DOCSLIB.ORG

Tiglath-Pileser Iii's Aid to Ahaz Anes 46 (2009) 93–10693

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tiglath-Pileser Iii's Aid to Ahaz Anes 46 (2009) 93–10693 doi: 10.2143/ANES.46.0.2040712TIGLATH-PILESER III'S AID TO AHAZ ANES 46 (2009) 93–10693 Tiglath-pileser III's Aid to Ahaz: A New Look at the Problems of the Biblical Accounts in Light of the Assyrian Sources Luis Robert SIDDALL Department of the Near and Middle East Factury of Languages and Cultures School of Oriental and African Studies The University of London E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This study examines the discrepancy in the biblical text’s account of Tiglath- pileser III’s aid to Ahaz during the Syro-Ephraimite crisis in light of the Assyrian sources. II Kings 16:5–9 (and Isaiah 7) states that Tiglath-pileser helped Ahaz by repelling the attacks of the Syro-Ephraimite coalition, while II Chronicles 28:5– 21 proclaims that Tiglath-pileser failed to help the Judean king. Previous studies have attempted to resolve the textual conflict by way of literary analysis or textual emendation. By undertaking an historical methodology of the biblical text and an examination of the Assyrian sources, the case is made that while the biblical accounts contradict each other in specific areas, there are key elements that are historically accurate in both accounts which are in complete accord with the Assyrian sources, and in turn clarify the biblical accounts.* This article will examine the contexts of the passages in the Hebrew Bi- ble that relate to Tiglath-pileser III’s movements in Syria-Palestine and his * This article is dedicated to Dr Noel K. Weeks of the University of Sydney. Now at the close of his teaching career, this study aims to pursue an historical problem abiding by the two central instructions Dr Weeks gave to the apprentice historians in his lectures and semi- nars. The first is to look at what is written in the ancient text, not what the secondary litera- ture says about it. The second is a quote from the late Professor C. H. Gordon, who was one of Dr Weeks’ teachers at Brandeis: “Any fool can amend a text, but it takes a true scholar to it solve it as it stands”. It is my great honour to humbly present this paper to my former teacher, who is for me the unsung hero of Ancient Near Eastern studies in Australia, in the hope of fulfilling the two criteria outlined for a young historian. 2170-09_Anes46_06_Siddall 93 09-01-2009, 15:07 94 L. R. SIDDALL aid to Ahaz of Judah: namely, II Kings 16:5–9 and II Chronicles 28:5–21, and where appropriate the account in Isaiah 7:1–17 will also be considered. It will be suggested that what at first appears to be a discrepancy between the biblical books can rather be viewed, with the aid of the contemporary Assyrian sources, as reflection of the different emphases of the author of Kings and the Chronicler.1 The thesis proposed in the discussion that fol- lows is in complete accord with the books of II Kings, II Chronicles as well as Tiglath-pileser III’s inscriptions. In the years 733–732,2 Tiglath-pileser campaigned in Syria-Palestine in order to dismantle the Syro-Ephraimite alliance. The alliance consisted of Tyre, Damascus and the northern kingdom of Israel. These states were re- corded as tribute bearers to Tiglath-pileser III in the years from 740–738.3 However, during the years that followed, these states formed an alliance against Judah, leading to a conflict that is reported in II Kings 16:5–9 and II Chronicles 28:5–21. There is some debate as to whether or not the reason for the Syro-Ephraimite coalition’s attack on Judah was an anti-Assyrian movement or a continuation of an existing territorial conflict in the Trans- Jordanian region.4 There are significant discrepancies in the two biblical accounts of the conflict. A number of scholars have attempted to harmonise the two ver- sions of the Syro-Ephraimite war by linguistic and textual criticism, or by identifying the difference between the ideological-theological aims and atti- tudes of the author of Kings and the Chronicler. At the heart of any inter- pretation is how we understand the relationship between Kings (and Samuel for that matter) and Chronicles. While we do not have the time or space to offer a detailed evaluation of the relationship between Samuel- Kings and Chronicles, it has been accepted here that the books of Chroni- cles were composed later than Samuel-Kings.5 This is not to say, as is often argued, that Samuel-Kings is a more reliable source than Chronicles. Rather, that the Chronicler produced a work that indicated that he had knowledge of Samuel-Kings and expanded on it to create a different em- 1 By ‘author of Kings’ and ‘Chronicler’ I do not contend that these works were necessarily the efforts of one particular individual. Rather, they are designations of convenience. 