585-580 BCE
Campaign of 585 BCE and a Look into the New Acquisitions of Assyria
After approximately three years of consolidation in Assyria, a new campaign was to be declared for 585 BCE. Assyria had recently launched two prior campaigns since the campaign against the Gaudamids. In 589 a campaign into Gerrha (now called Habaru) and Dilmun and then un 588-587 BCE, an unauthorized campaign to capture Ancrya by Kadashman-Shamash, the enforcer of Hatti. The acquisition of Ancrya, which was transcribed as Ankrutu, was unauthorized by the Assyrian state, but otherwise, supported, nevertheless. Sinbanipal made sure to not alienate the Field Marshal and his family and awarded Kadashman-Shamash with a necklaced gift.
Regarding the conquest in Arabia, this had been a relatively disheartening adventure. Adad-apal-Duranki was sent forth with the expectation that the Dilmun area would be of a great wealth and prosperity. The truth of its relatively backwards state had made the country relatively uneasy. However, it also asserted the true importance of the Assyrian monarchy in the maintenance of civilization.
“Without the care of the executor of the Great Gods, lands once devoted to the Great Gods, become a ruin and a pile upon which the unfaithful flock.” -Kalhu Codex referencing cryptically as always, the dilapidated state of Dilmun and the Akkadian world that once existed in the Persian Gulf.
Nevertheless, Dilmun was treated with great care. Dagon-Zakir-Shumi made the city a vassal realm under a priest named Sin-Gishru (Sin is the Bridge). Who ruled the city as a holy realm to the Great God Sin and dutiful vassal of Karduniash. The so-called High-Priesthood realm of Dilmun came to be a common vassal spoken of in the Assyrian court.
Dilmun itself from 587-580 BCE, would experience a level of migration to its city. From various venues, but most prominently from the Southern Protectorate and Karduniash. However, other amounts arrived in from the north, from Elamtu and Persia, where due to the recent tributary status of Persia, the country had gained a newfound interest in trade with Dilmun and vice versa. Yet, for the time being, Dilmun remained a relatively minor, yet over exaggerated city in Assyrian and Karduniash court documents.
Other new vassals in the Assyrian realm included Shamash-Makhir-Nisie, the governor of Elamtu and the Eastern Protector General, Dugalu-Kinutu-Assur. The Elamite governate under Karduniash from the year 589-584 BCE, was sometimes called, the merchant kingdom. The Elamite merchants had come to dominate society and pledged themselves in devotion to the Assyrian state. Likewise, a few Elamite noble houses readily assisted in governance of the realm. Elam’s main objective however was the following:
- The solidification of a local elite and ruling caste. This was being activated in Elam via the usage of the Elamite and Akkadian mercantile castes. In Elam, there had already been a faction of merchants and families who supported Assyria without much reservation. Merchants and the few remaining pro-Assyrian Elamite nobles formed this ruling caste and saw to the implementation of Elam into the overarching empire.
- The deportation of the Gambulu and Paqudu. Both Aramaic groups were required to be deported from the area. With their tribal leaders either killed or submitted, most of the Aramaen populace agreed to be lead forth. The Paqudu were split into four groups and the Gambulu were split into six groups, both composed of Karduniash and Elamite Gambulu-Paqudu. Shamash-Makhir-Nisie was ordinated with the responsibility to deport these groups out of his realm, upon which the general officials, that is the army would lead them to destinations.
- These groups of deportees from Gambulu and Paqudu were called new terms by the Akkadian records. From 588-577 BCE, they were near fully deported from the region. Of the six groups of Gambulu, one group was sent to Dilmun where they were to be used as levies and labor to build a new temple. Another group was deported to the Southern Protectorate Two of the six were then distributed as rimutu slaves to be sold in the city of Nineveh. Finally, the last two were given as rimutu to Urartu in the year 585 BCE as part of a gift process. Regarding the Paqudu, three of their number were sent to the Eastern Protectorate and the remaining tribe of Paqudu were sent to the Tabal mountain ranges to the city of Habaru.
- Finally, a process of restoring the Elamite economy and harvest was in order. Shamash-Makhir-Nisie implemented this by attempting to increase the population. Slaves were purchased on credit in bulk from the Assyrian state. These were primarily peoples from the Median realm, a melangue of different folk. However, more controversially, the Elamtu governor began permitting the transit of Persian farmers into his ream. The desolation of the land beckoned to a new number of Persian farmers arriving and settling the land. Likewise, Chaldean tribes moved in beginning around 582 BCE, inhabiting some areas in the west of Elam. Other matters of the economy was the city of Susa, a pile of rubble surrounding the palace and a few residential districts and a major ziggurat. The governate however, lacked the revenue to rebuild for the moment.
