A period of peace ensued for the Egyptians, but the eastern Mediterranean was
beginning to get restless. The first indications of the Peoples of the Sea can be seen
in the sword-bearing Sherden who stood on Ramesses’ side at the battle of Kadesh,
but they were merely the first hints of the coming waves which would strike at Egypt
and the Levantine coast from the reign of Merneptah onwards.
Assyrian operations in northern Syria continued to menace the Hittites, but events
in the Levant meant that the Hittites were so weakened that Tukulti-Ninurta I was
able to turn his attention back to Babylon. While the Peoples of the Sea kept the
Egyptians, the Levantine states and the Hittites occupied, the Elamites were able to
pillage Babylon several times. Since Tukulti-Ninurta I was continuously campaigning
in both Syria and in areas to the east of the Tigris, this inevitably led to conflict
between the Elamites and the Assyrians, both directly, and indirectly through the
Assyrian appointed kings in Babylonia.
Thus far we can assert that the direct links between Babylon and Egypt were not
the most important aspect of the relationship between the two countries. Instead, it
was the regional policies of Egypt in Syria that had an impact on Babylonian activity.
The Babylonians and the Egyptians were each conscious of the existence and importance
of the other, but the relationship between them was nowhere near as important as
the repercussions of Egyptian policy on Babylonian policy.
THE IRON AGEThe situation changed radically in the first millennium BCwhen Egypt ceased to be
an independent power in world affairs. Before the end of the Bronze Age, the Egyptians
were retreating out of Nubia and abandoning Palestine. Henceforth, it would be the
Egyptians who would be responding to changes in the international environment.
For several centuries Egypt would be irrelevant to the constant conflict between
Assyria, Babylonia and Elam. The Babylonian respite at the beginning of the Iron
Age was due to the power vacuum created by the collapse of Egyptian power. The
Aramean and Neo-Hittite states of Syria managed to place the Assyrians on the
defensive as well, with the result that, rather than expanding south along the Levantine
coast after the reign of Tiglath-Pileser I, the Assyrians were making treaties with the
Babylonians and trying to defend their own territory. It would be centuries before
the Assyrians would renew their expansion, but this did not benefit the Babylonians
since they were under pressure from the Arameans as well.
Once the Assyrians were gradually able to overcome the Arameans and the Neo-
Hittites, Babylonia and Elam followed into the Assyrian fold as well – quite aside
from Egypt. The two invasions of Egypt were followed by a hasty withdrawal, forced
by a conflict with Assurbanipal’s brother in Babylon. Paradoxically, Assurbanipal
freed himself for expansion against Elam and Urartu when his Saite vassals established
their own dynasty. However, by the time that Esarhaddon had conquered Egypt, the
Assyrians were overstretching themselves. Although it effectively liberated Egypt
from foreign domination, and thus left Assyria a free hand to the East, the Assyrian
empire’s growth had exposed it to the growing enmity of the Medes.
Making common cause with the Medes, the Babylonians were able to contest
Assyrian power. In one of the most bizarre episodes of Egyptian history, this encouraged
the Egyptian pharaohs – who had been vassals of the Assyrians after the devastations
— Egypt and Mesopotamia —