2 The dates are all BCE and follow those of Tadmor 1994. 3 Annal 13:10–12, in Tadmor 1994, pp. 68–69. 4 For a discussion of alternate points of views, see Begrich 1927; Oded 1972, pp. 153–165; Otzen 1979, pp. 255–261; Bright 1981, p. 273; Irvine 1990; Na’aman 1991, p. 92; and Blenkinsopp 2000, pp. 229–230 and Doubovsky 2006, p. 154. 5 Klein 1992, esp. pp. 995–997, Gottwald 1987, pp. 514–517, and Kalimi 2005, pp. 1–2, are representative of this notion. For a differing opinion, see Auld 1999; Rainey 1997; Rezetko 2003; and Person 2007. 2170-09_Anes46_06_Siddall 94 09-01-2009, 15:07 TIGLATH-PILESER III'S AID TO AHAZ 95 phasis. This notion is a key element to the interpretations of this problem and the reason for taking this position will become clear in the discussed below. The two accounts of the Syro-Ephraimite war are as follows: II KINGS 16:5–9 (5) Then king Rezin of Aram and King Pekah son of Remaliah of Israel ad- vanced on Jerusalem for battle. They besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome [him]. (6) At that time King Rezin of Aram recovered Elath for Aram; he drove out the Judahites from Elath, and the Edomite came to Elath and set- tled there, as is still the case. (7) Ahaz sent messengers to King Tiglath-pileser of Assyria to say, “I am your servant and your son; come and deliver me from the hands of the king of Aram and the king of Israel, who are attacking me.” (8) Ahaz took the gold and silver that were on hand in the House of the LORD and in the treasuries of the royal palace and sent them as a gift to the king of Assyria. (9) The king of Assyria responded to his request; the king of Assyria marched against Da- mascus and captured it. He deported its inhabitants to Kir and put Rezin to death. II Chronicles 28:5–21 (5) The LORD his god delivered him over to the king of Aram, who defeated him and took many of his men captive, and brought them to Damascus. He was also delivered over to the king of Israel, who inflicted a great defeat on him. (6) Pekah son of Ramaliah killed 120,000 in Judah–all brave men–in one day, because they had forsaken the LORD God of their fathers. (7) Zichri, the champion of Ephraim, killed Maaseiah the king’s son, and Azrikam chief of the palace, and Elkanah, the second to the king. (8) The Israelites captured 200,000 of their kinsmen, woman, boys, and girls; they also took a large amount of booty from them and brought the booty to Samaria. (9) A prophet by the name of Oded was there, who went out to meet the army on its return to Samaria. He said to them, “Because of the fury of the LORD God of your fathers against Judah, he delivered them over to you, and you killed them in a rage that reached heaven. (10) Do you now intend to subjugate the men and women of Judah and Jerusalem to be your slaves? As it is, you have nothing but offenses against the LORD your God. (11) Now then, listen to me, and send back the captives you have taken from your kinsmen, for the wrath of the LORD is upon you!” (12) Some of the chief men of the Ephraimites — Azariah son of Jehohenen, Berechiah son of Meshillemoth, Jehizkiah son of Shallum, and Amasa son of Hadlai — con- fronted those returning from the campaign (13) and said to them, “Do not bring these captives here, for it would mean our offending the LORD, adding to our sins and our offenses; for our offense is grave enough, and there is already wrath upon Israel.” (14) So the soldiers released the captives and the 2170-09_Anes46_06_Siddall 95 09-01-2009, 15:07 96 L. R. SIDDALL booty in the presence of the officers and all the congregation. (15) Then the men named above proceeded to take the captives in hand, and