STUDIES IN THE HISTORY AND CULTURE OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST SENNACHERIB’ 1B, HALPERN awo M.H.E, WEIPPERT AMPAIGN TO JUDAH Studies WILLIAM R. GALLAGHER BRILL LEIDEN - BOSTON - KOLN 1999anges, vB cha amp Joh =n i / by Wii ce ein he Hnay nd ak ea thy ae [Stacey Hae A 6 B.C—Canpi 2, Acne Plea 4 Boe OF =n Aen oa ne / Cp 1980 ye Ba, Le, Te een a a pat pene mn nye ne Yea on ale i pty fina pal pa ‘tet tp spp ad Se OTe i Baur id ee TR Tomy mather and in oving memory of my father, Robert M. Gallagher‘CONTENTS List of Iasratons Abbeviions| Inadsction (D1 The Tee-Campuign Hypothesis (02. Sores for Sennacer's Third Cangign (03. Concluding Remarks |The Historia! Background of ih 21-2214 T- Oracle ofthe Wilders ofthe Sea 21-10 112. The Relationship of 211-10 wih Subsequent Orcs 13.The Arabian Oracles 15, 21:11-17 1 Once ofthe Vale of Vision, 1, 221-14 15. Conchson Otter Iiah Passages: I. 10-19 and 1446-21 21 The Background of 105-18. 22. The Background of 14421 IL The Fst Phase ofthe Campaign: Phoenicia, 3.1 Preliminary Remarks 212 Soures for Senacher's Carpaiga to Penis 1V. Bight Westem Kings Bring Gifts to Semnickeib {£1 The Westin Light ofthe Assyrian Isciptos. \V-The Second Phas of the Campaign: Pili 51 Prelimiay Remarks $52 Our Main Source: Rass Cyl ns. 38-48 (700 8.) 53. lerreation an Histriograpiy 54. APowsible Assyrian Depiction of ala ‘VL The Thid Phase ofthe Campaign: dah 61 Inerpretatio and Historiography ‘VIL Source Citi of IK. 113-1997 18. 36-97. 12-Souree Crtcsm of IK, 113-1937 2 a 50 15 1s ” 1 3 10s ho 1 wt 6 1 19 a 1a 18. Msit contents ‘VIL Hise Valo of HK. 18:13:19:37 1.3637 11 The Historical Valo of A (IK. 1813-16) 82. An Evaluation of Bas an Historie! Source 1X Histol Discsson of Sources A and B Appendix: Why Hezekiah Rebull 1 The Inmens Burden of Vasaldom 2 Sargon Had Paced Stain onthe Assyrian Epi, 5. The Eidamse| 44 Sages Death 5. Seamacherib Appeared tobe Conary {6 Seaacterb Lon Conta of Babylon 5 Other Countries Joined the Rebelion #Retelon Gave Heeskah Tenor a aacnce 9. Conclusion Bibliography Index of Bis Pssages Index of Poper Nouns Subject Index Akadian Words sd Phrases Hebrew Words ane Phrases Plus 160 160 1a 263 268 25 261 268 208 2 m m mm 25 bas an m8 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1. Coartal Cy, Original Dawing IV, 8 Fig. 2. Beiogd Cy, Bota sn Flndi, Monument de Naive Fig. 3. Besieged City, Bota and Flan, Monument de Nine Fig 4. Interrogations, Original Drawing VI, $ Fi. 5. Inverrogations, Orginal Drawing IV, 32 Fig. 6 Imerrogations, Bota and Fadi, Monument de Niniv, I, 146 Fg 7. Enemy gods, Original Drawing 1.65 Fg 8. Noseropes, Bota and Fandin, Menoment de Nive, I, 118 Fig 9. Neserope, Bota and Fandin, Monument de Nive, I, 83PREFACE, ‘This ook sahest: handed revision of my dserton Semnacherib’s ‘Third Campaign, writen under the guidance of professors Hermann “Hunge of the Isit fur Orentalitik and Georg Saver of he lett fir Altesamentiche Wissenschaft und Biblsche Archiologi, Uni ‘ery of Vienna began the project ely 1988, completed i as 3 Giseration i summer, 1992, and revised i from 1995 10 Ades 1999 The time which passed between handing it as a dsertation nd completing its revision enabled me to dcover and extpate mis- ‘ake, improve or elininate weak spots, condease the Wording, find fd add ew primary sources, and incorporate the reste of ewer pubbeations Now i good ne for «book like histo be writen. Decades of painstaking work im Assyilogy have yclded plications which re [St enormous vale fr anient Near Haser stubs. The SAA serst ‘ovis reliable editions of a large par of Neo-Astyrian ltr, estes, conte, admiistivedocamens, queries to Shamash, td ‘er txts, The royal inscription publications of H, Tadmo” and R Bowser are now standard works fr study and efeence. The study of ‘he tsripns of Sargon has ben great faiated wth he pu cation of A. Fuchs"E- Frahm brought eateency ino the extremely ‘apex problem of Senaches'stcrigtion with his elope of text His new eitions of some txt ad sph comments have been very sifu! These are ony the largest works having the most relevance for this book. Consieabl more books and ances ould be meone, Namercus people deserve my gait for helping me in hig project My dsertation advisors, profs. Hunger and. Sauer, wert onerous with her ine and gave me good idence on varios pro ‘ee Te iin Ta oA SGA Ro, Rat a ime Anns chi Sarg era Bt ARE a itm hl eS i 8A Bhai PREFACE bem, Enka Bleiben of the Insti flr Orientals, University of| Viena, ws help my stady of Astin pale relies. Michael of the Univers of Wisconsin Madison fead an early deft of Chapter One and bought several weak points tomy attention. John Russel of Columbia Universi, Now York, seat me some of his pho ‘ogrphs of inscription in Senacher's place. Estat Fabm of the Universit Heidelberg sent me his meticulous tansiteration of tbe Rassam Cylinder and dupiates before it appeared in his book Hel rt Rainer advised me onthe dsibtion of olive tees. The Bosh Museum set me some photos; ough an exchange of ltrs with Dr. JE. Curis the Tres of the Bntsh. Museum Kindly pave me ‘permission o publish them. Waren and Carl alton Reps me to ‘overcome some ofthe challenges presented ty my compute and pro ied me wit working space for this project Once again this ist mld be prolonged have recetved some much needed. guidance in preparing the rmanscript for SHCANE fom Baruch Halpern co-ditrof the eis. atin Rade, de Desk Eto or Ancient Neat East and Asian St les at Bl, ately advised me onthe mameous aspects of bringing ‘he manuscript into camera ay form Alfed Charon help me it {he final tages of making the camera ready cop. inaly Tool ke thank my wie Marina who did nt Hose her confidence in me despite the eng of time Which the project lasted. ‘She was at my side fom te bepnnng. Needess to say publishing this book is eleasing my word 0 the Scrutiny of a larger group of experts and cetical readers. Naraly 1 mesponsble or ll mistakes, and os a npr, am responsible Toc any ceticim of other people's work. Unoabely his ook hat some las, bt tis being plished in the hope that its good points ‘utreigh hem. T am confient that open ietsion among scholars sea comecive to ts shoncoming. WR. ABBREVIATIONS. CHW. san Arian rend came, Cn, 18 ‘ty Slo adr enor, Win, 1968 EAM to tof op oni ‘thn wr Liar Aye Pa ad Mepis, PSR on Rl cine Nw He i rr ‘ip lsc SPS ome chen Ke Me ‘Anews Uetcay Seman Ste, Berien Snes Miche Apjeet enes Weto ion Bike erg, or. sepa a ‘USAMINEL” Bocas Ano! Maitre od Na Ba Trott ta ke he Aurion Diary of he rd eine of ‘ener of Cho, Cage 8 evausom Se he bp Ace Hay toe ita Quy, Wahagon DC ‘renee eter for yin a. eB Mo Endep rie ‘on chris Chas Pa. ‘Ee am Bone nS ci, AD Bh. 2) SIS ei chi Arh Kano an, A ‘chs ion A Nn Tene, nts er eta raat (80439 Ras 952. See eh ne om Lee rie The Ste, Ge Kae Rte thes nd ois Ltn tee fe vere {Cee ath oh ir: angry bani, weiner Cole Ann Cina Telrad Cal Connery, Edhar ABBREVIATIONS ” i ey Gn eo a Se et atte Cron mmr Eco eee See Set an Bere Sener, meni ee Retin TIE ae ret te Pepe tate vss ane SE a nap tt re viene aay ha teem Sipe hirer get ies ee Serres amare Pa SS coer Eel ig ont meme cereABBREVIATIONS ACB 4 Plt Mey of Pas ase Rays 15872 [HE Reto Pr Chom ei fre A LV tay Wat Ro Copenh aia age, A Fal ineripo of Meopei, To. EvBisngB. Moet ie Haein der Asyloge. Bem. gue 2 Fc renga Ut roo ele hme eanpne de Shere 10. ate ‘XG Th apn of Serge ag of Arie Pa 92 1, tym. Rairt Srpon's Ko on fan 2278 he Lapa. IC etc Sou Bat Le, 89 ‘Dace Te anal of Smack OP) Ens 1904 Seren Hy afte nar Ne Eu, Wee, a Sse outa eens ‘Snip a mms dem inna ural he Ou Tame Ret, Peer Sa atr o Ari (08 ) Ne Hae, 1025 The SEAA ua Ton SEAK tr Sy Tr Say Fre gues Sina Mot ate Daten des Ais Oe et ands KA Khe, The Third iucmedate Period ht ap (110.880, CHGorsa, Upon febot (An 3) Rome 18 ‘ett Be ee ABBREVIATIONS si Se crete Te ‘Etch Appice Sees oan LeeINTRODUCTION In 701 RC Senmacerb king of Asya le is army against some ‘abs the westem par of his empie. Know in assy as Senne ‘hori's third campaign, thie war wan recorded i he Hebe Bible ‘there God is said to have intervened om behalf of Judah and saved the Jerusalemites from depotion and theless of thee nana enti. ‘The Biblical ecord isthe reason Why his war has any sipifeance {ody 2,700 yeas Iter. O's vescue of His people inthis css fs emtined nthe memory of Jews and Christan Inveres inthe war was revived inthe 19th entry due to some si nie aivances. Layard unearthed Sennacherb's place, discovered the Lacish ects and Asburtunpal’s ray. Others deciphered ex hiform, Numerous Akladian inseiptions, cluding ar eopors of Sennacer, were acquired by museums and poblshed. In TES] and 1853 Avyran versions of Stmachei's Chir campaign appeared in transations by Raison and Hinks Scholars andthe general pub- Ticcould ow consider the compsign from the Assyrian pot of view ‘Not everthing was clear, however. Thee bad lng been obeur- siesin the Bbc text,Sennacherib’s smal were also unclear part. td those prs whch were clear were often diffi to recone with ‘he Bible People who tied to reconsrct th apa fom, the Ay tn abd Bitialsources are o very diferent conclsions.* ssc ny we) Ede ns uy ua se A Lap, co SS TIS cera a vopieleeiae eas cece "BS Chl oh an the Arn rs, GB 3) Lan 1967 See lene wmnrigearavniorseeenens ES ee ee iin risen canetttriiee Soeur utr ent BEN) Pa pe pl pos fear 2 The whch atone a KES nn2 isrropucion ‘Today the nambee of opinions a6 to wha happened in 701 is 50 large at anjone who examines the tops confeated with an ener ‘mous body of secondary erature as Wel as baie questons on me ‘hod, erry crtcism and sound judgement. In recent decades four aids towards studying the carpign have emerged. The fist that ll he sources can fe used fo produce 2 cakeren picture of he ar. This atitade optimistcally assumes ht the sources ae largely ‘eile andthe Biblical sources only concern one eampsign, no 0 ‘The seconde that uch reconstructions shoud ot be temp a al ‘The soutes ate too cotaictry with one ane o ever be ton cle The thie tiie ht the B source, IK. 1817-1937, tun ‘eiable and sould noc be used in any econstuction tempts! When ‘Bis eliminated, the other sources cn be usd fo rconstac the cam ign. A fourth viewpoim is tht te soures, especialy the Biblia, Indicate thatthe ASSyrans conducted (wo campaigns gains Jodsh Usually proponents ofthis viewpoint postulate that Sennacer led 3 second cmpalgn aginst Jodah between 689 and 691. Resntly bo ‘ve, some have asserted tht the Biba acount contain mets ‘fan invasion of dah wich occured in Surgon's eign (72.705)* ‘This stay mat elonely adheres to the fst ofthese spproches ‘There i abit of posible direction nthe ead of ths ward ne Is fen forced to grope around inthe dark. Nevers we can make popes through the labyrinh due to advances im Assrilogy, gptoogy, and archacology. Only sal part of the advances a= rectly concern Seanachers hid campaign, but information which Indie elvan canals be vale “The book is divided ito two main pans. Te fist part, Chaps ‘One at Two, examines cen omeles in Kish i nde to acetal thee historical background The pasages ae I 21:122 4 (examined ‘ Chaper One). 10'519 ands 14-21 (both discussed in Chap KA Kiso samo eae popoen o h euplt CE. Th id ‘mura Pd Ey (1008), ae 8 pe Lea en {SRV ons Ps ec a Bre, AA 9) Wo "Cae aha yon Cri RS "Wie sme nen srt hi ef hon et ch nee or {Sorrento} ms esp 11.CF Seager “Te Fp Pay ‘SEpyp Pectin ran Coen Cal 87 pp 27 ppp pert or rps Yat es Pld i rrRopUCTION 3 {er Two), Bocas the passages concen Mesopotamia, oe can employ ‘Asrilogical dat beter understand the. “Gre of my hes i tht Chapter One ill explain the background of I 221-14 to most people's stsfaton. This oracle hs cased norms misunderstanding concraing the events of TOL and ste ia atta toward hem, bu tals as enormous potential erich tour knowlege af the years 70501, The key to understanding Is 22- 11 es inte terretation of, 2. In Chee Two the dscssion of 1s 10'5-19 has implication for ow we should regard the abshageh's ‘specs. Tak tht the reader carefully conse he agaments of oth capers because the conlusions afect any atempe to reconsct ‘Senschenb's campaign. “The second part of the book, Chapers Thre to Nine, examines some Biblical and Asytan sources of Seanacherb’s ted campagn ‘Themain tens of sad ae Sennacerb’siseriptons nd HK 18-15 193711, 36537 ‘My steps for staying the Sources areas follows 1) determine wha the soars are 2) offer accurate anslatons ofthe sources 3) Take an istriographic analysis of the sources: 4 Laser the r= Tibi of th sources and 9) forthe Judacan phase ofthe campaign ‘Combine the historia information from the sutces inorder to place the evens in s0ugh chrnologiel ore We shal now discuss these step in more deta "The fit ep is ncesary because the background of teas such as the Azekah Imcrption and material fom the books of Isiah end Micah ar often snler the texts say cocern Senachenb's thd ‘ampsin oe they may conc diferent situation, aly one shoul eabih tht such texts concem Senacherib's third campaign before oe une them at evidence, but in some eases this is impossible and one freed to work with probabilities. On the fice a sensible priscile is hat one shoal not se a ext ues ot {issue that concer Senachei's hid campaign fo its Beer to ‘Sve lew information than ope false sfrmation. have largely fo fomed this principle, but not competes Woe omits a source de © ‘ocean ins background, the termining touces could yield 2 ‘stored impression of the evens, and this distortion could have been ‘olde ifthe uncertain source had in fact been sed. The Tikelhood that text concn the hi amp musa be consid "Theres frthe ficly in theft sep for IK. 18:13-19:37, ‘Most peopl think concerns the war of 71, bt there isa question of4 erRopUCTION how many sources comprise the account. Scholars usually sy there the, abeleé BI. and B2, swells other ations, This opi ‘on is largety conjectural, bu mist be adress, becne accepting ‘or rejecting tin part or emily has major coneguences for fen: structing the eampsion ‘Step two, ofleringacurte tzslatons ofthe sources, sl evidestnecesiy- Some eeconstions ofthe war in Jada have translation mistakes incorporated into therm. Some ofthe emo made (om Akan texts are now avoidable to advances in Asyreloy. For tansating Biblical fxs, possible coropsons in the wane: nite ext are factor, Fortunately Gonalves, Wildberger anothers ‘ve made good text eial remarks onthe passage they have st. died and some of thet work as been fil forme” Repetaby two ‘ter good books have teen ake into acount, one becuse thas ‘onl appeared recealy, the other duet language bars ‘The third step, analyzing the historiography ofthe docunests, oncems the mental oremation ofthe sacent writers. One mast sec ‘wha priciples determined thet selction and presentation of the terial what sons they wanted o each her ear, how hi view Point muy have inNuenced or distorted the soy, nd how caret they ere presenting thefts. ‘Such sie are relively easy for Senacher’s annals. There is ‘ent of material with which one an compare is count of the ca gn othe west. The ster of hie annals recetsons ae also Knows ‘nd since numerous recesions ofthe thd campaign account have ‘survived, we ea follow ie rdactonaldevelopmeat, Of couse these Advantages do nt mean that all the questions concming the ans can besser Forte Biblical texts one has the problem of dating them and tak ing possible reiconal sages into consveration. Those questions of {en canot be answered without resorting to exine conjecture. The ning snd eedacnal history ofthe Bibles texts we topes Which cannot be compeely avoided in his stay, yt Beem the saewer fo 1 FrPd Gong cp se ht Wes commen a sa spe Rat eee ee A, 2 Fe i he ns aa ou cet, wzaw Btn a ek "mt Cie a Sd ri dela adic n200 en Gc See Re irropucrion s these questions ae often 5 conjectural I shall avoid dem much ae posible, Ths fr IK. 1813-1937, donot concern myself with the fole of Bu inthe redaction of the try nor am To concerned about the dates of it edactonl sages maily adress how scurtl the tent eas the events of 701 and this most be determined by other ‘Asetining the