In the realm of the Eastern Protectorate, peace with Elma to the south garnered for it a trade link of great value. Media as a whole, now called Marhashi, was not as devastated as Elam. The area was more resilient likewise, and able to recover some revenue. Kassite tribal elites filled the halls of powers as advisors to the Protector General of the east, as did returned Median informants. Yet, the Marhashi region, alongside Parthia, called Partushi, were undeniably being treated as little more than Akkadian states.
Assyrian appointees were made the ruling power brokers in the area and taxes were collected by Assyrian appointed officials from the capitol, who collected a regular tax on tribal estates throughout the region. In Partushi, Ipanqazzu maintained a rule there, but appointed several eunuchs to rule the region as underlings for the Eastern Protectorate. Cimmerian interest, however, was made the most important voice in the appendage of the Protectorate, due to their immense importance for the military viability of the ‘eastern shielding’ of the empire.
Partushi itself was already inhabited by a semi-sedentary population of Parthians, who were reliant tributaries of the Assyrian ruling elite. Interspersed amongst them now, was a farming population of new Paqudu and then a semi-nomadic population of horse-breeding Cimmerians. The newcomers were held in line by the Assyrian military presence in the region, which was for the time becoming truly overstretched in the east, for the time being, Assyria had no capability to expand east, even if inclined to do so.
Drangiana for its part, had come under the soft influence of Parsa, which claimed to lord of the area as tributaries of the Great King. Nevertheless, in the year 585 BCE, Cyrus I of Persia died of an unknown reason. He was succeeded by Cambyses I (Kabūǰiya I, Old Persian and Kabūǰitin in Neo Elamite), who reassured the assigned qepu in Anshan of his fealty to Assyria. Persian under Cambyses I saw the kingdom reach an accord with Assyrian from 585-579 BCE, as Persian began to benefit as the exterior realm of the Assyrian state. Such benefits culminated in the fifth year of Cambyses I, the construction of a new wall in the city of Anshan to the Elamo-Persian god, Humban the god of the sky. Such a wall was the second great wall to be risen in Anshan, wherein Cambyses I claimed to have made the city impregnable to all assaults.
Cambyses I thus in his first five years, was known as a great builder and skillful in the ways of economics, he nevertheless was noted for his disinterest in military affairs and relative submissiveness to the local qepu from Assyria. Tribute to Assyria was paid consistently by Cambyses I annually to the Eastern Protectorate and Karduniash. In the form of the Eastern Protectorate in a loan of soldiers but to Karduniash in the form of silver shekels, which were the recently adopted currency by Cambyses I in the year 581 BCE. Such a submissive attitude, for the time drew no ire from the public, for Assyria was ascendant, the Medes were a past thought, the Persians had gained considerably and a greater amount of transit into Elam was permitted through the healing of war wounds. Yet, the Persian kings of late, came from warriors and conquerors, it was not their way to remain servile in perpetuity.
To the north of Assyria, the land of Bianili under Rusas IV was in a stagnant yet improving phase. Wars and scars from the wars with the Scythians and to a lesser degree, the Colchis kingdom, had left a void. Many peasants had fled in the wars into the hills of into Assyria. Traditionally, the custom in the royalty of the Biai, was in times of great strife, their royal class fled into either the Zagros mountains or into Assyria, especially the city of Musasir, a Hurrian speaking city in Assyria that the Biai royalty considered their hometown. However, some three decades since the harrowing fall of the kingdom and the peasant rebellion, the kingdom was improving steadily. With most peasants having returned to their fields by 609 BCE. In 588 BCE, a large group of Gambulu were given as rimutu to the Biai and were put to work in the field and or into guard positions in the army. Rusas IV also gave a percentage of the Gambulu to the temple of Shivini in the city as an appeasement to the god of the sun.
Traditionally, the Kingdom of Biai, was a Trinity styled kingdom. Worshipping three gods as the supreme aspects of the Divine Pantheon. Those three were the gods Teshub, the thunder god, Shivini, the god of the sun and Khaldi, the god of war. Shivini, being the patron god of Tushpa and of the Biai kingdom in general, whilst the god Khaldi was the personal god of the monarchs and of the Hurrian populace in northern Assyria. Teshub by contrast, was the supreme god of the nearby Anatolian peoples to the west, especially in the Luwian countryside.
