Sennacherib's Third Campaign It Would Be Difficult to Overstate The

CHAPTER THREE

Sennacherib’s Third Campaign

It would be difficult to overstate the sheer amount of biblical scholarship that has been published on the topic of Sennacherib’s campaign to Judah.1 It is not only the longest account in the Hebrew Bible of any confrontation between Israel and Assyria, but is also the most detailed description preserved in cuneiform of an Assyrian campaign to the west.2 Although any academic work has a responsibility to survey previous scholarship as a prelude to its own original contribution, in this case the length required

1 As aptly phrased by Kenneth Kitchen, Review of William R. Gallagher, Sennacherib’s Campaign to Judah, New Studies. JSS 47/1 (2002) 133, “During the past century, probably more pages have been published about the events of Sennacherib’s campaign in Palestine in 701 BC than clay tablets were written at the time of the events themselves.” For older bibliographical surveys, see Leo L. Honor, Sennacherib’s Invasion of Palestine: A Critical Source Study (New York: Columbia University Press, 1926); James A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings (ICC; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1951) 513ff; Hayim Tadmor, “Hezekiah,” EncBib 3.99 [Hebrew]; Harold H. Rowley, “Hezekiah’s Reform and Rebellion,” BJRL 44/2 (1962) 395ff; Peter Machinist, “The rab šāqēh at the Wall of Jerusalem: Israelite Identity in the Face of the Assyrian ‘Other’,” HS 41 (2000) 152–53 n. 1; Hans Wildberger, Isaiah 28–39: A Continental Commen- tary (trans. Thomas H. Trapp; Continental Commentary; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002) 359–60, 737–39. 2 As pointed out by Hayim Tadmor, “Sennacherib’s Campaign to Judah: Historiographi- cal and Historical Considerations,” Zion 50 (1985) 66 [Hebrew]. The Assyrian sources of Sennacherib’s third campaign are given both in transliteration and translation in George Smith, History of Sennacherib (London: Williams and Norgate, 1878) 53–72; Daniel David Luckenbill, The Annals of Sennacherib (OIP 2; Chicago: University of Chicago, 1924); Eckart Frahm, Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften (AfOB 26; Vienna: Institut für Orientalisk der Universität, 1997) 47–61; Walter Mayer, “Sennacherib’s Campaign of 701 BCE: The Assyrian View,” in L. L. Grabbe (ed.), ‘Like a Bird in a Cage’: The Invasion of Sennacherib in 701 BCE (JSOTSup 363; London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003) 168–200. A critical discussion of the annals, along with their value as historical sources, may be found in Honor, Sennacherib’s Invasion of Palestine, 1–12; Cornelius van Leeuwen, “San- chérib devant Jérusalem,” OTS 14 (1965) 245ff; Frederick Mario Fales (ed.), Assyrian Royal Inscriptions: New Horizons in Literary, Ideological, and Historical Analysis (Rome: Istituto per L’Oriente, 1981); Louis D. Levine, “Preliminary Remarks on the Historical Inscriptions of Sennacherib,” in H. Tadmor and M. Weinfeld (eds.), History, Historiography and Interpreta- tion: Studies in Biblical and Cuneiform Literatures (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1983) 58–75; Walter Mayer, Politik und Kriegskunst der Assyrer (ALASP 9; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1995) 37–60. 62 chapter three for such a review would be detrimental.3 The goal in retreading this ground is to take firm positions on those issues which remain contentious in academia, in the hope that new perspectives on this material will offer the chance of one day resolving such debates once and for all. The bulk of the representation of Hezekiah in Kings relates to the nar- rative of Sennacherib’s campaign against Jerusalem, and this will be the appropriate place to compare the biblical version of events with Assyrian records. Within the Deuteronomistic History, this confrontation is believed to be preserved in three discrete sources: a chronistic record in 2 Kgs 18:13b–16 (source A), and two prophetic narratives in 2 Kgs 18:17–19:37

(sources B1 and B2). The differing perspectives in these texts entail historical issues that need to be addressed, such as the question of one or two Assyrian campaigns, the dates of reign of Taharqo king of Kush, and the actual outcome of the confrontation between Hezekiah and Sennacherib.

3.1. Archaeological Evidence

The landscape of Judah changed dramatically in the wake of the campaign of Sennacherib to Palestine. The archaeological record has preserved many details relating to the severity and scope of the event, although due to the interpretive nature of the discipline many of these facts have been vari- ously understood. The field is also in a constant state of flux, with ongoing excavations that can dramatically alter the historical reconstruction of a particular site, compounded by field reports that are typically published in a gradual fashion over years or even decades. This section will under- take a brief survey of the sites and regions relevant to the period, in an effort to determine what conclusions may be drawn in accord with the detailed archaeological studies previously conducted.4 Lachish is the touchstone for ascribing comparable sites of the period, due to the recent consensus attained in the stratigraphic dating of the

3 For laudable efforts by others, see Lester L. Grabbe, “Two Centuries of Sennacherib Study: A Survey,” in idem (ed.), ‘Like a Bird in a Cage’, 20–36. 4 Discussion of Jerusalem itself will be held in abeyance until the next chapter, where it rightfully becomes the singular focus. Owing to the discord which persists with regard to the proper designation for the period in question—Iron IIB, IIC, III—such archaeological terminology will be eschewed in the subsequent discussion. For the range of proposed schemes, see Lester L. Grabbe, “Introduction,” in idem (ed.), ‘Like a Bird in a Cage’, 4.