historia reliability of the sources (he forth step canbe ahioved in 0 wa "Phe fit way i fo compare the varios sources with ape another. “The tet contradictions between he sures ae remarkably fw. The only major contradiction i that both the ASyrian and Jean sources ‘aim that he ober ie as soundly defeated. A minor comradiction {sta the Asian and Judean soures specify diferent ameuns of ‘iver wish Hezekiah sent to Senachen. ‘More toubing than the conadictions are the wasons between sourees One question e whether the report of Tahara’ apprcch (I 159) real inthe bale of Eekeh, and if so, whee the bate ‘ccured afer the Assyrian invasion of Sud had begun, a suggested by he Bible or whether i cocured before the invasion of Ja, 35 Ste in the Asryian account. There re also tensions between the ial soores, och as Heasia’ssurtener at Lachish being for lowed ty the mb-shageh coming to Jerusalem to demand the surrender tthe chy (compare IK. T1316 to IS). Another question is ow the extremely embitered is oI 2:1-4 fs the Iaah fT 18-17-1937, who protic the salaton of Jerusalem ‘There ate several possible Teasons for tensions between sures. ‘One sence may have alte information; petpe we donot fly ut sand what a source is sying: perhaps we Have misanderstood the background of one ofthe sources; pehaps the chrnologial ode ina ‘urge hasbeen darted; a rorce ma lack afew important details ‘which could lay the obscures. In ever cerety explain the contrition and esions, undo standing the test stroprphcall is useful as fra we can afta However question sacha whether the writer adhered tase chro nologial ede, whether he dviord his informatio, whee her ‘ered and passed on ditoed information or wheter the Weiter tsonersoa his inforatin te often bard to answer, Some cot ‘ition and tensions must therefore be explained in another way oF remain uncapained6 rRopucrion ‘The second way f0 determine wheter sore i ible is by bringing in rlevart information ofall sons which could lant the roblems. This typeof iformation is depestelyneded fo Bete at ‘derstand he campaign. We shall discuss the poses and pits ‘of bringing spplementary infrnaton int the dcusion bel ‘The ith step, combining the inormaton for the sures in oder ‘to make a ough outline ofthe wr in Joh, 4 nadest step towards ‘writing «narrative ofthe campaign. The coalusions ofthe olin te auious the uncertain pars are placed i parentheses.” Nevertheless ‘his stage ir also problema People ive tly warned against “harmonizing” the sources." IF one wats believe something na source which contradic o stands intensin to anaier soure, there the temptation to accep the data reliable and improvise an explanation to expan the iit. This approach may place too much faith inthe hstosal elit ofall Par of a source; it may dsegard chronologies! beaks within tex, ld the smprovsod explanations ae almost sways unsopprted eon. jects. However the difrence between annecepableharmonion Ss and eonsrcting a vet in al cml mt always Spalngr wrote that econcling ll the sources i ot possible He is paly nigh. The autor of Sennachei'saals would ever have secopted th interpretation ofthe wa offeted in IK 18 1719.37 My ‘esetvations about his option we as follows. Firs, examining bot diverse soarces of n eve together sa natural extension of ty ing the sores. Advising someone not to attempt x rconstnaction of the campaign from all te tlevat sources close to saying do no stndy the sources and do not seach Sennaheat's thd cpaign. Unless one want the war tobe a iboo top, ten people mst ape i these prablens. The kha scholars wal ach nonsensical on ‘tusions is one ofthe consequences of ia curiosity and acadec fedom. The risks mitigated whe one tres to eerie so judge ‘nent in evaluating the sures. Second some tension between souees Sisappear when we Beer understand what the text ay. Ths Spl an ER is C363 00 pS ‘aD Reting ee {hily ese tarmac Pte BA Spine Cae SUT EI INTRODUCTION 1 t's alleged contradiction between IK, 1932 and Sennacheib's als doesnot ell exist” "iy thd point goes beyond what Spalinger woe, but is eevant tothis content When source give au nfrmaton,concating that the whole source is seen has the same weakness ny inductive re “Singha he specific ease may ao accurately refet hesitation as {Toole A scholar cou owe some valuable, accurate information i hele concludes tits complete sou worthless. Thus TK, 1939 {the Taharga anachronism) and 19-3 (he slauphter of 185,000 Asy- fans by an angel ae wt adequate reason in themselves for reading the hoe B sure (IK. 1:17-9:37) as histoncaly worthless. “Thre i relly no other choice than to som ot the reliable data ‘rom the unelal othe main sources and in eases of doub 0 leave ‘Cerin question ananswered tnd ot base any reconstcton of the War onthe move dubous information. Ihave gained once inthe Soundness of his etbod because afer the texts have been propery tramlned and their historiography bas been wderstod. some ofthe tension eter disappear ox have relatively simple explanations. ‘My imi safeperd guna harmonizing” tbe sources es inthe fat four steps ef or mebod shal ty to comely asl the texts ‘ed understand their background. Isha examie the viewpoints and rejics ofthe ancient writer, nd above all, wheter they sstoted Gr flsied dats By going through ese steps and contin Sowedging the fatty of improvisational conjectures, the possiy ‘of hanmoining the aisprate sources is etl reduced rei how the second pat ofthe book i organized. The whole campaign is divided into ce phase the Phoenician pas, the Pils phate and the Jadsan phase Tis division fllows Senns- her's anal and is pry aici The soures concerning each have ae dcussd under these tee Beading. In or stay of the Source tention i pd to the frst for steps discussed above, ie ‘enuf the relevant sures, tansne the mos important one, di ‘uss hioriraphical questions and evaluate the information inthe Sources fri reliably. The th step, propsing an outline ofthe invasion of Sed based onthe sources, s done in Chaper Nine ge eng 1h ph See5 [BETRODUCTION 01. The Two-Campaign Hypothesis ‘One hypothesis abot Senschen's campaign snot dscuse in this book, te hypotiesis tht Senacherib campaigned twice aginst Jada, It hasbeen propounded a Teast far back as H, Winkler ™ “The mai apunent in favors thatthe Hebrew sources, ra ast some of the Hebrew sources, ae reconcile withthe Akadian, pecially reguding who won the war Other arguments have also teen advanced infavrof wo campaigns" “The min prolem with posting second western campaign by ‘Sennacheib lis in the cll that the Biba account bas contd to diferent war ino a Sngle wae. This harly seems likely hen ‘one considers tht Fdacan chronicle material was acesile oo east fone of the redoctors of Kings. Jodsean historian shou not have onfased two sepate wars on hit native sll when be al acres to 8 fed source, nor ist ikl that be would have deiertely conte the evo forthe sake of simplifying. Tie ebection aso applies tote ‘lam that Some Kings matral concerts & wat which took place in ‘Sargon's eign The hypotess about a wat in Sargon's ei being thing IK 1:13 cond solve a chronologies! dificult does ‘sothng 10 solve ope ofthe bigest problems inthe one-cmpaign theory, the appearance of Tahar, King of Cush, The presence of Te has in L199 soguets dh if there bad been second westem ‘amps it would have en place Inter than 701, not ear. SOMES Snr son 9 Ptr, 241 Ravan SAG i ie ro emia 29830 si 1c 3° VT36 (1978p 2698 ein ced ABTS ST ‘Grete ttt An coi of 71 a 01 BP ec y the abgch wre congue of Sapo ad of Src. i tesco mir macs tp. lag 0, Bt ting The Fle Soman SHAME Leen Yen 192 gp Std egal sa eins Cant fh n 718 8. Semen may ab eda Wh my kien Hess orn K moc tt erRoDUCTION 9 “Tt here ae bscue detail concerning Semachen's hid cam gn i obviows, and thi stalyenes no pretension to solving ll the problems. However the problems are not serious enough 10 justify [osliig of second major invasion of Judah careful eaing of The sures shows that some of he contrition donot elly exist ‘ter contradiction and tensions simply reflec the ideologieal ein ton of he wer “The arguments advanced in favor ofa second western campaign canbe fed and some of them already have been refuted. However ‘thorough discussion of the arguments would requ oo much space, Sort do not refute them bere If oe ofthe information in or Sources an be combined without resorig to unacceptable harmonization, there mo ned to pow frter campaign. The questions which ‘na be answered shal simply remain unanswered. (02. Sources for Sennacherib's Third Campaign “The following isa suey ofthe avilable sources for studying the “ampsizn, Noll the souresmeatoned are dncursed ie his Book. (021. Asnyrian: Sure writen sources 02.11. The Amale (nthe Asyran side thee ae tree main writen sources forthe third ‘ampign. The filles account i in Seanacherb'santals. The earliest copes ofthe account date 19700 B.C, and it rermined consistent ‘reel for seme minor changes” The most portant of the eal ‘opts, the Rar eylndr bas oly recently bon fly published by shan Fahim" Until now one customarily used the Chicago and Ty Toe pins athe main tex for Sennacheri's dud campaign.» Also ‘sell wae George Smith's Cylinder, which is avlable to me in 7 Seas oan mn ciara cee nae Teese weber ioe et eet0 -NeTRODUCTION ‘eanslaton® Although 1 cll he anals the “Rasim Cylinder” vai fans ffm later editions ofthe anal have been added snd propely denied as suc in my trnnations. Copies of Sennacheri's als ‘ae numerous. Below aera fw of the pblished oes ‘The tassam Cynder 700.C)* Shiner (87 BY ‘het! Pam (34 BC” The King Pram (6346) ‘The Jrwalem Pris (601 B.C Tre Tylor Ps 918.) The Cheage Rn (6 B.C) Needles to say the anal are very biased. Because they were meant to exalt the Assyrian king, the sribes concealed oe expliod day eran fats which didnot fi hie potre Tete were alo problems ff space. A Iot of information bas een omitted frm the anal and ‘when one tie to reconrrac an even inal ts comple Irom what ‘emai one cance ho il they have tl note problem ofthe anal stele ofr. They seem to hve teen amined ehonoogically, bu thaze ae eases in which 3 topical smrangemett was pefened. The main question it 10 wha extent the ‘hronolopcal or ofthe annals ts ben dite. The question be eee needy ema eee mete Ph Sorter ters Saline tee cat anr sare anata eae SS cette et 2 eT seein arte a ersah nein Ci Sang Water oe "Sorte Chcag and Tae prism. c.f. 22 sve, Moe information cm the regen meron a ama ESE nerropucrios " ‘comes most racial forthe Assyrian invasion of Phiistin and Judah {Gall wrote tha the stack om Pista followed by te atackon Judah tea atic dstnction ofthe annals and tht in Tact, operations ‘ans both were condoced simultaneously To Some extent hs tte, bot do ot bsheve thatthe distinction between the invasion of Pista andthe invasion of Suh is completely aria. Uhave a> fund thatthe main Avsytan thst was ist against Phils, eben oun Judah Calis eaoning led him infer atthe bale of Ele eh cecum at ater stage of the campaign than heal lain" ave piven reabons why ths seonstction is doubt.” ‘Daring the last ew years the Assan annals have bon intensively studied for their hioriography and the results of these stds are ‘pf in naling the anna for thi lability” Of pacar help i this study ata rite of H. Tadmor which provided some val ‘lenge on Sennacherhsacoant of his third earpaign 02.12. The Bulls Two bull ssepions are used in our study, Bulls 2 and 3 are a omposite text fom hee sources Apparent the two min sources ‘were to pis of bulls, facing back wo back. Layard discovered both rs in cout Hof Senachenb's place” Each pair of balls had an Inscription, tn the inscriptions were nearly identical teach ober. “The bulls corded Senacheni's Gat sb campaigns aswel asthe ‘vo pony campaigns Berane both pais were danaged, making a ‘Composite text wat unavoidable. Most ofthe text was reconstcted {n,n nd nee, weer, ak ara Ste, ‘iden SH Cope ale en, 18 alatienion aon elie Sr gf nf bal pn AE Lay coe he un of ceo Boyan p15 Hi espn ensigns cep. 9. “Gnu a ine we to con mo gd veer oa ee ~2 sTRODUCTION fom the two pairs of bull, but third bull Smith's Bull 1, was re qed fll estore Seamachers' epithet.” “The iscriptions on Bus 2 and 3 date o 694 a the eat. The ted campaign account has been grea abievited in copison fo the amas Neverteess shows what the Asians considered tbe ‘ost imporant inthe campaign, because the most noteworthy details ad the highest pony for econing Bul scription 4s snoter pir of bls Their txt has ben cut ‘andi nn the Brith Msum. Bulls 4 comtained the accounts ‘of five campaigns and the begining ofthe sixth. The fs oar cam ins are shore tan the anoals, but the hind campaign basa fe ‘esas aod oi which do ot appear anywhere else. Those deals Imestly concern the secon on Phonicia. The details may have eon ‘ded to Bulls 4 because of thei eatin in Seanachen’s place. The tulls Masked the main enranceto Senna’ throne root (Ri. Some flies inthe throne room probably depicted the King’s campaan,icluing a sane ofthe Phoenician oe Pisin coast.” (022. Anprian: Unsure Write Sources ‘Only one source should be assigned to the dub eatery, the s- called "Sennachei's ltr to go,” which we shal ell the Azekah Incriton because Kenton: Aska,” les the campuign of an Assyrian king on the Judean hilitne fren, Thor is. ged hance thatthe tpie is Seanacherb's third campaign, bt Beaune Se urn he Case eae ae a tne ‘Gomg.” ARRIM 4 (1986) pp. 28-30 and E. Frahm, ESE pp. 113-16. ° Fel Septet ae at ect. mgr ars ebaloei Ae TT Sgiccraccinmm stay ite ‘Sac ise en Lape. mga rept nun Shhh SR tn [ole eV SER ae hres aay wipcrtncdeumna ior sean inte SP pil meat haat Sens tar sats cops SaSoe aN ohd wT ce haa esearch ceoncawaeeas ia Sir weace boca stRoDUCTION ry some features do not suport his assignment we shall no use dhe inccrpion in our econsraction ofthe campaign” 023, Aurion: Place Reliefs Seanacherb’s pace probably had numerous relies depicting the ‘hd campaign, bat mos are no cused bere, The main problem is that we castor precisely idety the subject mater of most reli. “The obvious exepion is th Lachish eles, where an inscription com firms the cy ame. Because rich has seady been writen onthe [achicha are alo not investigated ee "Amor ep in sing Seach palace rei i book by Jon Russel? who tentatively identified the rooms in which third campaign rit were found" In most cases more exact labels ofthe fies ae dificult or impossible to achieve. Thus a maritime scene ould indicate the Phoenician or Philstine cas, but this sto litle Saformation to ecoaseuc an event abl plac in the pope sequence twitter events, The mebods ued fn Menfying rd campaign ‘cones are aso fli. Russel plausibly concluded thatthe ret of Room Slab | depicted a thd eampsion tate de the architec ‘url fentres ofthe ening sty on he elit We now know tha he elie dos not concem Ssonacherb's third campaign, Do rather hit {ith. Our improved knowledge is dv to rahm's sucess in ec ‘ering the ty mane on he damaged sla nerpion pateetiearermceecaestens tauimustereecmerincecmeos ae Bry ny scar i ih et ats a Senn aaa sats tee ati eee earn 4 Ym), , XM, XNIV. NXXIV, NXVL XXXVI XU, LVF and LXV neti rnirhd Maen ame Stel oneeee roe Roe4 nrRopucTioN Employing the slabs for reconsructng Senacteri's invasion of te west thus nreases the litiood of mistakes coming ito ou or lusions. The ale of mos rele sna that they enable oto suet evens, but ate that they provide insights ino ow the As) fhtnarmy was equipped, ho functioned a vat aad ia camp and wha terol ofthe King as” ‘Neclss to sy the place aif are tobe regarded with septic ‘iam beans they are ropagand. One never find dead Asyran ‘Soldier on them nor astuation ia which Assyrian military spereny {scale int question. Iis thas ll the more noteworthy that Sena ‘herbs elif sometimes show heavy fighting sad the defenses at tempts to save thes, 024. Beal 1K. 18:1919:97 (36-37 This mul iy fate mos complica. Thera qustons a1 tow muy sources makz up hse pasa: how and wy te tues vere pied tops they what ei egal Sti Leten ‘ss and what he stall ofeach sare Ply oe ims come «huge amout of secondary tae on ths Hay, ‘Mich of wich conte dou cons, “= “Ted of hs tox aio cbse Te ary could ot have had ts preset form foe 6b tenon of Somachoi's mr de Som believe that ars of te Hetil’ ayer ed oa’ props, wer tenn he exc pet. Theda an etna Hist ofthe et are gly cnc ops I peony saps that the stay of eae aan (sues B) was coped aly ‘oon at the war and twas tly nt very een fom spe Sen fom, ough etn pars, emacs exh tc, props Hezckih's per a pus of las proposes, er ed ae “AS hed a the prior setec, Lf the al vewpin fat 1K. 181-1937 cont of two main source, A and B Taso ge ‘easons why th von f ino two fre sues Band 2, Should be jee. Because some peopl onsite B sore to ‘holo pay igen yw tenis the hte cach Seon oft Final Tht Wa he A dB oes wee oo ‘kn. XK Bes he enh re bon ei ee et ‘St be nn wi stooped enter net Oe ah erRODUCTION 1s placed together according to chronological principe Some conjc- {ore so why they were placed together ths manner ar offered ‘Only afer hese pe hive Been taken can one se the ad accounts at soutes fr Sennacenbs thd campaign “wo final points mst be made fo source Fit thee ae gape in the aleady complicted dicsson. For example, Harimser's werk ‘sl harcly be mentioned there Hardmeier gave mich how tie book, bute dd not adequately examine the events of 71. Thus he did sot consider the work of Kitchen regarding Takar’s inval= ‘ment in the war, hough be shuld have known bout st cough the ile of Liwak” Ofcourse there are problems withthe Bia txt tot conchaing that IK T8197 taki Geshe mit hi Torschom Ansch,” jr prematare” One should not assign a sx ‘etary tackround Yo this text when the eipth-centry background ‘shih pps to elt as not ben satisfactorily dared ‘Second, because Telieve that should be rea a nity and that ‘tis rable ia mast respects, my discussion of i may have an apolo- ‘tic tea tines, This because aoe vey parsge of Bas becn Called itoqbstion at some tine or eb. The discussion af B's isto tial vale dete i pat, but Trott because respect he sho- {ars whew opinions fer rom mine. Ter opinions met an answer. 