What are the perks of being the king, and what are the drawbacks? >> To be a king in Assyria meant to survive. First of all, to survive a coup d'etat and family struggles and family tensions. It also meant to be in line with the gods, which was always very difficult for all Mesopotamian rulers. And so they did their very best effort to keep it to provide the temple with a number of riches. And it also meant, for many of them, going on a military campaign every year, this was a real drawback. But Sargon, for example, died at 65. He died on campaign at 65, which proves that you can still do it. And that they did not die so early as we thought they did. >> Now, it's fascinating being the ruler of a large, large empire - having a harem of many beautiful women. On the other hand, you had many enemies, people wanted to kill you, even members of your own family. And your life was ruled by ritual and divination. I think the Assyrian king couldn't even go to the toilet before asking his astrologer whether it was favourable or not. And when it was not favourable, he had to perform a ritual. >> Well, obviously when you're the king of an empire, you can shape history. And Assyrian kings were certainly very much in charge, which they hadn't always been. It is interesting that when you look at the origins of Assyrian civilization in the early second millenium to realize that, at that time, the Assyrians rather had something akin to a mixed constitution with elements of an aristocracy and even some sort of a popular element in it. And at that time, the hereditary ruler wasn't even called king. So it is strange in a way that as the history went on, the Assyrian kings eventually became these enormously powerful rulers. But during the time of the heydays of the empire, they certainly were very powerful. They were very much in charge. So answering this question of what are the perks, if you like, to have an impact, certainly being an Assyrian king would have been the role for you because no one else at that time all over the world, I would say, would have had the same opportunities to shape things. At the same time, though, Assyrian kings weren't dictators. They were bound by certain rules, unwritten usually but still very much in place that limited to the ability that they had to change things. And I would say the straitjacket of these rules of course is almost a terrifying idea if you were king and you had to be in the straitjacket. You had to constantly conform to certain requirements this office would bring with it. >> I would consider the main perk of being the king surely the incredible wealth, the royal beauty and that sort of thing. Being able to kill whoever you want, potentially if you're into that thing could be a perk. And then in terms of drawbacks, I think of course the constant worry that someone in your own family was going to try to assassinate you is a drawback. But to me, worse than that is just the incredibly large amounts of bureaucracy that they had to deal with. If you look at the letters of Sargon II or Esarhaddon you really see that within the courts and then within the whole empire, there was really a lot of correspondence just constantly. And as someone who struggles to reply to six emails per day, I think that to me, that's a substantial issue. >> The seemingly unlimited power of the Assyrian king appears to be an advantage at the first glance. However, the great responsibility and the dangers and intrigues associated with such a powerful position are a burden. Thus, I don't want to be the Assyrian king. >> I would say that the perks would be to have the possibility of taste a lot of different foods and different spices that the other common people couldn't have access. So very tasty wines from the mountains. The region of Izalla in the north or Zamua. So having a lot of possibility of meals, let's say. And the drawbacks for me would be to be killed by a brother or dying during war. >> I think the perks clearly would be living in the utmost luxury with the finest of everything available at that time. Whether it's furniture with ivory inlays from Phoenicia, or exotic fruits and vegetables to eat. People to wait on you all the time and so forth. And the most comfortable housing, let's say, that probably that the world had ever known. >> A benefit would be that the king can influence intellectual and cultural activities such as creating a comprehensive collection of tablets, just as Aššurbanipal did. I would personally enjoy listening to my favourite good music all day long. >> One of the greatest advantages of being king of Assyria is you could travel wherever you liked in the known world, whether it was the Mediterranean or in the Zagros Mountains, Egypt or any other region. You could also have information about the world brought to you by your scientists and your explorers, and by the mapmakers of the Assyrian court. On the drawback side, you were constantly worried that you were doing something to offend the gods, which might result in a terrible disease or other affliction. And you were even more worried that you'd be murdered by members of your own court. >> The perks, I believe that would be getting whatever you wanted: the most attractive women, the biggest palace, the fastest chariot, and the best food and drink. The drawbacks, well, there are many: having the weight of the world on your shoulders and being responsible for everything all of the time. Moreover, having to watch your back because your friends, your family, your courtiers may decide one day they want to kill you because you're not doing a good job as king. The cons, they far outweigh the pros of being the Assyrian king. >> It seems like a perk to be the Assyrian king is that you basically were the head of a massive strong military machine that dominated much of the ancient near East. Not to mention, of course, you pretty much got whatever you wanted, whether it's food or luxuries, the best palaces - those kinds of things must've been quite nice for the Assyrian king. Of course, the drawback is maybe your brother might kill you. And some of your other relatives may stab you in the back and claim their rightful place to the throne. That could certainly happen. Not to mention you might die in battle at times, as certainly happened. So those could be the drawbacks potentially for the Assyrian king. >> It's a tough question. I think there’s a good balance between the perks and the drawbacks. The drawbacks are that you are never alone, that you are not your own person, that you can't do anything without consulting with your various advisors. The perks are a very nice life, obviously. And I suppose if you were born a prince, if you were in line for the throne, you came very well-prepared to the throne, so it wouldn't have been a huge challenge when you got to the throne. I wonder how people like Tiglath-pileser and Sargon managed, who were not raised as crown princes. And the sheer fact that there were usurpers seems to indicate to me that it was a desirable job after all, despite what we perceive to be this straitjacket of court protocol and court life. >> Well, I guess the main perk is you get to do whatever you want. You're an absolute monarch. No one's going to tell you, or well, I suppose they could try and tell you what to do, but you can do whatever you want. You'll have a fabulous palace, lots of servants running around for you. If you want to go out to the countryside, you go out to the countryside. You'll have a vast harem, so what's wrong with that? Drawback, well, there's a couple of them I guess. You're stuck with a lot of religious duties. And so you have to go through ritual purifications a lot, which could be rather boring I suppose. And I guess another thing wrong with, well, you're not going to have any chocolate back then.
