, after gaining control of the Upper Tigris and Euphrates Assyria paid attention to its old southern enemy, Babylonia. However, the Mediterranean was still on its horizon, both symbolic and strategically. At same time, New Kingdom of Egypt and Hatti were battling for the dominance of the oriental Mediterranean coast.

Facing these two major powers, Tukulti-Ninurta I (1243-1207 BC) addressed the Mediterranean issue in a more subtle form, by trying to strength the ties with Ugarit and other Syrian cities. A century later, Tiglath-Pileser I (1114-1076 BBC) was favored by the fall of Hatti and the Egyptian retraction, which allowed a more direct approach. Phoenicians cities were conquered and the king promenaded through the Mediterranean sea. Soon after his death the Assyria kingdom entered a fast decline bestowing the "Upper sea" to its unreachable character, which lasted until the Neo-Assyrian Empire.

By analyzing royal inscriptions and other written sources we aim to identify the ways Middle-Assyrian kings acted upon the Mediterranean and its symbolic value, promoting a discussion about possible similarities with other Near-Eastern rulers.