025, bial: hr 32 1 and Ml Chronisles were comgosed Inter han I Kings and nt al of ‘hei material ssl reible. Meyers estates thatthe Books sere largely inthe final form in ea. 400 B.C. although some minor expansions may have occured ty" cit er Pp Se or da Unga aa, AN ‘hfe 3 yen rrr Neh ene une pen. ‘ifthe Moers | Cron nz Aare) Caen Cn. 8S,6 rTRODUCTION Chr, 32:1-23, which concerns the Assyrian campaign, was mosly taken ard abbevsted frm TK 8:13-19.7. However Ih. 3228 Aeseribes Hezsia'specpratins fr the invasion an hs no relston- ‘Ship tthe Kings text Kmay be dependent om ie 2286-11, tui Isaiah the Chile saw Hezeih'sfrifiation project in pos tive light For he invasion itself the Chronicle seated ut ensios iin the Kings teat ad interpreted some details mre cll. Ths te mentions Senachenb's servants going to Jers to demand i surrender but doesnot mention te large army which went With them, Pethape besnane he could not rvonile this with Laas peed that Seancherb would no besiege Jerusalem (If Cy. 323, ef 1K. 19:32). The Chronicle abo made the alleged Assyrian blasphemy les tmbiguous by adding the ve othe rab-sageh's perce "Who ‘mong the gods ofthese mations wbich my fathers destroyed mas able to save its peopl from my had that your God wile alo save yo from my hand emphasis my own, I Che. 32:14 ef. 11K. 1838)?" "The UChr. ext is ieresing in hat we can See how an ance reactor handled his mater, bv is ess valuable for econsracing ‘he campaign. Threfore {do ot big this source much nto the di ‘tssion IC. 32, however, set ns praprases of 1K. 18.13 19:37 When passage in Kings not ler, I Chr an show ow 2 Inter adsean vaerstod it 026, Biblical: Prophetic Material “Two cighth-cenry prophets let Behind texts concerning the war ot Jah Micah 1-16 lis some towas which were peabably conquered in TOK; Is 1-35 i abudant in oracles telating to TO1 and the yess lmmedisely preceding it The main peoblem sth the exc crm. tances of the oracles ae often sbscure and parclarly 13315 Sen a & compli of oracles spanning weveral entre. heeore ‘ake lined use of Ish and Micah, though Usarpect that lt of ‘materi in sah which scholars regu as Inte concers the yeas 705 10. ‘As noted above, Lhe includ a died ncusion of I, 21- 22:14 in Chapter One, Ihave sogested concrete station asthe tackground fr thse capers and shall Ropeully establish to most reads satsiton tha iors Weteweten 70 0 708 ora ep Sona Oh 32-2. ae Labi, eTRODUCTION ” 0227. Grek Sources Two Greck sources are elevantt thi war, Jovephus, Ant IX, $283 ST quotes a fagment of Menander in which an Asryran king invades Phoenicia inthe reign of Eousios, King of Tye, The Asean cut ofthe mala water supply of Tye fer five year. The Assyrian ing ame is either badly comopid,o it was not nthe eign tex all. Josephs tought the king was ShalraneserV, but since the ory his some afintes to Seaacheri's invasion of Phoenicia, the ‘esto rss as to wheter the Fagen recounts the event of 701 “erodes I. 41 eles tht Seaachea Wed to invade Faye nd advanced as fra Plasiam before Hepsists (=P nt sme tice wo destroy the Asians” weapons (hey gnawed onthe leather. ‘The wry ha litle istrcl mers bt shares with he Judas tad tin the viewpoint ht Sennacherib war defetd by mal Because some basi questions about these sues canot be an were, do nt ure them fo reconstuct the wars" However discus the problem of whether one shoul et the Herodotus sry to the ‘mieulousdeiverance aI K. 19.35, and ifs, how one should do 028 Archaeological Finds Arctucolopicl data concerning Sennscherib's hid campaign canbe ‘vie int four catego: 1) The Lachish excavation, 2) Te ids at Jresalem, 3) The fk tarps, and 4) General archaeological da “This erence i important for anyone wh wees w parative ofthe war, Besaese this book is more preliminary and focuses on writen Sources the archacolopcl finds af not disused (029. Indirect Bidence ‘A lace vat of sources do nat drctly concern Seomacherit’s thi “pip bt are relevant tin oer ways. The wefunes of sich “ooces maf T. Chronology A knowledge ofthe abso chzenology of Judah, Egypt and Mesopoumia is inportant fr any sty of the campnin ‘The 28th dynasty of Eyl for example, relevant cane IK 19°9 rmetonsTahorgs coming to 6 tle with Sennacherb. Te strc18 erRopucTION reliability of hs verse paly depends on whether Taargs was abl to lead an army against Seonachenb in 71. A fall teste the topic requires the investigation of Egyptian, Asian and Greck source, A solution cannot be expected unt a new discovery provides ur with fre information. 2, Background knowledge. The third campaign shoul be studied together withthe evens leading opto as wall it result This re ‘uites «general knowledge ofthe royal inscriptions of Tilathpeser Ii, 'Sargn, Seaacherib'and Esathaddon for 4 start. Biblical dt, NeorAssyrian eters and economic ext flo mporaat, 5. Similar Conditions and Situations Sometines evidence from stuns sma to those of Sennachei's campaign can eve isch imo tis war Alot of soc evidence fable, Assan ils show the methods of congsering cites and fighting sn Open tera. A ‘hough few refs showing the conquest of Judas cies have so vived and probly no rele epics the bate of Eck, other reefs of opened bates and capturing cites, combloed with enc ev ‘dence can help ws gin an impesion of wht the Bates ofthis at ‘were like A furor example fan Assyrian message asking the Baby. lenis to dese tet king and ake the Asian Kings sige ina biter isp, The Iter is comparable tothe second speech of the ab. shageb to the Jeruslemes (IK, 18235) andi wef for dete mining its geouinness” Sometimes an event in anole period is helpful. When the Crusaders were teeing Jens in 1099 they rected report of an Fyptan army coming to relieve Jerusalem ‘The report reached the Codes while the Egypanh were til fof nd abot month elapsed between the recip ofthe report and the tte with the Egyptians. Tose circumstances se relevant to It. 189, which repos that Taharg war coming t fight Scnnachesb Assuming the verse at ast party tae, ses the possiblity the Egyptian army sll being in Egypt when Sennacberib heard bout them, “4 Stable or unchanging factors. Fars which change slowly or ot at all include base human and animal needs, topography, hd ‘eam as “dep edn 13S 10th Sap. Irena deer mune. . the ram ned He Wire Jeg 1627, 9. 78, sna Ps ana Wager wo aS pn a ena oy ‘tare Weep ms Pate npr re ‘ie mm Von een Unecsng 9 ma Neth Back Di fran Fwd a 8. is 1 Sete comarca bow ang es “heaps Pie wan aco 139 Tals Cg a an Ce cms oA btn OO Kam. 110, 1. Wide dW. Ba Oe be dO Pooch Ra rsriwrr oa fee ak be pp snd HL Ge." iat fn 1-12 he ee of B21 8 se p81) advan tees wth ng 51 14587, bts propo lee26 ‘cuarrer one is ig included within s. 13-23. Beyond this stating point, how- ‘re, no clear eval principle canbe diceroed in the rangement ‘ofthese chapters.” Tn adaion wo these objections oa sth century de, thet te a> sos for dating the psage to the ith cet 1) Babylon flo Assyria atleast ice a's iti, in 710 ‘Reiss with an eighth century dating of 21 2) As noted above, Media a Ela (0.2) were military ower in helt eighth century. Pancularly Elam had sigan oe in Ba lon afar a theme” 3) I. BETO has some siking sinlaries to I, 221-14." The two crates are also placed coset each ater inthe Book of Isiah tnd 22:-14s widely accepted as lian. Proponent ofa sist cen tury date for 21-10 cannot adequately expan thos sires ‘The posi of explaining the relationship betwoen the wo orcs increases if 21:10 is aigned an cight-cemry date, 2 ¥ Kasmana Pe Pt, a bpp 6.0 we ba be ‘amos 12 ae arg peal. Tete aint ie ayn Se Rath Te awe on ure {ie rn opin pepe’ Oe Ca te um Sei co ‘Sora tesco re eat een Oamysh oh ye nga ‘Stipe wocesal rare ea 3 ‘Ror expan ore stro he oe mf by 8 on, “Le sepp aaron te ea 3d SE ae ‘id ne 210 man ped ar 201 srs wpeee Tapes tes eqns thal tows see 3 0 toy pce ZEIT tao qe eye ran ces ‘eto ie of Tip wach ed ke he ro xn 0 728 Fora eo A, Ban PD pp Se Alot tefl Raine ana 8. at ae pablo ge ae sn mM Sty neler agi Asa, a STE ee Son con mt noma ese i sila oe wnat gl pa oh ger 7 ayasceaan a atone Ta ‘THE BACKGROUND OF S.21.22:16 a 4) The eo ofthe prophet (ss 3-4 can be readily explained in an eighh-centry context Babylon and Judah od Assyria a thei ‘Sommam foe a thi Se, 50 the sucess of failure of Babylonian evo against Asia hada iret inflence on Juh's well-being Moreover tte ew sttong pssibity ofan ant Assyran lice be tween Jah td Babjon i te lat eighth cary se belo) 's) Isiah ad denounced he vst of « Bayontan embassy to Heze- ahs. 39, TK 2072-19, Che 321). Ths demuneation would fave few no comesponing passages in aah’ writings sf 211-10 ver 4 siat-omtry oracle Given siah’s reaction against the em ts one would expect to iad an allusion to Bayon somewhere in is writing 2111048 the main posi fring his gp. 1) One badly need mention Ut or mst of the oracular sections ‘ofr, 135 the tradition of bsiancauthorhip should be given Senous ‘Sonideration when tempting to assign dats. Those who favor an ‘iht-centary date for I 211-10 give this adition th Benefit of the ‘dat Tho who favor sinth-centry dite mast presume that thei Uundestanding ofthe ral is suiciet o reject the ition. ey be surpesing fo some that scholar sil asin sixhcen- tury dat othe orale in ight ofthe considerations given above. The ‘efor main reasons for this. One reason sw. 2, which sys that fishing wil be brought to an end. Tis is the sith century beter than the eighth, We sal discuss hs verse aera the chapter.” ‘The second reason is tha he summons wo ae of 21-25 epuely cogs Elam and Media to stack Babylon, indeaing sixhcatary ‘ite However, becae the objet of thet atack i unnamed his ‘tabjectve impression, Wis unclear whether Elam and Meda ae ex foe o fight guns Babylon ae the victors he ith cetay sta on or roel exhorted to ght on behalf of Babylon as ose he tlehth-centy station) Mest summons to war afe directed 0 the ‘tors, bt five are ote losers of wars Jer 46346, 910; 15.21% Jal 49-12, 1-14)" Ti it shows that one of the summons deted tothe loser i vs 5 ofthis oracle. Sine the prophets lary oie bereits plaoible, sot ely, tat be is onal aressing the Tesing side in 2:25 well. WE Ma i 1927, p77. Ueber op. 23.2) * rman ahve eit y Rte Bah, De fide ear Pind ou kan aio Prope 38.2% ‘CHAPTER ONE ‘Tie third reason for dating the oracle to the sch century instead of the eighth was gen by Ufeneimer: “There i o conceivable expla ‘tion fhe ex's sence with regard othe decisive role of Assen self and the atribtion ofthe vitory to Ela and Media" As jst ‘noted there is no atbution of tory to Elam abd Mei; they we ‘unmoned to war. Concerning the nilence on Asi, ome may expect this in ih of eter Oracles agaist the Naons eh 22 1-14 portrays a major miliary esis yt no enemys ned, This also ap- Plies tothe Arbian Oracles (211-17). The omcles an Phlstia Us. 14:28-2), Moab (15, 1, Daruscus (17) and Egypt (18 19) relate miliary disaster, but apa no enemy ie named.” The Medes oppose Babylon in Is: 13222: God opposes Assyria in 14.2427; Asse ae ‘acks Philstia in I 20 sd the Chadaeans() oppose Tye in 23:13, ‘bt they ae exceptions and not goed countererples* The absence ‘of Assyrian 2:110 is dus a Weak argument agsinet Asia being the aggressor. One may even asst thatthe mention of Ela and Mer in is evidence against their tacking Babylon, bose the attackers ofthe ity or people in gueston ae ae ly named in 13-23. Moreover Uifeabeimer did no discos the iden of 227 and ‘77s inls. 21:2. We noted above thar ths shard to expan ina sith century context, Buti fs ba abel of Assyria inthe eight century ‘The fourth reason isthe repuedlynowlaian Isage ofthe crac: OF this Wildberger ha write: Das Ege der Uneraching des Vets st of deem Fall on steer Eine De Worse Yon 21110 mee sch und ais Ure! on Bare da i ed Prasslope ee ‘leone ej sec, tic hen Alo’ sol Sage ‘Berhrunge mt Kap. 13; it er Hicung wed sucht fm Stn beer Hab De and Dyes, De Hen wien ese er An dessin Se ce bv de bay imran eggs engine eaesanenes (cp 3) Ano ane canyon Sane ty sae rit beet enmity is etmeen Galan a No Ben Sosy enna strasaia “THE BACKGROUND OFS. 21.2214 2» Eewkere in is commentary Wilber has shown sound jueement in asin vocabulary for dang passages. Nevertieless, I subat ‘hat he bas overestimated the ela of te method in this ase, One ‘objection arises when considering ABadian writen msi "The Hebrew Bible corpus i sal andthe dates of many of its texts are ncetin. The station i ete ith ABLadian exs: the cops ‘charge et an be asiged to a certain period or even be given 1 fixed de The time span of Akkadian texts preter then tha of Biblical Hebrew texts, Nevers an atlemp to dite an Akkoin text onthe basis ofits vocabulary would ran ito major iia, Some word to be sre, sodaly appear ia eg. MB andlor MA and ‘emi n wc uni Akkadian dis out Other wards disappear fom our ures for 500 of mare years and reappear in lt ex Some words ‘emai incennual wee throught the millenia. Osher words also ‘ain in contol ws, Bt ot in he sae eon dialect. One only tar to page though 4 CAD oe AHw volume tose he various dt tution paten of werd, OF oars the known dbo pate re subject to revision as new discoveries provide a fller perspective. TT Alkan texts show sch diverted dsrbution pater, hen 3 peron trying o date a Bibl passage a the basis of Ycabulry is at Sh enormous deadvanage nip of Akkadian ext, cae must reckon with ap fone oF more centres nthe seston f Bibel words ‘One ts ls reckon with long periods of time for thease of Some words I the Hebrew wits ha an appreciation for hei itera bos one ay expect some archans n elatiey Tt text asthe ‘sein Aldadan tex. Fly our knowledge of Bical Hebrew is fae more piecemeal than our knowledge of Akkadian, and this will vvaystbe the eae Ther ie chaceof geal increasing the corps ‘of ancient Hebrew texts “Tobe sure Wildberge'sagument i not only based on the dist atin partes of words. Isls based on the content of the orca tnd whe the content is consistent wth aah howe concer fn ose of language. However thre ae oly 35 short chaps of aerial which my be trite to si, ad the move passages one ronunoes as on lsianic, the lest we know abot the eben) Prophet The mater is