When he agreed, she had him executed and seized the crown for good (349).
After his death, she seems to have continued to lead such campaigns herself, although this, like much else in her reign, has been questioned.
This theory is contested, however, and there are those historians who claim Sammu-Ramat had nothing to do with the later figure of Semiramis and even those who claim that Sammu-Ramat never ruled as regent.
The historian Wolfram von Soden, to cite only one example, writes, “That Sammu-Ramat, the Semiramis of Greek literature, was temporarily regent after 810 BCE cannot, however, be proven” (67).
According to contemporary records, she had considerable influence at the Assyrian court” (155).
This would explain how she was able to maintain the throne after her husband’s death.
Women were not admitted to positions of authority in the Assyrian Empire, and to have a woman ruler would have been unthinkable unless that particular woman had enough power to take and hold it.
This, however, is precisely the problem with Sammu-Ramat’s reign: there is very little information about what she did and how she went about doing it and some scholars refer to her simply as “an obscure Assyrian lady of the eighth century B. of whom we know nothing for certain except that she is named on an inscription as lady of the palace” (rbedrosian.com, 2).
Shamshi-Adad V took his father’s side and crushed the rebellion, but this took him six years to accomplish.
By the time Ashur-danin-pal was defeated, much of the resources which Shamshi-Adad V would have had at his disposal were gone, and the Assyrian Empire was weakened and unstable.
A woman on the Assyrian throne: it had never been done before, and Sammu-Ramat knew it.
The stele she built for herself is at some pains to link her to every available Assyrian king.
Their successful reigns and military campaigns would have provided Shamshi-Adad V with the stability and resources to begin his own successful reign had it not been for the rebellion of his older brother.