TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY THE LESTER AND SALLY ENTIN FACULTY OF HUMANITIES THE CHAIM ROSENBERUG SCHOOL OF JEWISH STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF JEWISH HISTORY ARAM AND ISRAEL DURING THE JEHUITE DYNASTY THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY SHUICHI (SEKINE) HASEGAWA UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF PROF. NADAV NA’AMAN SUMITTED TO THE SENAT OF TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY 2010 Acknowledgements I began to study the history of ancient Israel in 1994, fascinated by the lecture on “History of Ancient Israel” delivered by A. Tsukimoto at Rikkyo University, Tokyo. My interest in the subject was further developed at the University of Tsukuba, where Y. Ikeda became my supervisor. As he himself studied in Jerusalem, he recommended me to study in Israel. Upon obtaining a master degree, I came to Tel Aviv in 2000 to continue my research. I am deeply grateful to the two outstanding Japanese scholars, who provided me the way to study the subject in Israel. During my first years in Tel Aviv, S. Izre’el, I. Singer, K.E. Slansky, and R. Zadok helped me to tackle the complexity of the sources. The late M. Kochavi and the late G. Covo taught me the significance and the pleasure of archaeology. In the years 2006-2007, I had an opportunity to study in Heidelberg, Germany. During my stay, I immensely benefited from conversations and discussions with O. Lipschits, M. Oeming, and J. L. Wright. The staffs of the Tel Rekhesh expeditions, amongst all, Y. Paz, have always offered warm encouragement to complete my dissertation. Innumerable English and Hebrew language editors helped me compose the thesis. My thanks go to all these people. To my supervisor, N. Na’aman, without whom I could never have accomplished what I had started, I wish to express my sincerest gratitude. He has been a strict teacher, always knowing what was missing, and is certainly one of the best historians that I have ever met. I am inexpressibly grateful for his patient efforts to help me to complete my thesis. It was a great honour to write a dissertation under his supervision. iii I would also like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on the earlier version of this thesis, which helped both improve the current work and expand my horizons. At last, I must especially express my gratitude to my family, Satoko, my wife, Rene and Noa, my daughters for their boundless patience. My thanks go to Emiko Sekine, my mother, Tamiko and Sei’ichi Hasegawa, my parents-in-law, who have expressed their encouragement as well as tolerance in every possible way. I dedicate this thesis to the memory of my late father, Tsutomou Sekine. iv Abstract The subject of the present study is the political history of the Kingdom of Israel in the time of the Jehuite Dynasty (ca. 841-747 BCE) and its relations with Aram-Damascus and Assyria. The Jehuite Dynasty was established by Jehu in 841 BCE, ruled Israel for five generations, and came to an end with the murder of Zachariah, its last king, in the mid-eighth century BCE. In Damascus, Hazael, Bar-Hadad, Hadiānu, and Rezin ruled during this period. With the rise of Shalmaneser III, Assyria played a significant role in the relations between Aram-Damascus and Israel. Following Assyria’s withdrawal from the region in the 830s BCE, Damascus subjugated Israel and the subjugation continued until Adad-nērāri III’s campaigns to Syria in the years 805-802 BCE. A number of studies have already discussed the history of the Jehuite Dynasty. However, most of these studies did not deal critically with the biblical text and did not discuss all the available sources. Hence the importance of this study, which examines all the available sources in light of recent developments of Biblical scholarship, the newly discovered texts, and the results of the recent archaeological surveys and excavations. Three types of sources are available for reconstructing the history of the Jehuites: (a) the Hebrew Bible; (b) the extra-Biblical texts; and (c) the archaeological data. The Book of Kings (2 Kgs 9-15) describes in short the Jehuite kings and the major events that took place during their reigns. The Jehu Narrative (2 Kgs 9-10) is a detailed source that describes his rebellion. Other passages in 2 Kgs 10-15 provide basic information on the Jehuites. Prophetic stories in the Book of Kings, especially the Elisha Cycle stories, contain historical nuclei that might be ascribed to the time of the Jehuites. The Books of Amos and Hosea provide additional information on the historical v background of this period. Assyrian royal inscriptions mention tributes received from Jehu and Joash, the two campaigns the Assyrian conducted against Hazael, and the subjugation of his heirs, Mari’ and Hadiānu. Assyrian inscriptions also illuminate the historical background for the events in the Syro-Palestinian