too sparse to determine the fll exten of Tava’ helo concep, pial opinions and voeabulay. ‘When we Took at Wiberg arguments in detail, we 6 that resemblance exists Between Ie 2/110 and I. 13, The two ores ae rested in hee ways. The lamer passages (213-4, 1878) contains0 curren ove ilar vocabulary; both oracles mention the Medes (13:17, 21:2); both ‘mention he downfall of Babylon (1319, 2:9). Moreover 1317-21, epics the Medes as stacking Babylon, so te atratve to sme that the Medes ae atcking Babylon in 2 forthe she of consis teney. However his conclusion oversimplifis te snation Thin problem is that I. 13 probably underwent some redaction which conilerbly altered its emphasis. Taken in isolation a ssh entry dt is plosible: However I 13 i in sevton extending 9p hrough 14:27" and this inclades material on Assyria Paiculy the tant agains the king of Babylon almost cern cncers Sarton the ile king of Babylon is probably dic to reacinal activi ‘These factors sggest Ut I. 13 encom Assyria aswell s Babylon, x pers icon concerned Assyria in eignl frm shot the te, orginal form and ection history of I 13 ae to cbc help os in dating fs 211-10. Irwe could be sre tat le 12 iain entry omc, the possiltyfemains thatthe wer borrowed and ‘Map Lsianic expressions o depict the sth cent situation ‘Wildberger saw more than the similares mith 1, however He also noted the similartes of I. 21110 with Tob, Desteronomy nd the later prophes. However, ii unsound to conclde that Doeause Inter were used his vocabulary, nah probably didnot use i ‘An important factor oncering comparable prophetic mail is the dsibation of our sources in ime. Besides Isiah, the oly eighth ‘etary prophet material own to iin the Books of Hoses, Arta td Micah Toes books contain 30 chapters of win some a which ae believed to be lt. By contrat the prophetic mater in Jet, Ez, Joe, Oba Hab, Zaph Hap, och Mal and Ds by ‘conservative estimate for times this moun. The far preter bur ance of pst-cight-centucy prophetic materi may cause a distortion in our perspective. Genie’ Tsanic eres may apes tobe lt ‘cause the doughs and words of lsih's contemporaries se not as ‘ell nwa as tho ofthe later prophets. ®ve ms wih any en ne hod Be ong iinet es nas nae Te Bad Bbyin 18; ¥ Rane OMY at P suntisiemceteantiacageh canny nn antl “THE BACKGROUND OF. 212214 au (Geographical factors met also be considered. Amos was a shep- er fom Tehoa (Am. 1). He di no associate himself with any prophetic school (Am. 7145) His munsuy muily cemered onthe [Norther Kingdom. Micah also had’ rual background. is home ten in Moret (Mi, 11). He opposed the contemporary props (6:54) and wate laa, be Irely igor intematonl plies in {he sayings of is which have survived. Hosea was from the Northern Kinglom nd mos of his oracles addeess the situation ofthat county, ‘Only sai wa firmly pa ofthe Jersalem prophet tadsn, so he may have had moe in common with Jeremiah, Baskel and Haba than withthe ight cemury prophets. ‘The Ise prophets were, after tll recipient of the Jensalem wadtion shared by sh ‘Moreover parte of Widbeger's analysis require a closer look Concerns "s of 21:2 he wee “7 im Sinn von “offenbores vr ‘wendet Jessa kt (aber Jr 16 1 424. 20¢ wa)” We should nore {vo factor ere, Fst th combinton of wath unguein the Hehow Bible; pm doesnot cur elaewhere with the Toot“ 50 the example i eremih te not del comparisons. Second we do ot Know ow ish nol stated hat he hd 9 vvion tease 9 few ‘inion are ecouted ia 1-35." We thus have no basis or contrast ing penmine Isianie words with his reputedly now-Isaanic language. ‘Wecan say that Tp Pa is unigoe but calling it ates dubious Concerning 7 (Us 21-2) i als occurs in I. 28:18 and 291 Wilbore nots tha inn 28:18 fers in meaning from in 212 (Cerna 0) By contast mi in 29-11 ha these meaning 3 a 21:2, bot is nonlsianic. One should ot, However, atch rach Signtiance to the eifferet meaning of i in Is 28:18, People ase the same words with diferent meanings all the time. Moreover r= only aur ive times inthe Bible, twice in Dail 8,8 and inthe thre sah passages. Thus a word which occurs a majo of tines in Ie 1-35 sheng used an argument gains anc suthorship.* pelea one nage eeretomtotcelinared “oe iter ithodben given Be comprises tin 2:2 ae ine. 393,423. sh tay ne a ok To)2 (CHAPTER ONE Aso problematic isthe remark sbout 7: (8), "Die Totenlage mit dem Sichoort Pe ket Jesaa mit, 5 aber 14 12" 11:12 Tne in Wilberger’s opinion * However the Totenlage with eno tall late (Am 52,11. 19,2 Iai was able to write this He ‘also able to wre “>be “768 (219, cD. 7.25, 12:3). The phase ‘ts he mental cliate of Isiah’ mes" Konan tested under Nezckish (IK. 18), and we know sia despised foreign elt (Ie [Wels Mi 17, which shows that 228 isan eight-centry wor), inaly,Wilerer« analysis overlooks words which catadet 2 late ate: Some vocabulary of 211-10 is sina to ht of Fe 221 143 Thee are also elaoshis between I 21:1,7 and 306 Both I 30:6 and 2:14 ae Islan in Wildberger opinion In conclusion the vocsalary doesnot dsrove leis athoship or does make his subi improeble.” Using the voeabulty oe ding a txt i problematic ™ We beliwe—and Wildbeger would probably apree—that 1 sonder method fr dating an oracle employs the istrealdaa within When hse canbe ached toa specific torial seting without itoring the evidence, there iv good hance thatthe oc Was writen with his setting backround 112. Asignng a Deo le 21-110 shall se histo xtra o def. 211-10. The historia data of the oracle wil be listed ands specific Riorical station eoleiding with the dita wil be tenaively assigned as ts background. The 3 loser comparison of the oracle an the stoic sei wil be made ithe omc fits the setng well i strong evidence that the oracle ‘as writen with hs seting as is background. I the oracle te the ‘ering oily, hee the seuch for ether torical stings shoal con fine Tehsil at 211-10 maybe lied a follows > a fae sp ty es seem ge aereee eee ereee eeereeereereeenarea cyctarmaen ccna tere nao ret ie ch i "THE BACKGROUND OFS. 21-214 3 1. Babylon falls toa enemy (9). 2 Elam s involved ina war (oe. 3 Media is involved ina war. 2 4 Babylon's al has tele consequences fr the prophet (vs. 3-0, My sent he isos i compan med y {wo pipes the events thn a's ine st pny or SGrtny. 2 Dos obec’ orton nah farther sro the ered to beeen 712 (year Othe war meted in 20) and Tot he yao te wa on Jah which 22 cere ae). Inst’ etme the nin agressr aginst Babylon mas AS fase lb wih ap vee of Ass wa wih Baby tem Bar, Madi an us n ‘Agia. 710 in fir etl Se eee vos eve 206 a Pi 204 Inbyoefatre amaciely Sore epee Bone ‘Rive LD. Lon Sache Soutien Pane 1069 BC ICS 34 (98)curren ONE Since the table is ony an cutie, sme adsitonal remarks follow. the le eighth centary Assyria contended wit Chaldean bes {in southern Babylonia for sont of Babylon Assyria ruled Babylon Inthe reign of ShalmaneseeV (121-722). the reign of Sargon (722 705) and Seanacherb (105-581, the Chnldacan Merodah-bladan Seid consol af Babylon on two cceasins, the fist being 723-710, the seco being for nine months in 104 These seizes ese in ‘wo Assan campaigns to vecapure Babylon apd wabdverebelioas ‘peoples msoutiem Babylonia. Inthe war of 710 Sargon drove Mero- Sch-baladan out of Babylon but failed to capore him. Sargon. then took te dvoae of Babylon and remained its King tls death in 1S. In 704 Merodschbaladanretumed to Babylon and Sennacherib rove hi away asin. In this campaign, Seanachen's fan open fol bate was FoghtBetwecn the Assyrians and age eoaltion of feres supporting Merodach-baladin.Kacom a the batt of Kish, it vasa bigitoy for Assia. nad Senacheri to enter Bayon Without farther resistance. The bate of Kish is imporant for the ‘eae to remember. I wl be menoned several sme nthe caper "The campaign of 700 was mainly erected aginst southern Baby Tonia although Sennachenb used the gceason to remove 8 king of ‘Babylon whom be tad eae insted ‘Duriag this emize prod, the Chaldacng relied ow alliances with "Elam in order to sin contol of Babylonia’ Ar the ble of erin 72D the Elamites fought the Assia aloe, thereby making the throne of Babylon secure for Merodch Balan. Tey oid not lp rene Lev Open Cog 196, 88 For van My ih Strats rage nn: “omar: Bana Pe ipregenESSorh pao B ec sy To ince Open 3. LD Loe 939 9 pp 38 ‘Spc emer wT Teagan alos ‘Sng Ie cnn Lv hmgystoueh me cea ‘ems Leone salen AB, P Eg ayn St Se bib ig aye 621, Re fe tt ts mac “THE BACKGROUND OF 1521-214 3s ‘Mercdachbaladan when Assyria rsonquered Babylonia i 710.7 bat wre his mot important al atthe btl of Kishin 708°" "The Modes were loa nity withthe Assyrians in the It ighth ceftry, but they ee not ivoled in the fal af Babylon in 710 In So Avy tacked Kara, a country near Media. Perhaps Media Shes tacked at is tine,” Up 705 Sargon was klein a war He po- Tuy id ot fal at vim othe Medes as seemed plausible in the past. but the Medes di take prt a the general rebelion folowing Fis death, as shor by Senachon's campaign of 702. Seancherib destroyed some Median setements ot this ime, but payment of tebe By the Medes saved them fom further tacks. "This mmmary cap sow be compared to the data of I. 211-10, linedon page 3. The historia evens relate to points 1-4 follow: 1, Babylon elo Asin 710294704 2 Bln sat omy wilson 70a 7081 710 ot Fa au Assy Doh ssi Ayia te Ble and ws Seated SrcaaLen Ere “SB toa Sop 8. 172, Sa Op re hone ae 716, when Sas ale si tt yp tpt Lavine, To evs Seer an 2, Fr 9 Ee SS eel otto OD operon on ed Sree o cy ira inanimate gate ieraa ieee Eilts patos satan tawcras eee entatre aseemeareae ‘ian whereas wo cD Levi 108 3888) See ae36 ‘CHAPTER ONE. 2 In 710 ther is mo evidence that Media relld spins Asya In Tosi was in rebellion again Assyria dd although i id not take art in the bate of Kish the Assyrians atacked Media the yest following tir reaptr of Babylonia, 4. J didnot have any major problems with Asya after he fll ‘of Babylon in 710. Within thre years of Babylon's fall in 704, however. the Assan undertook «campaign othe west which ged ds its tage. Tas wat let Judah devastated A cor ‘ection between th il of Babylon i 704 andthe devastation of Jada in 701 may account foe he extreme dstes of the prophet. ‘The evems of 704 seem to match the historical data ofthe oracle eter than thse of 710. However the fourth em requis more discussion ‘Why wonld the prophet beso dstesed bythe fall of Babylon? “The answer hinges onthe poston of aah. Afer Sagan's desth ‘Jadu ined in the rebelion agit Assyria. Ths in 704 Babylon ad Jadth had Assyria a thee commen fe, Moreover Asta to on ‘end wih the rebels in Babylon before t coal eps the ebelion in the wes. There wee thre reson or this ~ Mach lan a amd ge fest syn ad Kat, cove Auton tre ™ Asya el nt conta ‘open oe went nih ig hie foes wats ~ Babjon wars major laopsanan cys presi eae tt the Amys he eer ry oe eae ~ Mancha wel be eo fl tone kn of Be Syn in Na, 703 8 To pee he Aye ae Bimst aon ie a Here we must male a assmption: the Jadaeans knew tat Assyria ‘woul sete its Babylonian problem bere marching agains ther. I "hss comet, then the Todacans Were Kenly interested inthe coisa fal xe New Yew’ esa in Nam Ct ABIL 26, poy sen each SIN Ree Yuen ng tone Na ‘ie rls mye Tet Ya ise Sesh inf AF Bk, 18 255 mdr. eae nen ao ine Mech laa of ben etre Ne ye sg Sat [meal He tt or Bron ote 30h Ss, a 30 ys en the New Vers tesla Sp 50 {THE BACKGROUND OF I. 21-2214 ” tation of the two Mesopotamian power. Judazan hopes to be fee of [Asya ule wee focted Bayon, If Baton hd decisively e- feat Assia in 704, Assyria would have Tos a large profi em re and hunan resources. Pebaps the Assyrians woud ave been “he fo conduct a war agnnst the weser bul. IF the confrontation ihe been stalemate, Assyria could have been bindered from going tees by 8 projnged stugele wit) Babylonia. 1 Assy decisively ‘ton they could march against Jodah after subduing Babylonia, our easonng is cre, point four on the historical data st be cones cet. The prope wisn angssh byte fall of Babylon be ane thd Been Tuah's protection agaist an Assyrian invasion, ‘After Babylon fl the prot knew that Ayia would meh aginst Judah with no oe to sop This fear was justified in 7O8. ter Sen ‘aches had utdoed Babylonia snd his easter front, he anche his ‘hid campaign agin the rebel inthe west cluding oda. Tn considering Jada roe othe etelion, adopted 2 mini! poston, One need nt sume That Judah and the Caldaans ad Fone alae agninet Ayia ode to uaderstand the prophets ‘tess We east only assume tat Jada was hoping tht the Chal ‘rans and thls would climate the Assyrian heat Self Tris worth noting, however, tha there was probably formal anc- Assyria alliance betwen Tudh and the Chaoeans at this time. The reasons fr tlieving this ra lows 1) Cont between Merodach-aladan and King Hevckish is setested inthe Bile (lt K, 201219, 8. 39:18, Che. 3231), The tie ofthe Chaldcandelgation's vst o Hezekiah is uncear,* bt the die is nt crucial Beease there may have been more contact between Herskish od Merodarh-talagan than ths single vii 2) The rebellions ia Babylenia,Jygan and elsewhere wer simulae nooo, avin taken place in T0S-4 Merodach bln di large Soa ia in mrcah cera Eas a i econ scat tte ee apg ae Peeper el fe rho he te to lon, A ton eh le of Rah Oa Sea8 ‘CHAPTER ONE amount of diplomatic aetivity to form is oan nthe East" Hexe- ‘ca Ted the reelion i th ex cnet the point of medling in Phi- listine fas" ths seems ely tht MerodachGladan and Hex ‘a had contact wih each ther nd were coordinating the efor. 3) A Judean Babylonian aliance was potently advantageous to both panies. Assyria would be depraved often forts army i ester ‘vasa refed to pu oops tits disposal. Adionl Asin toope would be needed to guard the westem border, These wore aatages forthe Chadacas when facing the Assan any. The advantage for Judah was that Babylon woul be the feo Fight the Assyrians” ‘The arguments fran alliance between Juda andthe Caldseans of Babylonia are rong but not conclusive Ii however ler that Sadah paid dearly forthe Chaldaea faire to withand Asya it 704, Tear cabled the Assyrians wo devastate oda in 701 ‘The fil of Babylon in 704, therfore, is the mst plausible eighth emu event which we may tative assign asthe backround fs 2BI:T-T0. How wil his ssigement hold wp toa close sertiny ofthe ‘ext? The following exape ofl 211-10 not exhaustive nor oes ‘tsolve al the aici goal arto compare the tet othe is torical even to see how well hey it ogether and to offer interpre {aon afte vere in ight ofthe exert, 113. Ar Beenesiof 211-10 owe of the Wilderness of te Se. Like oid seeping on deeper teomes fom a widens, ate an Some believe the supercription is comupt\ However Ulfenkeimer soggested tht “Desert of the Set” iss deliberate alteration of he ‘Akan ame for southem Babylonia, mt tm, “Land of the Sea ingen tat ta Sony © Ee See ay debe an alls act aia Caen dace cae b(n or Ete He ‘ier met Ev 124 BRAT 0) Nese Vc 9p (Willers Ort) CEH. kts fg 927 ta eons, ‘Seri igen ang Wattle 77a cy. 78 ‘THE BACKGROUND OFS. 21-214 » “The chang the mame was mnt sa alson othe fre in of ‘Babylon Ths suggestion ba wo aap explains the close teneidenal sane ofthe Here phrase th the adn {bu bypases te nod for eonectrlemenatons By ming tis ugenion, however, Ulessine segtone he cose foram vig etary de of he rc I the sith cea te Land oft Se a stlevant for he power sapien he Fast Inte eighth cry the aca was of rca) portance. Being the homeland f the Chldcan mi nt wa hr as for ate 0 taketh iy of Babylon away fom Asti. Akough Babylon at pr mi tbe Assyrian eames e710 and 703 once {ad on mtr Bayon fad fle Th the pope ay hve mndespla on words wih his eating The Lng of he Sea as {btecoms he Deer ofthe Sea, The Asians mol ey it waste isnt sted nt comes ome wider, At pony willbe suggesedin the er 1 a 63. Te allnion the Ne ‘ede hath props was io aah when wiing this oracles ard von see lm Te escere et echey nd fede dey Got Ean! Pron Meda! Alans Seetwegitnmed® CObermann ned that prophets are not tol vsiogs elsewhere inthe ebro Bible they elher sce or are shown them Although Fp gee ne YX RE CSE 6 9), ee vcs ne St ca ae es apres “Theisen ct Om "Seas GK Blah ‘Sus any felon oy x preeie tiahngeg CLR Back De hese eee Mere maeecrrtan aaa = Seat ate en yr neater oe” ‘CHAPTER ONE “is unas i this espe, the prophet probably meant that Ke ‘experienced the vision ins. 2:1 sows tha the senses of sight and hearing were not always clearly disinguised "The word which Isiah, sn of Amor sae "The problems of ienifyng the "ueacherous on ad “estoyer in a sith-centry context were not above" There is no psbem ith ieniying the “escherous one” and "destroys i an eighth fury context. From an eiphthcentry Judasin perspective, the labels it Assyria. “Treacherous” is appropiate for Asya hrc of ‘is extenely negative comorations The Assytians were also on the tffensivein the invasion of Babylonia so they were destroyers. Elam and Media were the enemies of Assia and sypatetic othe Baby lonian cause. "The verse Uns fuses on the opposing ides and informs ws that a war between them staking place, “he commands decd to Elam and Media hve been comectiy labelled asa summons to war” Here the summons re fll of ony and despi. The tne ofthe passage i, "I you insist on lng You Selves, ahead” ‘Some have arguod that this vere shows tht Elam and Meda ste cing guint Babylon This interpetation can be aceped as 2 wrk Ing hypothesis for those favoring a sith century de, bat icant be sed a prof for sxthcenury date, Te text doesnot oer enough !afermaon for this In 704 Elam was the principal ally of the Chaldsans a the bale of Kish appearance inthis oracle comes aso arise As far 25 we Know Media was not diet involved inthe bale of Kish It ‘ould nevertheless te mentioned with la fr five reasons 1) it had history of opposing Asia in 704 In Sargon reign sloge thee hy Weg Jem 327.9 64 Sui) cmtes hea: he an ie 2416381 my he 2 mee plein ai emmy pmcgh Ft ca cteacamnaste aveacten Maer, Paik und tees der Ave (ALASPMU9) Mnser 193, p10) 7.295) Tam jl Guo ce pm Hes ne Tao were thee o four campaigns asin the Medes. 