Atarshumki I (also Bar-Guš) was the King of Bit Agusi in ancient Syria; he was the son of Arames. The capital of Bit Agusi was Arpad.
Like his father, Atarshumki was rebellious against the Assyrian supremacy. At that time, Assyria was ruled by Shamshi-Adad V and then by Adad-nirari III.
Atarshumki tried to build a coalition with his neighbors against the Assyrians; finally, in 796, Adad-nirari III launched a military campaign in the area, and subjugated it.
The Antakya stele ( de) is believed to belong to the later years of Adad-Nirari III. This is when the prominent official Shamshi-ilu, who is involved with the inscription, became active. Based on this, the inscription is believed to date in the 780s BC. [1]
"The Antakya inscription describes the interference of the Assyrian King in a territorial conflict between Atarsumki, king of Arpad, and Zakkur, king of Hamath ... At that time, both kings were vassals of Adad-nirari III ... the settlement was established in favour of the previously hostile king of Arpad ... The reason for preferring Arpad is clear: it had broken up the lines of the Syro-Hittite coalition, and opened before Adad-nirari III the way to the south, to Damascus." [2]
Atarshumki I (also Bar-Guš) was the King of Bit Agusi in ancient Syria; he was the son of Arames. The capital of Bit Agusi was Arpad.
Like his father, Atarshumki was rebellious against the Assyrian supremacy. At that time, Assyria was ruled by Shamshi-Adad V and then by Adad-nirari III.
Atarshumki tried to build a coalition with his neighbors against the Assyrians; finally, in 796, Adad-nirari III launched a military campaign in the area, and subjugated it.
The Antakya stele ( de) is believed to belong to the later years of Adad-Nirari III. This is when the prominent official Shamshi-ilu, who is involved with the inscription, became active. Based on this, the inscription is believed to date in the 780s BC. [1]
"The Antakya inscription describes the interference of the Assyrian King in a territorial conflict between Atarsumki, king of Arpad, and Zakkur, king of Hamath ... At that time, both kings were vassals of Adad-nirari III ... the settlement was established in favour of the previously hostile king of Arpad ... The reason for preferring Arpad is clear: it had broken up the lines of the Syro-Hittite coalition, and opened before Adad-nirari III the way to the south, to Damascus." [2]