with the booty they clothed all the naked among them — they clothed them and shod them and provided donkeys for all who were failing and brought them, to Jericho, the city of palms, back to their kinsmen. Then they returned to Samaria. (16) At that time, King Ahaz sent to the king of Assyria for help. (17) Again the Edomites came and inflicted a defeat on Judah and took captives. (18) And the Philistines made forays against the cities of the Shephelah and the Negeb of Judah; they seized Beth-Shemesh and Aijalon and Gederoth, and Soco with its villages, and Timnah with its villages, and Gimzo with its villages; and they settled there.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2 the Assyrian Empire, the Conquest of Israel, and the Colonization of Judah 37 I
    ISRAEL AND EMPIRE ii ISRAEL AND EMPIRE A Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism Leo G. Perdue and Warren Carter Edited by Coleman A. Baker LONDON • NEW DELHI • NEW YORK • SYDNEY 1 Bloomsbury T&T Clark An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Imprint previously known as T&T Clark 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway London New York WC1B 3DP NY 10018 UK USA www.bloomsbury.com Bloomsbury, T&T Clark and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published 2015 © Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker, 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker have asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Authors of this work. No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury or the authors. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: HB: 978-0-56705-409-8 PB: 978-0-56724-328-7 ePDF: 978-0-56728-051-0 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Typeset by Forthcoming Publications (www.forthpub.com) 1 Contents Abbreviations vii Preface ix Introduction: Empires, Colonies, and Postcolonial Interpretation 1 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Through the Bible - 15Th Week April 5-11
    Read through the Bible - 15th week April 5-11 Week 15, Sunday (April 5) I King 16-18 1. Who killed Elah and reigned in his stead? ________ How long did he reign (don't blink! - I Kings 16:15)? ______ Who took his place (I Kings 16:17, 21)? ______________ (and ______________) 2. How long did Omri reign and who succeeded him? ______________, ______________ 3. How long did Ahab reign in Israel? _________ Who was Ahab's wife (I Kings 16:31)? ______________ 4. Whose prophecy did Hiel of Bethel fulfill by rebuilding Jericho (see Joshua 6:26, I Kings 16:34)? ______________ 5. Who prophesied to Ahab there would be a 3-year drought (I Kings 17:1)? ______________ During the drought, who fed Elijah at the Brook Cherith (I Kings 17:4-6)? ______________ 6. What miracle(s) did Elijah perform for the widow at Zarephath? _______________________________ 7. What atrocity did Jezebel commit (I Kings 18:4)? ______________________________ 8. Who all met with Ahab and Elijah at Mt. Carmel (I Kings 18:19-20)? ____________________________ 9. What was the people's reaction to the fire from the Lord? _____________________________ 10. T F Elijah outran a chariot (I Kings 18:45-46). Week 15, Monday (April 6) I King 19-21 11. T F Elijah ran from Jezebel. 12. To what mountain did Elijah go? _____________ What other prophet (Ex. 19:20, Mt. Horeb is also called Mt. Sinai) fasted 40 days on this same mountain? _____________ 13. What did the Lord ask Elijah in I Ki. 19:9, and again in I Ki.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hard Way Lesson #4 for January 23, 2021 Scriptures: Isaiah 7:14-8:22
    Isaiah The Hard Way Lesson #4 for January 23, 2021 Scriptures: Isaiah 7:14-8:22. 1. This lesson will focus on the very sad behavior and its results of one of the kings of Judah, his rebellion against God, and his refusal to cooperate with the prophet Isaiah. How should God deal with people who refuse to listen to His advice? Should He “burn them forever”? Does our story in this lesson teach us anything about following God’s advice? Isaiah 7:14-16: 14 [The LORD said through Isaiah:] “Well then, the Lord himself will give you a sign: a young woman who is pregnant will have a son and will name him ‘Immanuel.’ 