2) Ic was in robe lion against Assen 704.3) Ithad argh geographical association vith Elam, Both were th highlands east of Mesopotamia. 8) The boslity ofthe Medes made the easter border of Assyria insecure in "708." This ws pasive help forthe Caldaeans io the bat of Kish ‘The Asian hao sitld mower from the bale a exer to [pac he eastern border) Active lp may have ben expected from ‘he Medes ether at the bate of Kishor for atacks on ASSyra's ber ‘er. This however, more conjectural. We do ot know what rumors tere circuiting in Jenlem abot the easter lances i 7 “The comand ected to Media hasbeen anlated “eess on." identifying the rot wth I 7 of BDB™ and It of HAL.” The ‘ended meaning may be “iny see" ia which ase te prophet may be tauting the Mee o take some coutroesive measues aginst ‘Assyran outposts or ies "The word "ran, usally understood a ighing,dabious fr thee reasons Fin it hs double feniine ending which occurs nowhere ‘lke with this word Such lngtenings are not common, tut since ‘hey tometines occur, hey are notin therslies reason enough to tend a word or analy diferent. Second a summons to wars “ually followed by an annoancement of «dar (Unbelsaekad amp” Bringing al sighing ro an ed doesnot appear ob sch an Snnouncenen™ Tid "7a doesnot tthe comet. The following ‘0 verses show taal sighing hasnt been bought a ed 'As the phrae now read, provides the seongestargumeat fr a sixthcenuy date ofthe orci, Beene the fall of Babylon at dha time rleved th oppression of te Judaans. However becase ofthe ™ See pi pM ih th eh ga re tit of Main to hea ph ey, oA Fe SK, 7 tahoe mime ee a came re von Di Ser eemras tcrcuat rape mie aati 93m) ome ‘hing th ne il pr veo,2 ‘CHAPTER ONE ‘ifiuties stated above, even proponents ofa sinth-entry date have ‘mended the word! zo meaning sighing were the original reading, there would be no satstctry explanation for it an ighth-enury context. For ‘hose aivecting an eighth century date, an etcndation on ifrent mls of the rot would be the best sluon to the problem Oat ‘ranslation above reflects th oat analy of Macintosh” thre my lisa ied wih anguish, pangs Bae sed eis ‘ae ang of wom a ata ton towed own Woe [am to Syed oe.) id vers rer a pad me, The eg | Tonos boon esd forme nt were ‘This ston descibes the probe's reaction. Comparable pasages show tat the prophet i experiencing pin reais he wil be person ‘ly affected by the eveat which he sees" His oror makes perlet Sense forth year 704. Is dco the danger which now coafronted Judah. Babslon was not ble to prevent te Asean fom marching est, aor could anyone ele, The Assan invasion was now se to “This explanation forthe probe's trois based onthe assumption ‘made caer nthe chapter that he Jodseans knew Arya wold ry to recapre Babylon before iavadiag Judah, The assumption is) ‘Probable at hos who ae reluctant to concede ti ar ke to beat ‘ith us forthe ine Beng. The assumption wil sive aon up pom inoue discussion of. 22:1-18, SEW Wen Jap 5:08. Oy, 356 2 Oe ar a oe nine Loiehaene es eae a a oe aa THE BACKGROUND OF IS. 21-2214 * nnangng We te, seating he cele. ining. Are, rine obese “The prophet now alld oa fest interrpted by cry to prepare for ate, Those favoring asixthcemary dt forthe rack believe this is Teas ofthe rulers of Babylon, perhaps before their city fll othe Persians, We have noted the weakseses ofthis inerpetation ™ The feasting rulers ae acolly Fudan 27S, who ate depicted elsewhere ts being iesponsible and omg (1:23, 314), ure support for the daca Sting of his Feast canbe ace ‘tom the surounding eres. The Jadacas location ofthe pope was ‘tabled ini alltsion fo the Negey (v1, s0 when be sates his ‘eon eatin tothe cnet (as 34, he also switches the atenton {o hs Jadacan lotion, Vs. 610 also favor a Sodaean locaton. The tring for news about Babylon suggests that he propel was lone ‘itanc rom the ata event Judah the most ike choice. 1s 21S ths shows atthe raling las of Pod 50 ou of touch wit the reales of heir day that they Test at atime of exis. The flrs are tld to prepare for ate. The reason for the command is ed inthe folowing verses For tng nid he Lord oe, "oe pw oko. Let i el wat sce When ees chai pn oor clu of es, ‘Sh of sem hn shuld ie fly, very cata" the oo inking ale out, Om 5 wutowee, 0 Loa eetinaly ‘to by ay and t my pst am toed wl hs "And bbl this is cman a ms brio spn of bss” And be eo ‘Sing, fl failen Bayon sd al he ioges fe ds He bs ‘Sater whe oun ‘Vs. 69 are read together cate the announcenent of Babylon's fall 1219 the chante whole section, Here ae mandation noes e There ie no problem understanding “> as For" The season why the Jaan rlrs fv. S are oi 1 pepe fr bales because Babylon has filen to Asse, Although the staouncement of Baby- Jon's fall comes te verses fer the > tbe intervening episode of the lookout oeuses the tention onthe announcement “he i of TE, peng cpt hd ne on ‘phen iia Pe 8 ete pain meee“ CcuArTER ONE Ja This pam is very obicre, What was the lookout supposed 10 sce'A tworhore chant is clearly ivalved, but sande may be olletive nouns designating many chariot and spans roby no ve icles ae meant ins 32" onsen Here >> cold ean corm" oe ‘iders).”beeuse neither asses nor camels normaly pulled vehicles, There are two main possibilities as 0 what vs. Ta deserts: the vance of hostile army taint Babylon, or tae caravan anor nessenges. “The strength of the appoaching amy hypothesis is that 27 9p cally ocurs in desriptions of armies. where i depicts merous htt (22°67; 31:1 369). The problems with he hypothesis a: 1) Becanse the oracle as a Judean Sing, me mo assume the ook cuts having a vision of the eauatrophe in Babylon. Argent For this being a vision exis.” but they ae incoclsive 2) Te announce tment of Babylon's fll av. 9 is nt logical interact of the 227 may ave clarified the marber a in ele. Concerning the loko dey, some lam the prophet and lookout tue the same person” This opinion his evidence wo suppor it” but there isa mar bjeton tot Elsewhere i the orale the prophet rele o hin in the fist person (38. 2-46, 10). The lookout, by otras dented inthe thd peso (3.78). Thus the prophet and Tookout are probably distinct. Because the lookout areses the Lord (os 8) be was perhaps a servant or disciple ofthe prophet An onriew f ae caan siaalThe Ac Arab 9 11 anu up. en toe Jl ad tn opi 5am op 2 sho wet 1M ‘aoe den ing aon roe ea ano tcc det i (OR 20 06 me sg detente as eae I yep Jn 2.7 pp ot so eer hi en nee req eee ht 2 wee pr ‘tnd aS ie rif ti 1“6 ‘CHAPTER ONE “The speaker of bs ebay the same he speaker af 8, i. te ke repeating the ne fe te caer im The flows (21:3, 22 At his point the ‘racks develop in since ways, but both have a" clase (216, 225) fad conclae by emphasing the divine origin ofthe orl (2110, m9), 2) Distress ofthe Propet (213-4, 24), No other > pasages ia 1s. 1323 express such intense feelings of the pope fora disaster ‘The mst comparable passages ins. 1-23 are 15:3 and 169.“ ‘CHAPTER ONE 3) Elum at War Elam appears nowhere else ins. 1-35 except in a lst f counties fom which God il eter the eles (1:11. The rotnity ofthe two occurrences of Elam ia 212 and 2256 and ie Involvement ino war ae stiking. "4) Vision Ins. 212 a viton was “olf the prophet I. 22:5 ‘mentions a Valey of Vision where the Day ofthe Lard was reveled (£222), Although oni crypt, it probably iniaes that he ropet is alluding tos vsion he had experienced” In both I 21:2 nd 225 the mention of the vision is dc followed by the bate {nvolvng Elam. No other race ns. 13-23 alades to vison, '5) ating and Drinking, Is 215 and 22:13 depict feasing 28 78 in 215 is matched almost verbatim by reo Don in 22:13. The phase ‘occurs nowhere else ins 1-3 ahouph some passages havea smile theme ds 51112, 22-23, 2473). (6) Horses and Chait. Hones (ere) and chariots (27) ae men- ied together four erin I 21:79 and 2247. They ate mot et tioned together ewer inf 13-28 7) Arms. 1s 21-2214 mentions implements of war relatively on compared to the ret of I 1328, Bows ae oly mentioned in 13:18 ‘seoreare i 11S and 1:19, '8) The Tile =x. The divine epithet oscure si Himes in I. 2: 22:14 I does not occur elsewere in Is 13.23 except in Is 22:15, ‘which was paps writen agaist the sae backround asf 221-14 Geeteow) 5) Lookoud Watchman. Ins 2:1-10 lookout i emt up fo some news which he then announces. resembles the watchman of the fo Towing oracle (ss. 11-12), who replies oa question when asked. No ‘othe pusage ss. 1-35 presente similar situation 10) Days ad Nips. 218 and 211-12 mention the passing of days and nights, probaly to emphasize continal wating and Sos ‘pense There aro comparable usages ine 1323" Te pis oe aig of ome in 1) The at sine ented even epee ly CEI ‘te Sa dng si a) Ty wa pa a, eit seg he er ne et 3 Thy wc ve mir ese) The sey fin md tess roe 1c hee ey i ie 39 809 Seon a ny ‘TE BACKGROUND OF S.2122:14 ° 11) Forsgn Speech Aramisms are inthe Oracle of Duna (ora 93 jrza zm) and Oracle: in Arabia (99 bi, OF) 12) Plight The Book of leah has many descriptions of igh Relatively seldom, however, isthe appearance of weapons in conanc= ‘ion with eins. 21:15 and 22-23 have their nearest smarts 10 Ts 131415 and 3:8, where swords appear in the Might dessins. 13) Dose Seting, The “2 of 1211 has its complement in he three sections of Ie 2111-17, where Dum 1:11)" Tema (1:1) ‘and Qedar 2:16:17) ar al asoited withthe dese, News of Baby Tons fal in 704 would hase cme to Juda through the deer by way ‘of Dumah and perhaps also thugh Tena, 14) A Path of Fight le 2:18 describes ein roma atl, Fag ives sing out rom ether end of be Fre crescent wool probe ‘iy ave at Dumah beter rscing Tema Ths I 211-15 may be atanged to reflect path of fight (Babylon, 21:9; Dumah, 2111-12 ‘Tema, 21315). 15) The Qedarites.Dumah was a Qedart iy (ef. p. $3). This conf the eatonship between the Oracle of Dur (2111-12) and the closing statement abot the Qedaes (2116-7). Qeante tem tory also extended imo Babylonia (p33). 0 there maybe relation. Ship between 21:1-10and 2:16 Mos ofthe similares and complementary fetes are straight: ward and no open 6 dapat The crvial question is how signft these data ae. We hive note that rome ofthe sated carters ffs. 21-2214 are unique within I. 135 oter are wigue within the (races agains the Nats (I. 1323) Sons points may be dimissod ‘coincidental butte accumalated evidencs suggests tionship beeween the oils. sett nl Cann, oe. id pe Ar Sepp maton alma ected user espa A Mate ah alls ye. {3 pn nen an = roth Fly bans Nh on im ‘ti. * hei 83 Pm Shan se0 ‘Harr ONE ‘We also havea rough comespondence of dates between the opening and closing oracles ofthis section. The ease for ding I, 21-1100 74 was pest above. Mest people relate f 221-180 701. The two dts are not fr apart Given the points of contact between the races, we may now explore the prospect of asigning a smiar date tothe material teen the two ales Ths mati 2111-17, 6 ‘he subject of he next section. 13. The Arabian Oracles, 15. 20:17 ‘The Arabian Oracles can be divided imo tree para: The Onsle of Dah 2111-12, Oral in Ambia QI:13-15) and the conclusion concerning Qedar (21-161). Assigning a dnte to hie section is dif Fic Doubt exsts as wheter the thes pars shouldbe read a8 & unity andthe concusion i especially suspected of being later ad ‘Son The arcs are alo trie and of ite infomation fo etre thei historia eine Finally thee is the question ofthe Aaa {nthe Once of Dumah and Oral: in Aba We shall fst discuss the Arumaisms. The Aramaisms of 21:12 (com jon 735 r3ar) and 14 rho rw) ave bend a ence fr‘ ate date fr ve. 11-15." Arama was, ara beter {own ia Judah in later periods. Neverles euton must be exe tise in draeing conclusion fom the Ara. ih time Art ‘mal war ard in iterations communication sod known to some feat troughout the fertile cescet!"™ Evidence for Aramaic in ‘igh cetay Judah i IK. 18.260. 3611. shows that 1 Are 5 SP er me ne ma A survey of Ara tess tom the cig century and eater isin $.C Sear Retro Sue ao eam arena mats athe yt eee ‘nae henry Bibylonian polis UA. Baka, PRB, 9p. 257-85), mic was the expected language for intemtiona communication” 2) “Thee members ofthe Judean ruling class, Sheba, lagi and o- ‘ach knew Aramaic well; 3) The general population of Jerusalem did atinow Aramaic well enough ended lengthy discourses, ‘Of eure itis unsound to contude fom pin two that he Judscan ‘lng cae a4 whole Knew Aramaic in the at eighth century, bt i Sebna Eliagim an Jach were typical ofthe ruling els, then bes probably kn Arana, 0, cluding ih Tih ha Contct ith th ruling elite (HK. 1922 mle 372, 73, 2215, 20), and he ob- ‘ered and commented upon developments in intenstional polis. "The only fica with assigning an eightvcemury ate to Ie 2L-1115 8 tha although Biah was probably able 1 sy i many of his istenes may not hae bee able To understand it However hee noe factors sould be considered: 1) Perhaps the Arabian Oracles Were composed forthe alin last, of which feat tro knew Art ‘nase 2) Understanding em and 25 di ot require tht he Hits ‘foe in Aramaic Probably both oos are atested inthe Cananite alec at Ugaric™ rw curs eve in Moss's blessing onthe Irae. lis, writen vhen the Norte Kingdom prospered (Dt 382, 21)" The nigh form of" oar ins 30:13 at i different ‘meaning fom that ofthe Arabian Oracles. 3) Whesher the propbet ‘op ge sn oa es ARE pp EE. a ‘at moc a ecto son cane om tay al pos ‘ret sown ac ha ef he pu, ov ay py ‘psd cae oer fon tus 21a oan 28861 (pb mena rope tng fora M Date Crh 0 14 8804 yA pon nn Day been the pr leet ci ‘ee fa Sra ADA Ms Dene, NERC, Gnd Rp a Sse Sie an Rm) een bt ene coc an eo nl nd he ho Sete er Son Br 38 9 a sich wp ws 6 Wade 8.9.9.so ‘CHAPTER ONE intended vs 1210 be completely clears questonsle, As od this may sound, the vere i cryptic to the dee eader a es. We can Sy with certain hat the orale mats a foe's speech, and ths isthe main reason forthe presence of Arama Tin concuson the Aramasms donot excl an eighth-century date forthe Ambian Oracles. OF course Aramaic Became beter known fn te Following ceturies, but te etevation oan nenaional ange ‘vas well underway in Kia's etme ‘Conceing the oracles unt, we shall etatvely assume that they were weiten by ene person the same cecason. Our dscsson ot pp 4.50 supports the assumption especialy poms 7, 1, 13, and 15. A fer sgunen for the prose section (21-1617) bing writen fom the same ocasion a I 21-11-15 willbe given below. ‘One fer master must be clnified. Edom has bes given heavy onsdeaion is cussions ofthe Arabian rice" sore beck: (pound. Thus Assyrian campaigns inthe wet have been sted to explain the races. However the passages mainly cite Ars ies and tees and although thee tay Have been “Greater Edom” which extended a far south as Deda ad fr est as Dut,” we should ‘ot confine ou search to wars i the west io explain the icustnces techind the Arbian Oracles. Verses 1617 inet thatthe Gers se the fea pois not Edom. T tbe Arbian Oracles are closely relied, the Goats of 21:16. 