In the tail-end of 586 BCE, Maniuqappu and Sinbanipal deliberated on future campaigns. It was dictated therein, after discussion, that two campaigns would be waged in 585-584 BCE. The first, would be designated to Rusas IV, who was to resume a hot war with Colchis beginning in 585 BCE, with the assistance of Assyrian resources and mercenary from the deportee population. In coordination, Dugul-Naboo was instructed to return to Hatti and work alongside Rusas IV, oversee both the unfolding situation in the west and north. The second campaign would be a southern invasion that would be led personally by Sinbanipal alongside Southern Protector Kanapalsuhu-Marduk. The goal seemingly to subdue the Ahsa, acquire tribute from the Arab tribes of the interior and then return to the border of Egypt and demand tribute once more from Egypt. This thus would complete the southern section of the four-corner goal of Sinbanipal. The Nippur Correspondence explains:
“The Great King, eponym 4353 was instructed by the Great Gods, to bring ruin upon the four corners in a consecutive series of movements. In the year of his 18th year of reign, the Great King commissioned a great expedition south to conquer the Arabs and subjugate their hills, mounds and beasts of burden.” -Nippur Correspondence.
Sinbanipal by this point, was aged 29 in the year 586 BCE. His reign had been 17 years of hegemony for Assyria after a short break from 602-598 BCE. From 598-586, the empire was truly hegemonic in the region. Sinbanipal was by this point an ambitious king who attempted to emulate his father in what ways that he could. Sinsharishkun was a famed and renowned fighter, a battle king. Sinbaniapal in contrast, resembled more Assurbanipal in war, he was content with remaining at home, directing battles from a distance or otherwise using his generals to launch most campaigns. Much of this was his personality, later Nippur articles describe Sinbanipal as being somewhat fickle in warfare, that is, he frequently changed his mind and was arbitrary. As such, planning intensively prior to campaigns and permitting campaign flexibility to his generals and subordinates, permitted much of this fickleness to be dealt with. Yet, the Nippur articles also described this as a strength, for Sinbanipal was unorthodox.
Later Akkadian scholar, Ilawela-urkutu-Duranki (Ilawela is the rearguard of Duranki) said as such:
“The Kings of old who serviced the Family, were Lords of Battle. They threw themselves into the pits of battle as a lion sets himself upon a bison. They fashioned themselves as lions, men of renown who hunt their prey. Later Kings, Assurbanipal among others took caution and held back from the lines, preferring the life of a palace, the cushion of a couch and the vices of Dagon, without the duties of the Great God who provides…. Sinsharishkun returned to the field of battle, they say he covered himself in blood upon the field and led his cavalry with sword and bow in hand, a man of war. He too was decisive, yet not innovative or abstract…. The son, Sinbanipal, the Great Elder Brother King, took initiative as the lesser and held planning and unpredictability as his mantra of choice.” -Narration of the Generals
An example of such unpredictability is Sinbanipal often extending his armies to the four corners, on small incursions and raids. In prior years, states around Assyria expected yearly campaigns, but not necessarily consistent often unwarranted raiding strikes by hyper mobile forces. Assyria under Sinbanipal from 594 BCE onward, was engaging often constant war with its neighbors who were not subjugated, much of which was perpetuated by the aggressive toning that Sibanipal ushered into his reign. This, however, came at the cost of resources in totality and a greater extending of Assyrian armed forces out of concentrated zones and into a more dispersed field of operation. Likewise, Assyria had become fully reliant upon its vassals surrounding it to act as buffers for which Assyria could use as its vehicles for constant expansion. The creation of protectorate style politics by Sargon II and then perfected by Sinsharishkun and finally realized by Sinbanipal, was perhaps the greatest boon and remaining constant in the wider Akkadian imperial project moving forward.
Protectorate and dual-monarchy based politics however had delegitimized the provincial system of Tiglath-Pileser III and Sinnacherib. Currently, Assyria possessed a provincial system, but only for those lands ruled outside of Mesopotamia, mostly referring to Syria. Otherwise, all of the ‘yoke of Assyria’ was ruled by the direct Assyrian government and its bureaucrats without excessive usage of provinces. The result of this, was a marked decline in tax revenue internally in Assyria, where taxes were less strictly observed. In fact, from the reign of Assurbnipal, there is a decline of 29% in revenue acquired through taxation. Thus, Assyrian revenue in this reign relied upon tributes paid by Protectorates and from the vassals. But even more importantly through that of looting. Looting, tributes and state monopolies made up 59% of all of Assyria’s revenue. While taxation made up a 39%, primarily the land tax and the customs duty. This made Assyria even more reliant on warfare and less substantial in a civil sense.