15By the time he is old enough to make his own decisions, people will be drinking milk and eating honey. 16Even before that time comes, the lands of those two kings who terrify you will be deserted.”—American Bible Society. (1992). The Holy Bible: The Good News Translation* (2nd ed., Isaiah 7:14–16). New York: American Bible Society.‡ 2. These verses were God’s response to King Ahaz’s refusal to be guided by the prophet Isaiah’s messages from the Lord. He was told clearly that the two kings, Rezin and Pekah from Syria and Israel respectively, would not be able to overcome his kingdom or attack Jerusalem. But, as we studied last week, instead of accepting God’s word, Ahaz had a plan of his own. Isaiah 7:1-9: When King Ahaz, the son of Jotham and grandson of Uzziah, ruled Judah, war broke out.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interphased Chronology of Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah and Hoshea1 Harold G
    THE INTERPHASED CHRONOLOGY OF JOTHAM, AHAZ, HEZEKIAH AND HOSHEA1 HAROLD G. STIGERS, Ph.D. Up until the appearance of The Mysteríous Numbers of the Hebrew Kings* by Edwin Thiele in 1951, the possibility of the harmonization of the dates for the Hebrew kings as given in the Book of Kings seemed impossibly remote, if not actually irreconcilable. The apparent conflict of data is seemingly due to the fact that an eye-witness account takes things as they are with no attempt being made to harmonize apparently contradictory data, nor to state outright the clues as to the relationships which would make it possible in an easy manner to coordinate the reigns of the kings. Living in the times of the kings of Israel and Judah, and understanding completely the circumstances, and writing a message, the significance of which is not dependent on the dates being harmonized, the authors of the records used in Kings felt no need of explaining coordinating data. However, if the dating were to be harmonized, the viewpoint that the present text of the Old Testament represents a careful transmission of the Hebrew text through the centuries3, would receive a great testi- mony to its accuracy. Now, with the work of Thiele, that testimony has, in a great measure, been given, but not without one real lack, in that for him, the chronology of the period of Jotham through Hezekiah is twelve years out of phase.4 In this point for him the chronology is contradictory and requires the belief that the synchronisms of 2 Ki. 18:9, 10 and 18:1 are the work of a later harmonizing hand, not in the autograph written by the inspired prophet.5 The method correlating the synchronizations between the Judean and Israelite kings of the time of 753/52 B.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Testament Timeline: an Overview* Patriarchs to Judges (C
    Old Testament Timeline: An Overview* The following dates (all B.C.) are close approximations based on correlating dates between the Bible and other ancient Near Eastern sources (largely from Assyrian accession lists, Babylonian king-lists, or Egyptian historical sources). Often dates can be confirmed between the Assyrian and Babylonian Empires by narratives recording contacts between these two countries. Patriarchs to Judges (c. 2166–1030) 1446 Date for Exodus** 1260 Date for Exodus** Abraham 2166–1991 2000–1825 Isaac 2066–1886 1900–1720 Jacob 2006–1859 1840–1693 Joseph 1915–1805 1749–1639 Moses’ birth 1526 1340 Exodus 1446 1260 Desert wanderings 1446–1406 1260–1220 Entrance into Canaan 1406 1220 Period of the judges 1375 to 1050–1030 1210 to 1050–1030 United Monarchy (c. 1050–931) Dates Notes 1050–1030 to Numerals relating to Saul’s age and length of reign may be missing Saul’s reign 1010 in the Hebrew text (see 1 Sam. 13:1)*** David’s reign 1010–971 Solomon’s 971–931 reign Divided Monarchy to Exile (931–586) See The Divided Kingdom: Kings of Judah and The Divided Kingdom divided 931 Kingdom: Kings of Israel Syro-Ephraimite 740– Pekah (Israel) and Rezin (Syria) pressure Jotham and Ahaz (Judah) to war 732 join their opposition to Tiglath-pileser III (Assyria) Fall of Samaria 722 Shalmaneser V (727–722) and Sargon II (722–705) of Assyria (Israel) Josiah’s reforms 628 Battle of 605 Daniel and three friends exiled to Babylon Carchemish Jerusalem Nebuchadnezzar II takes exiles to Babylon