17 ae the Key to understnding tem Tose space we shall ily iscoss Qed in the eighth entry B.C. Qed was federation of specs i a as a reeset mater ang mag urate tects ee “THE BACKGROUND OFS. 21-214 33 Ara rites." Inthe eighth century, Duma was probably 2 Qari cy" and Qedarittetory eslended frm Duma nto western Babylonia. They were thu onan important rade route connecting Babylonia with Nor Arabia. The eiht-ceary Qedaes wer also [ow nthe west where they had some economic terest ‘Alough eighvcentury data on the Qedartes are nots plenifal 2 inthe following to centres, we shal consider an eightrenty ‘bute for the Arabian Oracle cae: 1) We have dated I, 21110 10 704. The Ambain Oracle follow and sce slated to i!" 2) The Arabian Oracles immediately precede the eiht-ceatry oracle I 221-4 and sem eat to 8) Because Qadri leary £¥ tended ito Babylonia, they wee alfacted by te Assyrian invasion of “706.116 tus possible thatthe Arabian Oracles were writen on the same occasion 211-10, he fal of Bayon in 7, "This lst point requires forter discussion. Sennachesb’s annals ‘ste tat he Arabs picid inthe Caldaca alliance agaist As ‘yin in 704 Adis af Meola laa’ sister log wih Bg, oer of iste gue f te Arar well a te sme Tied Ing "AW, The Acs ab, 226 cons ash on pun Seu! Or pte ies iba CL aah thar p. 02GB Gay Cp "tthe mh of Bm iQ oer by oH, ‘anuh nb NB Lk Sn p82 e287 ao Fs ing ot Arbe Aub’ nspns sae that Hal was Gere ing Ei The ci Art p22) Th 49 ae hae fe ‘hw cw moc Dua it elr tna as pec Nevers bums va Get iy ine ahs ERTS Se hoy cet any gr i Tepe le yo ey aed Gere 5 ac hi ery le Re "HS eg ult meng th west ois wh ad Tia lei ea 1s estan ras rap. He9 Fo ‘ere ch 2 hth et ei in 125d p83 The Onis obey pane hep me ‘ec CE ga Pe ent eese ‘CHAPTER ONE sive. The chro wages, hres, me, aes and (Ba "tm cael whe wee sane nthe te ny cape ‘Athoogh the Qearites ae not mentioned in this paste, they were probably among the Arab rouge which allicd themselves aginst ‘syria! Reasons fr believing this allows, 1 Joining Babylonian lace asin Asya in 706i consistent ith Qala poly i ler mcr The Qed tok Babylon's $e again Asya fo 9 and gan inca. 80-67. 2. The Goins coopted nh Melvin te cig eva) when hey owe hey pa opt er ogni Heth ease,‘ foe spose Ceieion cul! nt have Aouprieconer of Asya sense 3. At memo shove te tnns which she Ayn ap item te 108 cana spit Bao wos tn ‘ws cley adie cy inelion pant Asia ‘Adit posting a ate of 708 fr the Arabi Oracles has some ‘weaknesses. The inter evdeoce for dating the eraciesto this ear no compeling. Assigning a ler date to the oracles ie tmping be ase the Qeanites are mentioned more fegherty i ar texts and 2) later dae does ot requie one to challenge the tenacious bei that Isiah woul not hae inser Aramic woes in an orale The ‘Assyrian campaign to Dua n 791-89 ox even Nabo’s sojourn in Arabia from 852 to Si3™ come 1 mad a possible backgrounds fore 211117 ‘skates Oppntem p28, 6140 pees ma iiemeaaenest a sheets SAREE eat anes marcas igiruinamecenenss msi amatuer att eatin Rg an 369 4G Ne ao 1 Sommer Seo “THE BACKGROUND OF IS. 21.214 55 ‘Our gol bee iso show tat dating I. 21: 11-7 to 704 is a pau ble nllerative. We love ts the most atesctv lematve in light ‘ofthe relationships ofthe Arabian Oracles ode oracles around them ‘We shall gow examine the content ofthe three Arabian Oracles td show how they could be connected tthe fll f Babylon in 7, 1.3.4 Proposed veges ofthe Arabian Oracles "ne Once fama On calling fom Se, "Ga, wt of the mph Guar wat tte mgt?" IB si oring a coe a aoe lh you mut ck, see! Came bck apa Dis to ite brevity any interpretation of this cxacle conjectural My remarks have the advantage of ing ample conieration tis {sltonhip with he somoanding oracles. “The prophet imagines himelfoverearing& dialogue at Duma which es tothe me diection ag Ser" The questioner: ae pe ‘ably fee fom Babylonia” The assumptions plausible be- ‘use he aac placed duel after the oracle announcing the fll ‘of Babylon the to oracles have some salaries to each ther the (ieston can te understood a coming fom refuges (se below) the ‘newer wih its second person plural verbs canbe realy understood ‘sc adtesring» group of refopes and vefuges ae the cea ope of ‘henext oracle 211615. ‘This understanding also as some historical evidence in favor rn atthe logcl pce for Arabs, expecially Quits, 10 Dee when thee were problems in Babylonia Ks dst, desert leaion = ee aot tenon a Benes gerne cng ere ie ae ee ree tas seve eee ates Eee eis paleSet ralanentoraaraman “Domi Seis meee bees es nab! he oe econ fom Joa awe. Se eee ich he56 AFTER ONE made parsit by large ames dificult Te Hight of Harel, king of (eda, fom Babylonia to Dams is atest dng Semacherb's invasion of Babylonia in 691-89. Our interpetation of the Duh cs ‘ke supposes hat the Arts alto resorted to this acter the bate of Kishin 70, ‘The nex question (Guard, what ofthe night”) i obscure, In my imerpretation refugees cuside of Duma a aking when te ight wil be overs ht the ety pte wl be opened or entry. Adit 10 gate is mentioned inthe erce at no oer explanation fr such @ pestin to gr ie me potble, The ile that people tee ing forthe gate o be opened was recognized by Lota. In his mswer ("Moringa come, bu alo the ight" the gua 's speaking on vo levels, The coming of momingcoald be understood ieraly but then of cours, the canang of night wood no be ira. Night symbolized dangerous station when the iy gate would not te opened. The guard is ths saying hat dest the approach ef morn ing the gate wil ot be opened tease the siteation danse “The gus et tate Hf you mt seck,Seck! Com asin”) is also unclear. Aramaic w3 arly mean 0 seek, sequse = The object of 723 can cy be conjectured. In view of or hypothesis tht refuges ae asking how long they must wat efor the Cty tes are ‘opened, the guard ls probably talking abot seekingreuesting em) itto Duh I this is, ten the gard refuses to open the city at othe tells therefgeos tht they ca ty to seek etn again att TF he guard sai histo faites fom Babylon the reabon foe his ‘fs to open the gates is clear Ie was dangerous to howe fuses from a disstrous bate. ould rovokeponitve measures against mah by Assyria This in at happened in 691-89 hen an Assyrian fone pursed the Qedarite Hazaet al the way to Duma panded the town and broogt its ges and some hostages bak o Asia “Ths thr dalogue therefore, may depict the ety of Dumah being ‘shactnt help some fupives ding he Assyrian asin of Baby Tonia 708. 8 ten Sheer geen Vo durch neeoken Pra pag We ‘per Sc Ws et a eT iia meer crc fata Pesce Rap ncn agp HUE LB lowe es HOSE ‘THE BACKGROUND OFS. 21.2014 7 orale Ari) Inthe ick in Abin you wl ll, ans "Toward th his bing ue, of tend Tea. mee te {age wah ea "Spor ry hve rm swords fa the eae sora om te stung bow dn rn wae ‘The superscripton i secondary. Missing inthe LXX, i iff from cher sbperscripins in thatthe prepostion 3 is coded with the toponym, By conta the supesripton of 2:1 (rm wen doesnot ince 3 although 3s in 22°57 =) This suggests thatthe sapere serpions of 213 and 22-1 were add by diferent indivi. Moreover when the superscript somite, 21:13b, which tell the Dedanies that thy il del the thik, lial follows 3 refs to enter the city (our interpretation of 2:12). Thus 2111-12 and 136 1S were probaly one orci thet rigial form” Unforunately the obscurity Which Woubled us in the prior oracle continues in this one. I begins withthe Dedanites. Are ey Seal tothe hungry and thst fogitves of vs. 14 or ae hey normal eae ‘ute whose commercial civies were draped bythe wa? In ciher se [aleve the reluocs of vis. 1415 Ned frm Babylonia afer the Str ofthe Assan svation of 74, As noted above, the paceret of the oles is eadene for this. The onder of th oles on Babson (21:110), Duma (11-12) and Tema (13-15) sages path of fight. However thi inference requires that cris of Gains be ai factory angered. ‘alin ceicizeda hypothesis which held that Dedante caravans wee atacked by Persian cavalrymen immediatly after the fll of Babylon in $39. Te carvan wore thus forced to ee ll he way 40 ‘Tema, Galing noted th the distance beween Babylon and Tera wat ‘very area thi it is doubt refugees woud fe to Tema bee ae the ange zone (Babylon) is sacha geat distance fom Tema Mowe- 7 Sig ey een tem ge ore ag dabel gone onea EETER ngeiehne tie ts gee semen Acacia tematic siieremwanee taatieneeecemresag Sacer eesom aaeh ea eesss ‘CHAPTER ONE over if his sa prolonged igh rm Babylon, it is pazaling why the prophet was ony concerned with a Inte stage ofthe igh. Akhough allng was cntcinng view which gave atat-enary date this acl, the critlsms can sso apply o proponents ofan eighth ery (ate who connet the oracle withthe fl of Babylon in 78 ‘The abjecions, however, ae nota rbling ae they sem Firs, the prophet srt oly concerned with th last phate of the Might rom Babylon. The preceding Oracle of Darah probably depicts an erie sage of it. Seco, the ret distance heteen Babylon and Tema is nota tse problem, The discussion off. 2111-2 has sowa tht aah could also be par of the danger zane hea Babylonia was invaded by the Assyrians. When tht was the se, Tema Wa the next lice to which fogives could Ne ‘Our explanation of 2:1315, therefore i 8 fellows. The fives of ss, HLS were survivors ofthe Asian invasion of Babylonia, ‘They may have Ben inthe bate of Kish, they may have ben De dante czavans which were stacked ia Babylonian any case tet fist dsiation war Durah, but at 211-2 shows, the people af DDumah were no very help. They were perhaps concered shout 2 pamtive expedition by th Assyrians if they gnve tf to the fag fives oF the proplet may have seen oter factors lnlve eg the fugitives were to numerous forthe city's esoures to sustain thom Some refges were ths forced to flee futher south tothe land of ‘Tema, The propet showed that he fall of Babylon would ave Severe effets onal of Non Arabi. rhe Land sai tu to me one Je, eye filing al ‘he yo ater wll an end "ia th emining uber fmf te Gear igh mee willbe fo forte Lr he Gs of lanl a splen™ ‘The Anbian Oracles end wih a pose section which was intended to cxpain them. The conection betwen the prose section andthe rir Verses is shown bythe fst word. Some people doubt ta this oa oy RES feo The ea may man 2 ‘fr The to ean rere Os ag be Meg ‘Su 5379998 apt Ker De Pope ap 1399-611) na‘ Cotes ach Bugs” UCR 1215 08D.) 6 ge sheet can 1 eo ein 9p Te che bs ‘atm appeal wage Te {THE BACKGROUND OF IS 21.2218 ° le was writen tthe same ime a8 verses 1S. "he grblem lis in Atsrsemblance tol 16.2414, which worth quoting "oruisithe word which he Lor spoke cncring Mosh inthe ps. "epate e Lid ae pena ne yeas, Yeas iting he gay of Mah wl be of mo account wih all he peat ie a he ems il be ery ew an evo of eg ‘The similarty worded Moab passage cleat tts tht ts ne han tte oracles which precede i Siac i later than the preceding traces, 2116-17 may also be ner than is preceding races ‘One could try to st a profmble date for. 1613-14 and 2:16. 17." assuming both were writen by one peron at about the same time, the thee yeas sppoued for Moa’s destcton and one yest for Guia’ dencton cou be matched to pore historical tu tions The main possi fr such a situation safer the bale of Kish in 70, The tle was fllowed by an Assyrian campaig to re ‘onguer Babylon ncloding Arab is and the etry points of Amb trade routes nto Babylonia Ifthe Assyrian wanted to atack Dum it would have alo oocred ths ins Clery to one year following the fl of Babylon was dangeroas forthe Arabs, including Qears. Concerning Moa, thee season to bliev that twas also e= bello against Asya in TO. After Assyria secured Babylonia and itscater fonts tock about wo yare—then would be Moab's tum o suffer the consequences of eelin, it had rebelled. Moab ‘woul be one of hears i Sennachenb's campaign of 701. Tobe ‘re, Moo saved tel by svg Seanachenb some cosy gis” in 501; Neves, Mosb hd rebelled—and it probably ha —then the forecasts of the years for Mosb and oe yea for Qedar match the ‘uation following Babylo’s all in 704 precy “Tis ens the dscanion ofl, 2. Dating the mhoe chapter o 708 ves de consieration to the snares Between the rales! ‘dcr no stort the internal trea data. One assumption onthe 76 ee fr ep mC RDA. 24 8 'R Macosh oh A als p10 is pro ad ‘aust at ra nag a eh ao eh ee© ‘CHAPTER ONE Yelopment of Hebrew (ie Aramasms india «pos rn a ni, A 2959. to ‘ely tga” 8 ry ACS As ie wae baer Ste pl fe HP kJ 1 ‘ute te 3s be pene ory CLP 8 aod ee SS SED md ie 31.90 pec sae) TE BACKGROUND OF I. 21-214 6 in whic cs the hag of cova pins more eet sine it Wald mot ina al te leaers!The spent as ome sport Tom the LXX and Pst, bt stil does ot ave the problem: No teow a ur npn indice tat any ender of Fuse of ah fsa fom the post ing Senaches invasion" 2) Te ing iy of 2212 arent om the clebaig of 2213 fs 2212 dep realeooing! in 22:1 the Jeroen Se ndlging ine desctive dois tf dspi fr thi fr. 3) The Asan war agai Joh manly eomised of besieging and conquering eles. The description in 22.263, 668, however, {san ope eld bat ter ante segs of "Charts 22:6 ‘ye une wel for conquing sie, bt ee import for bat Asm pen spces, Fein (3) also ore charters of open tates. Theres also no meron fsege-weks or beaching wali Ss econ Te re eens se reparing for siege arn te orate (sb, bt this eem 0 FERS eston othe event dsr init 253, S84 not por of {heen el™"The only ope-ses at te war of 701 Was he ss nt domly (DD. Lae Sa pe, AL Siem AN eine decade zm Sima RT EA OP PT cater, “cong Fat Mere Men bY, ‘ta ey no a ting bt mere ew on edhe ewes opana ns tad ty BS Ch onto ‘sum Cs Lan, 1079p. dF. Cane Lei Sm S22 ln i tte eae nan sR ys fn Sa ee Ao 8 a pcliseanny beset canoe reel ory of Te Sos on ten weit ss btn dun of wall” wich sx orto ae pty. bt Wepre eens pete SD te capi st 2% i's son a pe. unineme leer) repens rs ee 2 yous A aio ene en (Seon of 2080 teat lenis tt aces nn 9a CHarreR one sites hh ns ny ot an “SECA arms rane Se aren eee Ere beh Se atten nt tes in cx aban nares tn SaaS eee ‘erkeptepen crs an Sera sree oemnte de Rae ees Space eee ore Se ae eae in en spencer aa cma atin oe Sein neat meen eee Bae tans ewe etn So Sicha cose oe Pippen ae aia Poza ei mcrae gegen 7 om ep nd Cad a eth octamer testcase serena ban a ts Me Spciecc aa Wire det tee Satan (orn net el ae Oh oh ty Sito Senne. Tet oR Huns cp Seen ‘hes mS oc aa emgarinenn ine ae tain een te SUSIE Oe ne See ee SSS nah rt ee rap coca seca ee ‘Epis i bw wc ea Pee Sr Rac ee aa ess 8 “THE BACKGROUND OF IS. 21221 6 “Elan” if it was involved i hi war, did no ct sem atenomously 1 226 depict. We also doo tat aah considered information on the eine composition of the Asian army important enough 1 i ne nan omc concerning th Assan invasion of Judah “hose at the dca ofequting te feminine sna ty of I 221-8 wih eral: Tere en problems dating he ole 0 Sater the Asan had Span rr Jah a ec hy he re ing. ee conmony soe tn the eral wets cng beeune Assyrians left Judah without destroying the city. a Deep the devas- {tn of theese ra god ron for jen. Rj {nth son oral rd sn lh eng em teed y th vac. shard omit be would eet he opis 10 weep aly shve ter beads td don suka 21D) ‘hen te Anas departed. One un th mpreson hat ish Was ‘Gnappened ot ermal war sed” Wa perverse? ‘ epcting les n bng cred by rjcing Heracles is dea to conceit be due tan of as ein fhe Aan van. Te ton ect sia ging encour ‘genet und pedicting tation of eter Tet he nul then ‘Smee that the peopl rejce inthe linet of his roheey 1 ree Ts rte leas people wo elm tht IK. 1817 = age Sain gE ne om hie Migpine aceaoatter one sccactenyg naCunataas a mrnien Serene Sena enone gee ak eres oe Be races acainene act eae RURee ae aie cameeta Ce Pea une arin TE TEE cs oenameencree ti eer Ginbcmernimuerceees sees Se Sbieneen imamate ao ccuuarre one 19.37. 