Nevertheless, Sinbanipal implemented in December of 585 BCE, a series of edicts revolving around vassals, protectorates, war, and looting. This edict, preserved in the Nippur Correspondence, stipulated the following:
- The creation, effective immediately of a hereditary estate in Hatti to be bestowed to the family of Dugul-Naboo, who will inherit the governate as if a landed estate. This would be the first implementation after 45 years in office, of Maiuqappu’s dream of extending noble privileges and rights beyond Assyria proper.
- All Protectorates and vassals would be distributed a seal with which they could wage war on all realms outside of Assyrian zones. For this matter different seals were to be constructed.
- The seals of the realm were to be the following:
- -Seal of the Great King
- -Seal of the King of Karduniash
- -Seal of a Protector General
- -Seal of a Mandated Expansionary realm
- -Seal of a Vassal without expansion privileges
As outlined by the Nippur Correspondence, and the Assyrian court registry, the difference was simple. Vassals were granted the ability to expand in the name of Assyria if they possessed a seal permitting such. The seals given them, would double as the seal for which other peoples would be forced to submit to in event of conquest. However, seals used by vassals without privileges, were simply signs for which they could use to display submission to Assyria. The court registry in Kalhu describes these states as receiving Expansionary Realm privileges:
Parsa
Judah
Tyre
Sidon
Byblos
All Protectorates
Thus, leaving out Moab, Elam, Marilik, the rest of the Phoenician cities, and so forth. This policy affirmed the trends in Assyrian politick under Sinbanipal. It did not however sit well apparently among the Kalhu scribes who wrote polemically about the situation in later eras.
“The Great King wages war with the leave of the Great Gods alone…” -Kalhu Codex
Ultimately, arch conservatives disliked the conception of a war as not decided upon directly by the Great King, but instead permitted to subordinates. Nevertheless, it is an aspect that the Nippur Chronicles lauded as an effective strategy for which to apply pressure on exterior realms and also ensure Assyrian integrity on all fronts. Maniuqappu can be credited much for the development of this strategy in addition to the unorthodoxy of Sinbanipal.
The Resumption of war in the Mountains
Rusas IV, now around the age of 41, had already made himself a new crown prince a certain Ishpuini of the age of 20 years. Rusas IV, gathered an army and began to launch counter raids against Colchis in the Spring of 585 BCE. Already, Colchis subordinates had been attacking the Urartu frontiers on occasions, especially during the harvest. The Urartu response was simply to hold their mountain garrisons and stop advances. Now however, Urartu/Biai was instructed to overly conquer and destroy Colchis.
Colchis, then under Zurab I, was while a sparsely populated country, was not to be trifled with. Their armies were disproportionately large and Zurab I, who referred to himself as ‘the great mountain’ was a fearsome general, who in a short pan of time, had carved a kingdom out of the hills and mountains of Iberia, Colchis and Barbashru. In 588-587 BCE, Zurab I had struck the Cimmerian tribes in the Pontus, inflicting wounds on them and gathering tribute from their tribal elites. Zurab I had also campaigned in 586 BCE into the far north, capturing lands beyond the mountain covers along the Black Sea Coast, gaining formal envoys from Greek merchants at Bospora and from the Scythian tribes to the northeast. Zurab I was around 63 years of age and his son, Zurab was 35. His son Zurab was stationed at the time of 585 BCE north of Pityus along the northern Black Sea coast, where he was ruling as lord. Zurab I however had returned to the capitol of Aia (Kutaisi) when news had arrived to him of a new series of Biainili attacks upon Barbashru and Iberia.
Zurab I responded to the attacks by raising his army back in Colchis and seeking a coalition army alongside his tribal allies, in accordance with the Caucasian warlord system. This war in the north would begin in earnest with Rusas IV setting forth with an army from his kingdom and funding from Assyria. Additionally, several mercenary bands hired in the campaign to capture Dilmun were hired by Sinbanipal and loaned to Rusas IV.