including Jehoiachin and 597 attacked Ezekiel Fall of Jerusalem 586 Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (Judah) Return from Exile (539–445) Fall of Babylon 539 Cyrus of Persia (539–530) 1st return of exiles to Jerusalem 538 Temple building begins 536 Temple completed 516 Darius I (522–486) Esther in palace of Xerxes 478 Xerxes I/Ahasuerus (485–464) 2nd return of exiles to Jerusalem under Ezra 458 Artaxerxes I (464–423) 3rd return of exiles to Jerusalem under Nehemiah 445 *See also Historical Books Timeline; The Divided Kingdom: Kings of Judah and The Divided Kingdom: Kings of Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • H 02-UP-011 Assyria Io02
    he Hebrew Bible records the history of ancient Israel reign. In three different inscriptions, Shalmaneser III and Judah, relating that the two kingdoms were recounts that he received tribute from Tyre, Sidon, and united under Saul (ca. 1000 B.C.) Jehu, son of Omri, in his 18th year, tand became politically separate fol- usually figured as 841 B.C. Thus, Jehu, lowing Solomon’s death (ca. 935 B.C.). the next Israelite king to whom the The division continued until the Assyrians refer, appears in the same Assyrians, whose empire was expand- order as described in the Bible. But he ing during that period, exiled Israel is identified as ruling a place with a in the late eighth century B.C. different geographic name, Bit Omri But the goal of the Bible was not to (the house of Omri). record history, and the text does not One of Shalmaneser III’s final edi- shy away from theological explana- tions of annals, the Black Obelisk, tions for events. Given this problem- contains another reference to Jehu. In atic relationship between sacred the second row of figures from the interpretation and historical accura- top, Jehu is depicted with the caption, cy, historians welcomed the discovery “Tribute of Iaua (Jehu), son of Omri. of ancient Assyrian cuneiform docu- Silver, gold, a golden bowl, a golden ments that refer to people and places beaker, golden goblets, pitchers of mentioned in the Bible. Discovered gold, lead, staves for the hand of the in the 19th century, these historical king, javelins, I received from him.”As records are now being used by schol- scholar Michele Marcus points out, ars to corroborate and augment the Jehu’s placement on this monument biblical text, especially the Bible’s indicates that his importance for the COPYRIGHT THE BRITISH MUSEUM “historical books” of Kings.
    [Show full text]
  • Chastised Rulers in the Ancient Near East
    Chastised Rulers in the Ancient Near East Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree doctor of philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By J. H. Price, M.A., B.A. Graduate Program in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures The Ohio State University 2015 Dissertation Committee: Samuel A. Meier, Advisor Daniel Frank Carolina López-Ruiz Bill T. Arnold Copyright by J. H. Price 2015 Abstract In the ancient world, kings were a common subject of literary activity, as they played significant social, economic, and religious roles in the ancient Near East. Unsurprisingly, the praiseworthy deeds of kings were often memorialized in ancient literature. However, in some texts kings were remembered for criminal acts that brought punishment from the god(s). From these documents, which date from the second to the first millennium BCE, we learn that royal acts of sacrilege were believed to have altered the fate of the offending king, his people, or his nation. These chastised rulers are the subject of this this dissertation. In the pages that follow, the violations committed by these rulers are collected, explained, and compared, as are the divine punishments that resulted from royal sacrilege. Though attestations are concentrated in the Hebrew Bible and Mesopotamian literature, the very fact that the chastised ruler type also surfaces in Ugaritic, Hittite, and Northwest Semitic texts suggests that the concept was an integral part of ancient near eastern kingship ideologies. Thus, this dissertation will also explain the relationship between kings and gods and the unifying aspect of kingship that gave rise to the chastised ruler concept across the ancient Near East.