36.37 is lel legendary." However it shard to maine that he tation of aah 5 grossly mistepeseat th pope. More: ver IK 18:171937 36-37 is accurate in many respects The tension between IK. 18317-19557 36-37 and Te 221-14 may be ue tour misunderstanding the bckeround of th ter, '3) The orgy described mvs 13 is hard wo understand on psycho- logical level ifthis orci was writen at th ed ofthe blockade of fe rsalemin 70. At eat cant imagine that people wou alk bout ying tomorrow aftr thee ety had jst been saved from te Ase ts. A fling of lof and thankfulness more understandable Nor ist sting to assert that Innh was acting the Jeremie of tn tua they i not ely have 4) The slaughtering of animals (22:13) i also ay enigma. Afr the Assyrian invasion, Judah was depleted of stra Living shoe and ‘atl couldnt he Kept ina blskaded city very lang becase they ease the food Supply istoad of seressing i One bast ak whe ‘he animals came fom and why the Jerslemites wold il hem time when ver ew sheep an catleremained inthe oan. 5) The fertifetion poets in 22-b- 1nd not fi the ofS ‘achen' invasion. Some chim hat the acts mete done when the “Assyrian were in dah and perhaps event the walls of Juste However the major work onthe water system rs. 1a) iniaes that hee were Tongterm preparations." Other people recognize tit the prepntions were mae pir tothe invasion, Dut when they elim that ober pars of the eae concer the invasion fat and it af math thy produce a new chronologies dic. = Bama Sercetom ee game ent ap bkemroncrn ect mest + Besaieeemems et = Ee ae renee my gw aS a Anim 3 ay ena gel i paar nce vente ty nteealcinamemaatat {son that dy, that ime" does sry epic backward movement iL THE BACKGROUND OF IS. 21-214 6s Becate ofthe problems in interpretation, some believe the oracle underwent wo o more edactonl phases.” However Gongaves and {Childs have given good argmens fr the oracles unity, s diving it Should only be dooe as ast sor!” My approach ist exanioe the feriine singular city nentoned oven more detail 2:18n contains the statements dtd to the ‘ity andthe cireumstances ofthe catastope in which was involve "ora he ily Vion Whi he ate thou ei ave pte ol you te etn Ho who we fal of oun, aaa cy xan ows? Your shins iy ord orden ae. SIAN of sur mle fpr on bre ep ite i) town of our on wh ae ad were apie geet {Get yb id fray. ‘Sete fan “ook soy om met me ey ey. Do a ‘na on cg te ron of he ah po Ln hn yt ain nd con Stan card he quer withchart an bore” ~ ws Qrancoreed esi (an Rosi hye hyo ccices vay weil of chara Fee may semi min 263 = BEM tn gan Cnr g SE te Cane soins oer a Se Sy "SPS 4K aw xm The MT ingens ene ier pa gos oon EO ra so rom an ce 3 yaa ed isn ne. en 5S 3. onp 2 SiS lan 5 Tf MWe Mtg ean ei ond it Se 2a Bey 9 onde toch Hing a wie none te nnsCCH Sep tp hb Ci hou esa p ce Eee ot 3 bl 2 2. The cnc ia Shy ie em, 999 peo pt) Em ‘pct gu wa gay Evan seen epi 220 mye Efecnice mipmap mec rt« ‘CHAPTER ONE pte hos set themselves ard he ate pnd resoned cover of aah With the exception ofthe imperative forme of he lament (4), al of te second person verbs and pronouns denote a fetunine singular iy ‘The pase gives the following data onthe city andthe date |. The disaster was probably an ope- Fel bates, 2-8, 5b). 2. Elam was involved inthis bate (6, 3. ie was ivale in he Bate (6) Qi almost cently signifies, ‘Arimacane™ 4 Probably daring his bute, he leaders f the ity led. Some o all cf them were captured (055.203). 5 Aer the Bae the cit ad some occasion for rejoicing (88 I> 2a) 6 Isaiah experince this vent by means ofa vision (Sf item soup. 48), 7. salah eqused he event with the destruction a is wn people ( a 1. Though this ven the cover of Juda was semoved v.80), that is on, Judah os ts protection ‘When thing thse dato as hist event, opened bales of ‘he Tate igh etary shouldbe given primary consideration" Two 1 as Fore oeeris vce My tn stu ered met rpg Sb mh eS Rp be {Toe sre te seg of cama be cca at he I. op tele ne ye te esas edt py 2 ‘9:7 sth ha a iN sh wes a oh tnt fy fhe nai io 3s pee st hm he ea oe oy tien rans he bn png Oh “hecho fre ano LR fora ual 2 (Ane yam, 9759.33, VN I sue te en We Sm sae ‘iu of str “le te ogee er URUBADy AN wd {aA i oe wo te zr Bonan r $i Bln Ames a on re ben Hains nd Ran Za, “eno Asc Fete Ah Aries Ta nn SHIM. Cap edn. I ped ar ore Pl Dap Teor teri ot ct eng ote opt ar "at yen ean a “THE BACKGROUND OFS. 21-214 o tes immeditly coms to mind, the bate of Elekehbetwésn the ‘Assrans and Egypins and the bute of Kish, The bate of Kish ‘Should be examined first beens 1 we have concluded that i is he min topic ofthe preceding chap, 2) there are some notable imi- ies between this ole and I 21. and) ike Bam, the Aramieans (Qi were ale involved his bai "Athi pone we all hacar the ble of Kishan its aftermath in snore deta In 704 Merodachtaladananssed a hage colon of forces at two fowas ned the Assyo-Babyonian border, Koha and Babylon itself His forces were ths divided. Sennacheri's amy was vided, 00, At the sat of hs invasion he sent an advance guard to Kish underthe leadership of is che euch He himself Ted the main ‘army against Kotha Merodachbaladan reacted by leading his army from Babylon agains the advance gird at Kis. Whea te chit eu ‘ch’ foce became hard peso they sent a message to Seanacherb [sking for belp™ Senaachertstrogpe mde a major asaut on Ko tha, took the ty and many caves." They then raed onto Kish 10 elp the contingent thre ™ When Meredach baladan sa the main [Asian army approaching, held and wet int hiding” The Elam ites, Chldneang snd Arameans Were let behid tose defeat by the Astyiane If Sennache can be telived, a debacle followed. “Many memes ofthe colton were eapned immediatly. others Sisense ec meerare Rees Sire SET amen Libkuoeteaceneammreomar Re Pel rrf6 ‘CHAPTER ONE. were cape afer becoming exhausted fim Meng Merde faladan himself wa not found” ‘After winning the bate of Kish, Sennachesb eat to Babylon "™ ‘The iy opened ts eats 1 hr and we maybe comida that he meta fenlyreseption by its inhabitants. Babylon was ale to ply the le ‘of grief city, weleoming Senacher, who had saved them fom the vl Meodachtaladan. Sentachenb ef the cy intact ny ting “Merodich-blada’s possessions from the palace, Seanichen's a count cominves with & description of sig the et of Babylonia, ‘Wren we compate the events ofthe btle of Kish wih he dts hich we gleaned fom I. 2:1-a (he egh tems on p 6) tete is {astonishing elaiontipBeowen the two, The bate of Kish was an open-field bat (ft = Bm andthe Aramacans were involved tems 23." = The self-proclaimed king of Babylon, Meradch-laan, led for his ifeas dl many eters Not al ofthe leaders were capa bot some were ef. tem 4). ~ The mention ofthe isin item 6 fs the stsion of he propet selina distant event a the bate of Kish was forthe Jada, ~ Thealance of he Chaldeans, lames and Arunaans had eon “cove” for Judah and at the bate of Kish ths cover was fe ‘moved (tem 8c ow discussion on pp 36-8), = Asnoed above the Assyrian victory a the bute of Kish afimed ‘hat bre would be an Assyrian invasion af Judah tem 7), ‘The mater ofthe eejoicing ity (em 5) sil rermins. The main eae for identyng the ety aih's srt tha al of ts leaders ad fi (223) This indicates that he joing cy ls Babson, whose top leader fed when the man Assyrian army appeared. Although the ‘cecasion for Babylon's ejlcng cannot be iid wth erat) i DD taste. p. 2 3: The i of is Mea tis) sll hin ane tae fom Hon smh ath Sm cts ao “THE BACKGROUND OF. 21-2214 © was probably welcoming Seancherib!™ As noted above Sennacheris nerd Babylon soon after the bale of Kish, Probably ov this een Hon Babylon gave him a eeption of ubtios ad jing ‘Our conclusion therfore ett I. 221-8a mainly concerns the ttle of Kish nit consegence for odsh, Te rejecing ty hich Tanah ares in soeond person feminine singular forms Is Bayon. ‘Wernart now consider pose objections ots proposal Pehape te main objection to wenying the eecing iy as Be ‘yon fs that Bayon sot meatoned anytere in, 22 One should rot bring stant city into the discussion when thee sno itera {viene fort Actaly this is nota problem in igh fou discussion ‘of fe 21, We hve presented ood taons for assming taal of Is, 31 cooceen the fall of Babylon st ts consequences. This chapter inerey continues the tpi. After detailed sccouns of de bate of ish and it fermth reached Jrosalo one of i's country nen ould ave san the city of 22:1b:3 and 7-H hee was ay dou, "he mention of El and Quin 226 made it clear. ‘Anober pol rim concerns 22:23. Contrary to what 2 ste, tere were pabubly mary men who ded with oer a he Bat tle of Kish, Moreover 223 could be consid to mean that al the leaders had ben aptred." This was wo the case. Some leaders Wore captured, but Merodachbaladan escaped and probably thes id {Siu nin cay bea ng aot i ips derigecs haces sl er tacos wpe Perec eee Soi ieeaincmraerarenera tetas Se ee ena tpence cere ay hrosraecmeaese pte hw es ae a ny ar wl ene mene yer fot ey ae Seen vase jenn wo te Sip taansnane minetcasinet Fa er na tara nota myer sma” ‘CHAPTER ONE ‘oo. Its thus possible tha Isiah overstued the Babylonians’ file inthis tle. However we are protaly bring excessive i ur demand for accuracy in discussing these dei, Some imertant lars were captured along wih lege bodies of troops” The pesibily of manor Inconsistencies should not cbscre the ntale mires beewece Tsu dseripon andthe actual event fhe bate of Kish, “Another difilty sthat Oe mart ssome tht Ih smoking thre dase switches in his addresees within he eace, Vs. 3 has Sitch from Babylon to the Jeralemites. Vs. 7 adresses Babylon tein: 8 tims back to the Jerwalemites. However comparable mt tal shows that abrup changes inthe adese reno o nus I 211-5, for example. adresses Elam, Media and the festing ule with summons to wa. CL the change of ares in 231-14 ‘The ony problem with he changes in I 2:18 is th the adresses sre not clearly ned. However hs sour probly, nt problem of Isia’s comemperais. They recognized the dleent nesses ‘learly enough Moreover he oracle provides intra evdene fo the ‘hangs. The words directed to Babylon coincide withthe second pe. Son feminine singular forms pefly while the words tote lente. lemites fit the second person mascline pial forms, Also the word ‘atin ren 52 (08 4), which bas ben sepeted of blag Ferloous addition. serves to dest the stenion away fom distant Babylon othe prophet himself inhi made soundings ‘Some people may obj to this proposal became vs. 4 tals shout the destnction ofthe propet's on people a if bad aed taken ‘ace. In 708 this had not yet happeed. The prop sul talked in wr acer acer Sree comin ees cine emt ca hay rae SSE ers Sane, Ale seo Ra Mec stoma a i spe ate sashes eee egeegerey ai Sie Seer ie PSEA eran ‘TE BACKGROUND OFS. 21-221 n this maner because he comet sw hat the fate of Judah was so tlosely Bound tothe fate of the Babylonian coaition lt would hus be ‘ore surat fo sy tht he prophet was alin aboot the event ae there was no doubt tat would happen. Tht the destucin of his people is a fre evet is confimed bythe remade af te onl Verse 8a states that Judas protection i gone. The following verses 3 compton ce Secondary adiion 16 make the text covespond fo he situation of the ‘Reyne te a at oe cna “SE eter 2 8a ct eld lier es eden 351 hea lao he (cat rand en eyon p99 oe Reet, “fre Onl in Seah bean Sevsh May Le Ment ‘okin) Ofetin o1983 hen). Themes eu ce een bay Sisnig ay ean hana om tne bc ee 79 5 ag ne nn Extn 1 my sn er hh" Whe meg hme” ‘CHAPTER ONE sixth century." Howoves, the vere mre likely an tone indiement of the policies which cased Phoenii's problems, Assuming ta 213 Is fom Isiah, it canbe understood a follow Behl th of te Chala “Tibi people! roa ot uy. ‘They he Canes) eine er Ty) ons ‘ho setup ge ter) They Soles Frees. ‘Th set he rn 1m this verse Isiah may be blaming the Chaldseas fr Phonici's problems. OF couse the Assyriane were doing te actual damage in Phoeniin, bu th Chaldeans were the wal root of the problem, The ‘ere is evidence forthe Chulaeas being Bind the whole ebelion inthe net 1. Conclusion ‘This chapter has ede three conclusions fr our stay of Seanache- 1's thd eampalgn. Fi the Todacans were dependent on Babion When thy rebelled against Assyia. We can rand Chaldsea far acon alliance in 105-08 sa near certainty, Second 221-4 sould ‘ot be used for reconstting Senaacherb's campaign tothe wes because wat ‘wrien before the wari at 704 er erty 703. Thus most ofthe alleged contadictons and testons between the Bibs arratve of the eamplgn std I 221-14 sly disappear, Thi I 2:I-14 shoud pt be wed to dred leih's olen K 1617 19:37 To be sue new question aout Iih's atid now arise, bt the the years teen this orale ad the Assyrian inason of Judah sis allow time fora development ia Usa thooght. The deeply em bitered Kish of 7043 may have nevertless prophesied the salve. tin Jerse 701. 2" Boh FCB p 105 CLGR Hanoy "Ren apne in be Co it ep ah lp jot of e.My ee aon ow RO) Ta ene py otsing 3) at nn a spe ses So {rar she lve. Changg bj sk, My ee int rhein anc pt en oP aoa SS ‘Sey ve se menng"e deiner Po dy he ie eecarrer Two (OTHER PASSAGES FROM ISAIAH IS. 105.19 AND 1621, 24. The Background of i 10:5.19 1s. 105-19, an oracle concerning Assen, has five Feats in common swith he ences ofthe rabshage (0K 1819°3 1 36:420) The ‘common eatres have led see scholars fo conele thatthe ras (geh's secs area Jadaeanfabecatin largely based on Isiah 10 Representative of this viewport tS ‘Wehave cl Rabat of elle prophet. This was of lure not eat aly, Rbk Inyo lye he “pps eh ad espe in slr ty inte Know ine bial ogy ca ere of he ces of he As Timer enc, ar gee some col The arsed by Incwaing Rebsakch i his narae how el te teed woof th ropa an be dst xp of parte posh ah he wo sponte of Rabu re ata 4 riz ton the popecy nhs cape “Tis sy wil atemp o determine the validity ofthis opinion. We shall begin by examining I 108-1, which ithe prophet’ quotation ‘of “Asstia” Fur ofthe five common features ae i his passage. A tras below "fae ot all ny commander ngs nt Cao ike Cyc? Is st Hath ke Ara? le mt Samar he Danas? AS my hd tan! ths Kone of ietnaed tha sates ere wore ha (Gea deter snd Sari i Sarr sa es, (rita oer dis images? “The fur common features oe similares with he sesches ofthe ab shageh area lls aS i es ati a ote aso Ris See (rs sen 199, p15 The ame eon tah Som ADS ino Tee” nn o>6 ccuarree Two 1) Vers 8 is eminscent of the rab-shageh’s boast in IK. 18:24 So how can you tm back the advance of single govemer of my lord's minor sera." According to thi statment even an AS) ‘itn governor was oo power for King Hezsksh 1o defect wih his wn resources. implies what I. 108 openly sta the king of Assy ‘a's subordinates were ie powerfl Kings in thes own 2) Verse 9 puny resembles IK. 18334 ne ny he gt si oe ao thing of Asya? Where the gol of aman an Ap? Where te te gs of Sharyn, Hee sh? chee ee ge a Siri hat ane ted Sanaa fen my hah Both passages preset questions. Congr cies ar aned; Harath sod Apd appear abot in 3) Te ash Ito i nH K 18334 clo mind the Assyria cong of Saris ab the shunt dagen? th te tngcon ig he tae fe as 1D 101 te clear sate of what heaps of he vce pled Sinaia ad not been able ition an Attys sep eaten ill nt belt withstand an ASpin segs exer 4) Teas and images of 1010-1 seh adacan way of ay. ing he bse pit ofthe bsg: te ga of varios cents inloing Santa id nota the cunts fom hye Ay fa The el ifrencefetwsce the two passage inti pest tht the rabstageh wes tenor fem Som to dept he rons sc Is 10-1011 es he ergata ems oon ed ‘The similarities beeen he abshageh’s speeches and Is, 1811 are undeniable, How should one exphin them? To answer this question ‘hee base posublis exit” 1. A prophet or prophets had writen Is 108-11 and tear of ‘Kings ook the Heas of this and other passages and created the speches ofthe ab-sbageh Eero mao mbites mittee net a ‘elena toring th ages a Seger mien cheat ‘OTHER