region in these years. Aramaic, Moabite, and Hebrew inscriptions contribute to the understanding of the history of this region. Archaeological data attests to Hazael’s destructive military campaigns in the late ninth century BCE and the prosperity in the Northern Kingdom in the early eighth century BCE. The following methodology for the reconstruction of the history of the Jehuite Dynasty is adopted in this study. First, each source will be separately analysed, then be compared with all other available sources, and finally be synthesised to achieve a comprehensive historical picture. Each source has been written from certain viewpoint and thus requires critical reading for isolating its possible historical information. For instance, the story of Jehu’s coup was composed at the Jehuite court in order to legitimise the rebellion. The author’s intention is reflected in various passages in the story. Prophetic stories were composed to explain the divine intervention in the history through prophets, and their genre does not require the exact presentation of the chain of events. Some stories in the Book of Kings were written in later period and cannot serve for historical reconstruction. For example, the story of the wars against the Aramaeans in 1 Kgs 20, ascribed to Ahab’s time, does not conform to the historical reality of that time. Multiple redactions in the Book of Kings must be taken into account, as some passages were inserted either by the Deuteronomist who edited/composed the Book or by later editors and should be eliminated from the historical discussion. Assyrian royal inscriptions include annals and summary inscriptions, and they are characterised by vi their ideological and propagandistic tendency. For example, the Tell al-Rimah Stela describes the subjugation of the kings of Amurru and Hatti by Adad-nirari III “in one year”. Yet, the expression “in one year” is a literary formula aggrandising the king’s achievements, which cannot be considered chronologically accurate. There is a controversy about the dates of archaeological strata at the major sites of the Northern Kingdom. These dates were initially established based on stratigraphical and historical considerations. However, scholars recently employ radiocarbon dating to establish dates of settlement, and hence the chronology of the Iron Age sites does not depend on historical consideration alone. By means of cautious examination of all the available textual sources and archaeological findings and by synthesising the results, we can try to reconstruct – even if only partially – the history of the period under discussion in the present study. In Chapter 1, the chronology of the Jehuite kings is discussed. There are two types of chronological information in the Book of Kings: (a) the synchronisms of the kings of Israel and Judah; (b) the length of each king’s reign. However, they sometimes contradict each other. The Assyrian annalistic inscriptions fix some of the dates of events in the history of Israel and are crucial for establishing the absolute chronology. After reviewing the Biblical chronological information and its problems, the chronology of the Jehuites is established by combining the Biblical chronological data with the data extracted from the Assyrian inscriptions. The chronological framework established in this chapter is adopted in the rest of the present study. In Chapter 2, the rise of Jehu is examined. The story of Jehu’s coup in 2 Kgs 9-10 (“the Jehu Narrative”) is the main source that describes the coup in great detail. Yet, the narrative must have received multiple redactions and the original story should be vii extracted out of the present story. In light of the literary analysis of the narrative, three redactional layers are discerned: (a) the oldest layer that describes the events; (b) the Deuteronomistic additions; and (c) later interpolations. The oldest layer (a) is defined as the original Jehu Narrative. The salient character of the layer is the legitimation of Jehu’s coup. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the original narrative was composed at the royal court of the Jehuite Dynasty in order to justify the coup of the Dynasty’s founder. This rebellion is mentioned only in the Book of Kings. Yet, Hos 1:4 refers to the “blood of Jezreel” which possibly mentions the coup and its aftermath. The Mesha Inscription attests to the fall of the Omrides in Mesha’s time. In light of the aforementioned evidence, we may conclude that there is a historical event behind the Jehu Narrative. But not all details of the narrative can serve for the historical reconstruction. The Tel Dan Inscription mentions Hazael’s killing of Joram, king of Israel, and Ahaziah, king of Judah. There is an outstanding contradiction between the descriptions of the Jehu Narrative and the Tel Dan Inscription, and preference is given to the Aramaic description that was composed not long after the event.