    [Show full text]
  • 60 'L'hj< J SYRIAN LANGUAGE
    60 THE SYRIAN LANGUAGE. the Gate Tadi, the north gate of the Sauctua.ry, appears to have been closed and replaced by an underground passage passing under the doisters, and represented at the present time by Cistern No. 1. The Northern Cloister, like the Western, ended at the Tower of Antonia, the probable approximate position of which I have marked in dotted lines. There is a statemeut in ,Josephns which 3.ppE;ars to confirm this proposed restoration of the Temple, as he mentions that the addition of the Outer Cloisters doubled the area of the Temple Enclosure.' Now the area, as enclosed by the four Outer Cloisters as shown on Plan No. 2, is rather more than 480,000 square cubits, aml the area of the Sanctuary was 250,000 square cubits; so that the one, speaking roughly, is just double of the other. In the sections, I have s11ow11 the manner in which the Temple buildings, with the levels given in Josephus and the Mislma, compare with the rock levels, as determined by exploration. These sections will explain, better than any verbal de;,cription, how well the one corresponds to the other, if the site of the Temple on Mount Moriah, which I have sl1ggested, is accepted. I would add that in this paper I have treated the subject in a i:reneral manner only, as to enter into all the details which had to be considered in preparing the plm1s woul<l make it a great deal too long. As I have stated before, my effort has been to prepare plans, which would be in accord with the historical documents, and also with what exploration has shown to 1)e the actual facts.
    [Show full text]
  • State Formation in the Southern Levant – the Case of the Arameans and the Role of Hazael's Expansion
    Dies ist urheberrechtlich geschütztes Material. Bereitgestellt von: Universit?tsbibliothek, 27.05.2020 State Formation in the Southern Levant – The Case of the Arameans and the Role of Hazael’s Expansion CHRISTIAN FREVEL* Abstract: In accepting that there was no united monarchy in 10th century BCE Jerusalem and no division of kingdoms under Rehoboam and Jeroboam, state formation in Israel and Judah can be considered a new start in the north with the Omrides and the Nimshides in Samaria and in the south with Amaziah, Asariah, and Jotham in Jerusalem. This paper parallels Aramean and Israelite state-formation and enquires about the re- percussions of these processes. The formation of these polities was triggered signifi- cantly by economic factors, such as copper production and long-distance trade. Hazael’s campaign to the south aimed to control both, and this is seen as decisive for the devel- opment of Judah, the Shephelah, and the Negev. By coming under the patronage of Hazael and the Arameans, Judah was able to get rid of the subjugation which prevailed under the Nimshides in the 9th century BCE. State formation in Judah in the late 9th/8th centuries BCE will be seen as an outcome of the larger regional development. The cam- paign of Hazael and the emergence of Judah as a state also triggered the development of the Edomite polity in the Negev and the southern Beersheva Valley in processes of territorial clustering which at last gave birth to Edom as statehood centered in Transjor- dan. 1. Parallels between Aramean and Southern Levantine State Formation Broadly and more or less traditionally speaking, the emergence of the Phoenician and Philistine so-called “city-states,” and the territories of Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, and Edom are the aftermath of the breakdown of the second millennium Late Bronze Age system of city-states in the Levant.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kingdom of Judah
    CHAPTER TWO THE KINGDOM OF JUDAH The focus of this chapter is the archaeological data relating to Hezekiah’s capital city of Jerusalem and the breadth of his empire. It is only within the last generation that the debate over the size and extent of Jerusalem during the period of the monarchy has settled, prior to which the mini- malist and maximalist interpretations of the archaeological record have held sway. The initial matter for investigation will be Judah’s status in relation to Assyria, an important aspect of his rule to be treated in isola- tion before concentrating on the Judean kingdom itself. The Siloam Tunnel is another controversial piece of evidence, tradi- tionally admitted to be of Hezekian origin based on the brief references found in 2 Kgs 20:20 and 2 Chr 32:30. Yet recently even the paleography of its accompanying inscription has been questioned. The hundreds of examples of large storage containers, named lmlk jars according to the Hebrew word ubiquitiously appearing in their accompanying seal impres- sions, must similarly be given consideration. Two key questions appertain to the lmlk jars: how reliably may they be said to have been initiated by Hezekiah himself, and what would have been their intended function? 2.1. Assyrian Relations The relationship between Judah and Assyria during the reign of Hezekiah has been a matter of some debate. The southern Levantine state was of interest to the empire despite its tiny size, situated as it was along the important trade routes between Egypt and Mesopotamia. The Assyrian- izing influence within the seal of a Hebrew servant attests to Judean rec- ognition of Assyrian authority as early as the reign of Azariah/Uzziah, ca.