Initial movements by Rusas IV were more conservative than the prior campaign by Sinbanipal. Rather than sweeping the field with a large force, Rusas IV, sought to use his resource advantage and attempt to slowly grind the numerically inferior Colchean kingdom into the dust in a slow moving invasion over the Barbashrru, and into Colchis proper. Zurab I however sought to counter the Biai advance and then counter the enemy. In recent years, Zurab I had developed a strong character and authority as warlord over his kingdom. This necessitated clear victories over enemies and display of dominance. Rusas IV required no such achievements in the current moment, he also was not given a specific timetable for which to complete his war.
Early attacks thus resembled a series of organized raids and coordinated sustained tactical attacks upon fortresses. Zurab I and his army arrived in Barbashru and engaged in defending their territory and attempting to counter the raids with his own attacks. For the majority of 585 BCE, both armies, according to accounts, ‘stood parallel, neither wishing to engage until an opportune moment.’
Rusas IV, held the advantage in terms of quality soldiers. His forces were some of the most well equipped in the world for the period and his cavalry were extremely skilled. However, Zurab I compensated for this by excessive numbers. The mountain hill folk often could raise very large armies at short notice for defensive measures. Likewise, militia remained a common stay for the peoples of the hill country. This was something however that Rusas IV knew well how to deal with. Using his cavalry only to harry enemy villages and attack supply lines, whilst using his infantry as shock troopers and soldiers intent upon breaking militia and then fleeing back into the cover of larger forces, provided a series of fear inducing auras upon the Colchean army.
Zurab I thus as 585 BCE waned, resolved to induce a confrontation in 584 BCE. In the cover of winter, Zurab I gathered most of his force and rose more levies and impressed tribal warriors into his army and attacked deep into Biai in the month of February 584 BCE. Zurab I brushed aside the enemy raiding parties and struck Biai at Delibala. This forced Rusas IV to muster his army at Erbouni and strike a decisive blow. Such blow came near the cities of Aanshi and Alashkerti. Therein, Rusas IV and Zurab I fought a famed battle The battle near Anashi saw Rusas IV gain a decisive victory over Zurab I. Defeated in battle, Zurab fled north. Several of his lords too were slain in the battle. Supposedly, the Biai heavy infantry were able to break the enemy ranks alongside a concerted series of cavalry charges supplied by javelins and horse archers newly adopted by the Biai.
Rusas IV pushed ahead this time, sweeping the Barbashrur tribes before his formidable army. This quick movement however led to several ambushes and significant casualties. Likewise, a Cimmerian warlord named Dandashmatu entered the Colchis kingdom with a force of some 12,000 warriors from Pontus, attacking and raiding the Colchean kingdom. Rusas IV remained however remained conquering the Barbashru from March until September, when Rusas IV pushed into Colchis proper. Dandashmatu had already pushed northeast, raiding and pillaging across the country. The Cimmerian lord reached the city of Pshizi along the Black Sea coastline, the port city of Aia. There, the Cimmerian lord was engaged by Zurab I, who defeated him in battle and dispersed the Cimmerian raiders, who fled back towards Pontus. However, shortly upon their flight, Rusas IV had entered the edge of Aia. There, Zurba I set a defense and blocked the advance of the Biai army. Likewise, Iberian raids cut deep into Barbashru, slowing the advance of Rusas IV, the delay of Rusas IV would last until November, when Rusas IV, fully gathered and joined by reinforcements, invaded Iberia. Rusas IV intended with the invasion of Iberia in late 584 BCE, to draw Zurab I out of Aia and also to frighten the Iberians from impeding his advance northward.
Zurab I did not leave Aia however. Word had reached him of disturbances and renunciation of his fealty ties by the Iberian lords. Hoping that Biai could clean up his foes while he gained a new army, became Zurab I’s plan. Zurab I ordered his crown prince, Zurab to travel to the Don river, where he was to meet the Scythian and Budin nobles, so as to gain their alliance. At the time, there was several Scythian noble clans ruling on the Don and the south of the Don. The Budin tribes, a branch of the Scythians, resided just north of Colchean spheres of influence in modern Circassia, called in Assyrian sources as ‘Budirbutishu’ (the barren land of the Budin). Zurab travelled to their realm in January of 583 BCE. Prthtuva ( Pṛθ-tuvā) was the lord of the Budin at this time who met with Zurab. Apparently, according to the Kalhu Codex, the Budin lord agreed to assist Zurab. And marched southward with him to crush the expansion of Assyria before it reached the steppe region.
The Fall of Zurab I and the rise of a new king.
