THE BO UNDARIES OF ARAM-DAMASCUSIN THE 9TH-8TH CENTURIES BCE*

G ERSHO N GAUL Halfa

This articlc rccxamincs thc boundarics of Aram-Damascus in the sccond half of thc 9th ccntury and in thc 8th ccntury BCE in light of thc ncw inscriptions publishcd in thc last decadc, mainly Hazael's booty inscriptions from Samo s and Eretria,' the fragments of the Aramaie royal inscription from Tel Dan.? and the new edition of the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser HP

1. The Boundaries qf Aram-Damascus in the time qf Ha;::ael and Bar Hadad, his son

In 841 and again in 838 (and in 837?) Damascus was dcfeated by the Assyrians, the army of Shalman eser IH occupying all the dis­ tricts of the land of Dam ascus up to Mount Hauran.' The dcfeats of Aram on thc battlefield did not lead to its surrender. Assyria failed

* This article is based on a pape r presented at the 44th Rencontr e Assyriologique Internationale in Venice in July 1997. I A. Charbonnet, "Le dieu aux lions d'Eretrie ", Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Clasico edel Mediterraneo Antico Seeione di Archeologia e Storia Antico 8 (1986), pp. 117- 156; H. Kyrieleis and W. Roellig, "Ein altorientalisher Pferdeschmu ck aus dem Heraion von Samos", Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts AthenischeAbteilung 103 (1988), pp. 37-75; 1. Eph'al and j. Naveh, "Hazael's Booty Inscriptions", JA] 39 (1989), pp. 192- 200; F. Born and A. Lemaire, "Les inscriptions Arameennes de Hazael", RA 3 (1989), pp. 34- 44. 2 A. Biran and .J. Naveh, "An Aramaie Stele Fragment from T el Dan", JE] 43 (1993), pp. 8 1-98; idem , "T he Tel Dan Inscription: A New Fragment ", IE] 45 (1995), pp. 1-1 8; and recently I. Kottsieper, "Die Inschrift vom Te ll Dan und die politischen Beziehungen zwischen Aram-Damascus und Israel in der I. Haelfe des I. J ahrtausends vor Christus", "Und Mose schrieb dieses Lied auJ"-Studien zum Alten Testament und zum Alten Orient: Festschrift fuer Osioald Loretr; eds. M. Dietrich and 1. Kottsieper (AOAT 250; Mu enster, 1998), pp. 475- 500; A. Lemaire, "T he T el Dan Stela as a Piece of Royal Historiography", ] SOP 81 (1998), pp. 3- 14, with earlier literature 3 H.T admor, The Inscnptions qf Tiglath-pileser III King qf As.ryria (Jerusalern, 1994). 4 A.K. Grayson, As.ryrian Rulers qf the Early First Millennium H.C II (858-745 B.C.), The Royal Inscriptions qf Mesopotamia, As.ryrian Periods III (Toronto, 1996), pp. 48, 54, 60. 36 G.GAUL to conquer Damascus, and Hazael did not become an Assyrian vassal. The Assyrian threat, however, was not liftcd from Dam ascus, and it took Aram several yea rs to rccover from th e blows it had endured. Biblical sources state clearly that H azael subdued his southern neigh­ bors, including the two Israelite kingdoms and Gath of the Philistines. The Aramcan campaigns probably took place during the first fivc years of thc reign of Shamshi-Ada d V, taking advantage of the death of Shalmanese r III and thc revolt in Assyria." H azael annexed to Aram all the land of Israel from the Bashan up to the rivcr Arnon (2 Kgs 10,32- 33). It was probably a vcry cruel and sadistic conqucst which even after three gene rations was not forgotten (Amos 1,3; 2 Kgs 8,12). Most of thc oracles aga inst the nations in the book of Amos, chapter 1, probably refer to the period of Hazael." The empire of H azael may have included not on ly Israel, ]udah , and Gath of the Philistines but also T yrc, the other four Philistine kingdoms , and the kingdom s of Tran sjordan. It is possible that the fall of Calneh and Ham ath mcntion ed in Am os 6,2, also refers to the conquests of Hazael.? Hazael's booty inscriptions from Samos and Eretri a indi cate that Unqi / Pattina was within the ernpire of H azael." Moreover, it is rea­ sona ble to suppose that th c rivcr which H azael crossed was the Euphratcs ("in the year that our lord crosscd the river"). I may therc­ fore suggest that central and northern Syria were under the hege­ mony of Damascus, already during the reign of Hazael (as indicated also, in my opinion , from Amos 6,2).9

., For the date of Hazael's eampaigns see G. Galil, 711e Chronology cf the Kings qf Israel and ]udah (Leiden, 1996), pp . 48-51. <; \Ve should read: " to deliver them up to Ararn" instead of " to deliver them up to Edom"-Amos 1,6, ete. For earlicr studies of Amos's O racles against the nations see J ßarton , Amos's Oracles against the Nations: A Stu4J qf Amos 1.3- 2.5 (Cambridge, 1980), pp . 25- 31; M .E. Polley, Amos and the Davidie Empire: A Socio-Historieal Approach (New York and O xford, 1989), pp . 76-77. 7 Th e eommentators eonclude that the referenees in Amos 6,2 are to the eam­ paigns of Ti glath-p ileser BI, attributing this verse to a later redaetor of the book of Amo s. Cf. j.H. H ayes, Amos (Nashville, 1988), pp. 183- 84, with earlier litera­ ture. For another approac h to this problem see S.M. Paul, Amos (Minneapolis, 1991), pp . 20 1-204. " T here is no reason to aeeept the ident ifieation of 'M Q in the Eretria and Samos inscriptions with the Beqa' of Lebanon. For this prop osal see N. Na'am an, "H azael of 'Amqi and Hadadezer of ßeth-rehob", UF 27 (1995), pp. 384ff., pp . 393-94; Na'aman misunderstood the inseriptions and his interpretat ion must be rejeeted . 'I For same eonclusions see A. Lcmaire, "Hazael de Damas, roi d'Aram", Morchands, Diplomates et Empereurs: Etudes sur la eivilisation mesopotamienne qffirtes a P. Garelli, eds.