    [Show full text]
  • God's Promises
    Session 3 God’s Promises Since God is sovereign, His people can trust His promises. ISAIAH 7:7-17 20 EXPLORE THE BIBLE Why are people sometimes prone to believe they can do better than what God offers them? “Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth” is an odd idiom. A person can tell the age and quality of a horse by looking at its teeth. To look at the teeth of a horse given as a gift shows a lack of appreciation. The idiom means do not reject a gift someone gives you. In Isaiah’s day, God offered King Ahaz a gift, a sign guaranteeing God’s protection. But Ahaz thought it was better to trust in Assyria instead of God—a decision that would have devastating consequences. UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT The event that precipitated Isaiah’s message Even though the Lord promised to give Ahaz in Isaiah 7:1–12:6 was what biblical scholars a sign to prove He would bring down the call the Syro-Ephraimite War (735-733 coalition, Ahaz refused to believe. Instead, BC). King Tiglath-pileser of Assyria posed Ahaz sent messengers with silver and gold a threat to the entire ancient Near East. from the Lord’s temple and the king’s palace Eventually, he would turn his attention as a bribe to King Tiglath-pileser of Assyria west toward Israel and Judah. So Pekah, and said, “I am your servant and your son. the king of Israel, joined Rezin the king of March up and save me from the grasp of the Syria with the hope of forming a coalition of king of Aram and the king of Israel, who are all the kingdoms in the region to defeat the rising against me” (2 Kings 16:7).
    [Show full text]
  • Sieges and Similes of Sieges in the Royal Annals: the Conquest of Damascus by Tiglath-Pileser Iii
    KASKAL Rivista di storia, ambienti e culture del Vicino Oriente Antico Volume 6 (2009) SIEGES AND SIMILES OF SIEGES IN THE ROYAL ANNALS: THE CONQUEST OF DAMASCUS BY TIGLATH-PILESER III Davide Nadali 1. Introduction Assyrian scribes frequently employ similes and metaphors when describing the attack of the Assyrian army, the attitudes of the enemy and the mighty power of the Assyrian king.1 In the present study, the conquest of Damascus by Tiglath-Pileser III in 733-732 BC is taken into consideration. The similes and metaphors (that describe the attitude of the king of Damascus, his defeat by the Assyrian king and the destruction of the orchards by the city) refer to an Assyrian topos that can be recognised in other Assyrian written documents dated to Shalmaneser III and Sennacherib. The simile of the capitulation of Rezin of Damascus seems to stand for an exact strategy used by the Assyrian army, different from the sieges usually represented on the bas-reliefs. Actually, this strategy seems to depend on the landscape features of the places, the defensive systems of the enemy city as well as on the military forces at disposal of the king’s army. According to the account of the royal inscriptions, the Assyrian army seems to be involved in other military conquests and sieges while the main centre of the region is blockaded, seemingly by a permanent group of soldiers living in a camp by the city under siege.2 1. Marcus 1977; Ponchia 1987; Milano 2005; Rivaroli _Verderame 2005. 2. See the account of both Tiglath-Pileser III and Sennacherib: while Rezin, king of Damascus, and Hezekiah, king of Jerusalem, are blockaded in their city, the Assyrian army conquers the cities of the neighbouring district depending on the main urban centre (Tadmor 1994, 78-81, Ann.
    [Show full text]