As prince Zurab and Prthuva marched south to deal a blow to the Biai army, Rusas IV had turned his attention to Aia, after failing to bring out the Colchean king. Rusas IV set siege to Aia in late January and by the first week of February, had broken the walls of the mountain city. A furious battle erupted in the small city. Zurab I had held firm in the city and marched out with his men, aged 65 to do battle. House to house battles were occurring throughout the city as fires sparked across the residential huts dotting the city. After three days of gruesome fighting and bloodshed, Rusas IV had emerged victorious. Zurab I was searched for by captured soldiers from the city guard, who found his body amongst a pile of dead near the city shrine to god Armazi. Rusas IV, had the body beheaded and placed into a box to be sent to Nineveh.
Rusas IV placed a garrison in the city and sent word alongside the head of Zurab I, to order a garrison force of Itu to be given to his new acquisitions. Rusas IV then marched to Pshizi where he took the city without much resistance. After said capture, Rusas IV dispatched word Dugul-Naboo to deal with the Pontic Cimmerians who after the death of Zurab I, had been creeping back into Colchean territory. Yet, much of this was in vain, for Zurab the prince returned in the month of May with an army of 30,000 Scythian warriors and 5,000 Colchean noble levies. Prince Zurab marched straight southward toward Aia. Rusas IV, turned north to face him, near the meeting point of the Pontic steppe and the Caucasian mountains, near the town of Pitsunda. Therein, Zurab the prince of Colchis, inflicted a grueling defeat upon Rusas IV, slaying him in battle and routing the Biai army, which fled south into Aia, where it was reorganized by Ishpuini, the prince of Biai, who retreated from Aia and marched to Tsunda in Barbashru. There, he ordered his forces to protect the town and appointed a general to oversee his army while he travelled in haste to Tushpa to be crowned king of Biai and request an aid from Assyria.
Zurab for his part re-entered Aia as a vanquisher of Assyria and was crowned king, Zurab II. His first priority oddly, was to assert his status as warlord. Zurab II thus attacked the Baiai at Tusnda and cut a portion of their numbers inf a first series of attacks from June to July, where in early July, the Biai army, despite wishes from Ishpuini II, retreated south and fled most of the Barbashru. Only the southern sectors of Barbashru remained in Biai hands, due to occupation of the many hill forts in the area. After that success in middle 583 BCE, Zurab II would spend the rest of 583 rebuilding his army and paying back the Budin allies of his, by permitting them to raid and pillage as they please across the region, aside from his capitol district of Aia. Zurab II invaded however with a new army of 14,500 warriors into Iberia. There he subjugated the recalcitrant lords of Iberia, which had all resubmitted their fealty to Colchis by 582 BCE. Zurab II followed up by making more advances upon Biai, which was still reeling after the loss near Pitsunda, by pushing them from Barbashru entirely and proceeding to raid across northern Biai, alongside their Budin allies.
In March of 582 BCE, with new resources and a hastily formed army, Ishpuini II was able to stop the Budin horde near Erbouni, setting the border there for the moment. Later in 582 BCE, Zurab II pushed eastward, conquering along the Kura river until his broder reached the Caspian Sea. In that critical juncture, Zurab II, had turned chaos into a massive conquest, yet it was mainly due to his assistance from the Budin and his own excessive military talent. The Karas river acquisitions that he gained were only loosely controlled as a series fo tribute paying tribes, who feared Assyria and Biai. They were attacked so as to assure Zurab II had a means by which to freely travel to then attack Zagalu, which was done in the winter of 582 BCE, leading to a failed siege and a hasty retreat by Zurab II. The throne and territorial expanse that Zurab II was holding would eb tested in time.
For the entirety of 581 BCE, Zurab II spent his time consolidating his realm and gathering tribute to pay to the Budin tribe had migrated back to their lands. The tribute to the Budin and the fame of victory in the south, inspired a greater number of Scythian and Budin warriors to travel south in mercenary bands and bands of raiders and warriors. Most of whom funneled in beginning in the 581 BCE return of Prthuava. These bands were used by Colchis as hired warriors, but most of these groups either moved toward Pontus, or toward the Assyrian empire. Smaller bands though, took to robbing and banditry, forcing Zurab II into a position as a weak king, refusing to enforce law and order in his realm for fear of angering his new patron.
In fact, as of 581 BCE, Colchis became a firm tributary of the Budin Scythians as repayment for restoring their crown. Yet, the matters and relations between the two are openly hostile, if not undeniably close.
-----------------------------
This will come shortly in a few days with a post on the same years for Arabia, Egypt, etc... and then following that, an update for the same years on other areas of the world.