PASSAGES FROBISALAH. n 2, Some spsshes were really mae by 3 rab-shageh othe pople of ‘ensalem ad those ae mote o lee secrately preserved IK i and I 36 The main pout of the rab-shaqe's speeches were Also sirmarized by a prophet or prophets in Is. 108-11. They em elisha the base message of te rabshageh by icing their ‘en perspective of frei gods. 4 Both te rabshagh's spesces and Is. 10811 eet Assyrian propaganda wth similar const, but they ae not based on the Same speeches, Recent aces onthe rabshageh's speeches assume the Gist alterma tive the mow pluie without sessing Tis dstbing be Cause the prophet claim to be quoting something which “Amr ‘aid (108, Awyeta Being understood fom the context) and this ‘nim is simply ignored in these ails. I the clam is core, ow ver then the second alerative may be the ght explanation forthe “Shes ete the rabshage’s specs and I 103-11 Fouatly another gootation i the ral can belp us fo decide which ofthe ematves isthe mos plausible Is. 10.1318 does not (quote “Asya” bu rater the Assyrian Kng- We stall exarine whe- ther tsa gente action, a pry genneqastatio, oa compete Siac fabrication devo of any eationshp t genbine Asan propaganda Below my wanlaton of the pusage pare st “By te sent of my hand Ihave ed, and by my ‘sums for {am dicen And hve removed bandas of {eps he pn! res Aik ul hare out "OX ytd a tnd te sr fhe pope ie aa”, nd sone Pers tandoori earthy sd “To wh eco ua eesti Tan ane ita pn ESTES ed {GealyZegetoc, Since snd ee cifealy Leti 5 Ma, ‘ohn a 07S pee pce ap Ty 0. Ov yw Mass inn a Spine ang*® carrer Two tse mas none wich moved wine or oped (is) mouth and ered 1s, 10:13:14 has some resemblance to Neo-Asyian royal inscriptions. Cote following 1.7 isin bth verses. Inv, 13-71 - no has no exact pre {0 NA royal inscriptions. Ia va. 16 psn So p> mED ha ‘he subject of ws The combination occere 11 ies in Biblial He ‘ew. bt nowhere elie in Isiah except Is. 10:1, the quotation of Asotin cited above (p. 78) Wis, however, slmos the exat semantic uae of Auda gat or iSuda gata weed by Astin King. Four examples should snfice to show its wage "(am Tippee tng of Asya, woe to hands hve cpt A te consis Raye est al Sam al rt ah ‘ns atin gaia ida) Sago, (ales om he nf Ra oh ede la he ies atte Pogue (and) Dams, hee Dar Rega (ot) gig th compe desert pote rok of Epp te ad la of ‘teAmara te west) he nl nd of atria trey nd nhs great and has ener icra gc eo) he ‘he ud of Chshmar ote an of Si dein on the an of lun Mees of te ast, th nde of Nosy i, Be-Chbon, Pasa, elie of be Manse Unt Kaka an) a ‘The secnd passage hasbeen quoted at greser length because it as some relevance fo point below Both the Tigltheser and Sargon asspes are general sunmiczing tatetects of the King. uss Te '0:13-14purpos tobe. Far moe common ithe avamence of dud ita Specie station such athe flowing "Fey meas ot, oe od ie 42 72m ag ve Monaghan ten vo wha x wana le 263,100 an Gob RT 2) ng 3 LO 4293 9. ae or ln amy cane pepe 91, cceig Td spit ABatn guy perso po a force Son anette in "tanking 1215p cmp. 29, (OTHER PASSAGES FROM ISAIAH » My own tans cape lve (fudge chro commander tn princes of yt oper with th og Nis ro conan Serine mid of be "Ne Merah anand lone in eder ove i if dy nds ape (it 10) Qe cai, Nags, horse, (ad) aes We had dened “These examples sugest tht he prophet is imitating the Assyrian style of basting by his us of 2: As Chis noted, the "bons repetition of the fst person: “ save dne it. hive removed have gathered.” wih Finished a ‘ion verb is pial of ancient Near Eastern inscriptions ts father viene tht he propbet wa inating propagands which he Knew 3. 10:13 the Assyrian King desebes nse a wise and discer ing. This sa commen theme in Neo-Asyian royal inscriptions, at an be Sen inthe CAD ens for dpa (wise exper)” mk i stu, lunes. ingenious or clever ies) némepu nowlee, peice, wisdom)” bas (otelgen)™ an! mud (owing, ‘vse The following passage are good examples. The fis a ge tral sel'deseiton of Sirgo: the Second fom Sennachenb' c= ut of is"Palace without a Rival” aor pt hs 18 aia Sint pal 48 a ml ng rh sin eb ‘Theking eo sharp is sess cg of al he crits, hea of the sips bo bs Rowe great fo ledge ed widoe, But, Semcterhy fet smong all ices, vite in al raimaship (rip Elina ret plo one cls ie, wh ing ttre my tine ad fsone, tough te ever tasting « Fr RC 8, 2 CAD 107. mp Riz woaton on 220 ccunrreR two ina sti) wih th nie Nn od nen me, ond my wn win na rama) (made 4, Removing oeders (10:3) has ben discussed by Machinist” ‘This is commonly mentioned among the NA kings, withthe word fr border being mig pe. The Assyrian kings often described te ‘moving boundaries in euplemisic manner, t=. they enlarged the boundtries of Asse map mir mi ate (Seg) wo eres be bx of Asi Sean” ot ar rapa mir — utc it's ‘hep soxpor h clages te Sr (Ash) plas i Sennacherib ako boasted of “adding” counties 4 the borders of Asya Seach econdcanpien gre mt abel nig mi ar wad ite Bie Bad fo rnd ae te border ‘The prophet called the deeds by their real ae, removing the ‘boundries thas bringing 0 mind the peobibon i Dt 19-14, 5: The King’s landing of stores (22 Ewer) and maining the wealth ofthe peoples (577) are, of couse, common in As) rian propagania abd doo eque extensive documentation, We sal only note Seanacherib's description of bis entry into Babylon in hit first campaign: Nas appt fe od wo ishowa or caine Pu Ma “Ay i ag it 1408 1898) a ab es ey by Meee aw CE. 2) REDD. ke mp (OTHER PASSAGES FROM ISAIAH, 8 1 need his plc nthe mit of Babylon ad opened itu ewe alder, vex of gland ler, pcos soe, eey. ‘hing image, wea and oper iho nab» hear Td is palce women cowvers tenants male mol female Pesca (3) ‘ce af schol all wo tee wee, hs pale eee {Deg fet scot ‘The prophet seems to have fommlated a geneaiion based on numerous stems such chi, made by ASSyran igs on specie ‘secant. Boasting about seid plunder, incidentally, a Yer AS) rian erate Neither Neo- Babylonian nor Persian kings based ‘shou the planer whic hey hd seed in thee inscriptions. (6 sar Tako 77 hae caused exual and teslation problem. levine hak armed tht the MT cold reflect the original text" Mere ‘over the ketib 2, “ike a bull” or “ikea mip one” Hs 8 ber ‘eadng than eguding the underlying words T22. Ivins suges tions are atactive fr thei impiety, and » farther historia arg ‘ment can be addoced for understanding 3S a5 “ke a all” "This Simul occur depictions ofthe Assyrian King inthe lsciptons of “Ashura td Sennacerb orth ate. Seach fi campaign (eh 208 f Sha {et cu fom Ash abead of ay ry he seh time in ph nt ma ny, 1 {Sree rinat aoe shri a) want ie orden ft ie sal, Seach ith camoien”™ ‘Wh ay pone bed and my meres bale woop st tate hr uma a a wal (maim ee, ‘tae iy oe bree te pen ig ly open. * Doin peneanee i2 ‘CHAPTER TWO (nthe surface such a simile inthe cones of I, 10:13-14 may seem od, bt cis easly understandable in ight of Neo-Assysan royal i Sevpions. This 2 farther instance ofthe prophet niating Asi Propands "At the basis ofthe nest sini of I. 10:14 ithe frauen Assy- rian comparison of the enemy obi, sally when the enemy es Tike bt ori enteaped ikea bid (ka sir oir) More ‘over ns simules occur in the inscriptions of Asuras nd Senos ‘herb. Ashura decribed some mountain peoples mbo fled fom his tnvasion as bling “nests ike bi) on mountain precipice (na ir git aa hl Sa Sad id." “Rte Ashura plundered and dsoyed thei ies, they came down, sobmited, and fecepted Ashunaspa's mponiton of bute, tax and fred lab, ‘Sennachei uses the nes smile for his enemies in sft campaign ay ith camsign be populations of Tamara ewe dling Strat ons pth sk of Mc Nr ade mei, ‘ens of ea na gine) fare i and hs hd een sibsietoany ye ‘The account continues by relating the conges tl plundering of the ‘ies, The nest simi eno further developed in the socount Ami ely the nest sis in Assyrian eat re not very close to tht of 10:14. The royal insrigtions ase the smile only for mtn po les. They do to develop the ird smile tothe extent of I 104 ‘Abundooed eggs have wo Assyrian parll tomy knowledge, noe are ‘he peoples ever deserted nr no tering a winger peping. Never theless the proper probbly ew that Ayia seriber often wed bir ime when depicing the enmies af thei king '8.Guhering al ofthe earth (2258 3 mT", 1) ao has no ‘exact parallel ip Asian royal imeriptons, but the saement rer scent ofthe fequet eis which Assn kings gave themes: Sor hiv ert (king of the four (wort) repons) and far Klan (Ging ofthe weed). Here isa boat of Tigh plser MI "(Focin) lands large a) the etry of Aseria Teaparcd.Couslss people ‘os people Tae I ontinvasly heed them in safe pastes mien byH Tad See i. 18-17 gp. 10655 ‘OTHER PASSAGES FROM ISAIAH 5 Finally te Sargon txt quoted under point one above i piel pas sage of a Assyrian king, in hich world bepemony ir shown by Ii ingthe countries conquer bythe King Thos wold dona i the ‘bse ofboth the Assyrian and sia passages. 1s. 10:13:14 sno a diet quote ofan Asian hing a fara we can lisse. However these eight pins taken together show tat he pro ‘het summarized Assyrian ideology and propaganda, The orc Com {ain ey words and motifs which appear in royal insrigcos. While {he Assyrian inscriptions ofen employed the mais in specific sta tos, the prophet presented the motifs as generalizaions concerning ‘he Assyrian hing. One feat which the Assyrian Kings described ete ‘msi (Ge enlarging the borders), wan seed to give some i= ‘minal undertones, Despite these liters, the exteme conctt and ‘meralmania ofthe Assyrian King abe depicts inset in the royal Insertion, condently summarized by the prophet io thse Io "This conclusion, of couse, uses the question of how Assyrian propaganda reached the eas of Judas, The gueton was ablesed by Machinist" One means was though the Jadseaneminaries who ‘ised the Assyrian capital to deliver the anal tte. A tuo he “Assyrian Kings pace with reading ofthe inscriptions om the lle five them direct exposure to Assyrian royal pomp. A Judaean court Prophet may have eon pat ofthe embasy himself oe year fmt, be euld ave foand out shou the propaganda though an ensiy who bd gone In his contest we may meation hat Kg Henskish hms probably vised Assen in 706 fr the dedication of Du Shakin, Sargon I's magafceat new capa How many members of court accompanied him is pure guesswork, bat visits sch a hi gave the Team ang clas lose fairy with Assyrian propaganda ad the Assyrian mentality. A second means was that AS)a ay havg spread its propaganda direct in Toda ad its suroundings in various srry... speches ie tht ofthe eb-shagsh, Assyrian official st Toned in near Fodah, oy insertions om stl, rock it tor wo pont: he ngs ten a a oon“ (CHAPTER TWO What are tbe implications ofthis dscssion for 16-11? Thre points oud be noted: ) The claim ov 13, “For he te Assyrian king) si” has been fly substantiated: 103-14 fa summary of Assyrian royal pro ganda fom aJodcan perspective. Reasoning indctvely we shuld lko ive some credence tothe opening statement of 10% "For i (Assia) said” One may poste tht 104-11 is also a rewodked Summary of Assyrian ropasnds 2) Because Ie 108-11 hae four notable simlries with the ab- shagehs speeches the species are probably the propaga source of the passage. This would mean thatthe rab-shageh's speeches a8 r= ‘cordon IK. 18 andl 36 ae basicaly then '3) The distbuion of slates betwee I 10-19 andthe ab- sages speeches supports these two pots, If Jada had fab Cate the rabsshageh's speeches onthe base of 105-19, be would have had 15 verses of mri for ceating the speeches In reality however, nly five vers have notable smilies wih the rb-cha- Ges spaces, and four of the fie verses ae in the quote of Ayia Go8-11)° There are no notable sinulaes between the ab shoe's Speeches andthe quote of be Assan king (1013-14, aboot ould have been maura for a fabio oe elements fom thi quotation in the rabshageh's speeches at wll The simplest way to xpath ptr so pstlate that the autor of i 105-19 made x omesesunamy of the ab-shageh'sspeches in his ise quotation (0:81) fone refeses wo acept his, one shoul offer an explanation 2 to why the Jolean redator of I Kings til used these our ompeesied verses for fabricating the species. "terefore sob hat Is. 108-11 isan independent atesaion of an Assyan speech, probably made by the rab-sageh, a the nave I ITK. Ts depicts it Of coun farther sty ofthe speeches ie needed 1 test his assertion, and tix provided Inter inthe book. For now | only need say that this soggestion must be Kept in sind when adress the problem of how te rabshageh’s speeches ogited Eee Sbeartree em stey neers eames acne cara TE Ecc tmnm tn ‘OTHER PASSAGES FROM ISAIAH ‘s 1 the suggestion i vai t woul have implications fr the unity ‘of ys. 8:1, Some people regard ws 10-11 a secondary and separate ‘hem from ves. 69°" To bese vs 10 ean anacoluton aad it com ‘ais information nt found in the abshageh's peahes, i the dae fof eter counties were more numerous tan those of Jnl ahd ‘Samaria These re, however, not compelling reasons for regarding. TO as secondary. Because the rbsage’s second speech mestons ter peoples gods, mentioning frign gods ins. 101011 may be expected, despite the disparaging. manner in which the gods ae leeued, Vane 10 may have suffered in transmission, bat the ra Shage's speeches povie a rong argument for he basi uty of I ron T noted a he beginning of his shaper tha thre were altogether Five features which the rob-shgeh's specs abd Is. 105-19 had i common. The fifth feaure i that baths 10:6 and LK. 18:25 36:10 claim tat YEWH seat the Assyrians to devasiae Judah, Hose oes one explain his? shall discus thi, question after moe ta on {he abshage’s speeches are presente.” Here | sal oly mention ‘hat the prope simpy agreed with he rab shageh on thi pot ch Ike Jermah found himself expressing opinions advantageous tothe Babylonian side more than acer Ir Jer 381-4, 1718, 203: ef 3713-14: 3911-12) Thee need not be any redsctiona ink beween Isaiah 106 ad IK. 1825 3610; on he other hand a eal con ection may exe. revsely ding the oracle rere conjectural Barth considers it ‘ely thatthe atest stands of the arc were writen between 717 nd 711, based on the ies in v9. None ofthe ees were conquered iter 717- On the ster hand Asdod—conqeged in 7I1-—i not on thelist s the oracle would precede that year These cetera cannot limit a date of 70), however, because Hezekia's incursions ito Pistia in 708-02 highlghed te weakness of Asya conto in hit 10, Ov as Bas Bch er Pop a Kap 12 (ATO ee, They 221 Ont ert 8.8 Chil ane agran as ‘titans ath, De Jj Wore er fms, (MAN) Nec Sig op Scag mst od ano YOM on6 CHAPTER TWO tea Since 1s 108-11 purports tobe a qutton of Asi it would toc mention Ashdod, because mentioning a Philistine city would be ‘nsiable for Assan propaganda at his tine. Cn te ther hand we ave ated he esos for manning that 1s, 108-1 summarizes the rab-shaeh's peehes I 10:57, 12° sage fest tha the Asian invaron of Judah was in progress, vt was 8 future event, The bal simul of ws. 13 points to Seanacherb being the king. Heand Ashura ae the only Assyrian kings employing this ‘expression inthe inscriptions to my knowledge. This easier i Tey that 10-19 dates to 701 BC ‘Anuher hia ht the rele was composed in Sennscheri's reign is sign by vse 16:19. Most scholars regard these verses at secon an.” Bren i they ar, however the pasa fits Sennacberb's reign ‘well. Vs 18-19 tll ofa foresdgardenand™ which the Lord wil ‘burn Nec many Assyrian Kings bosted of planing Desi garden forest but Sennachei was one of them. The account of his Pace without a Rival, dated vo 694, els sbow plnting parks round about Nineveh Round aoa he ciy Testbed ach (om he ede” of ie aman se le cams al he eb fhe nd Ha (= ‘rs plane es One ugh ease the Bae Sani peacatoiton est ne erty ocean tee ec han eenmr esa Sato aerate one in dr Sort. 1-18 Te min bln wih aig 10.1619 3 Suen enumerate Sarocmasuateent pee aratrs centean canter iment nee oeeaiaeer estes Seiccumametesi tener Sete tre epee gh We og ‘OTHER PASSAGES FROM ISAIAH " ese {pled in get mantel inde of moi ine ft be Fe of mamknd hte dv res tou or my jee "To wate the puts Sennachri built 2 cana from the Khose river to the pln around Nineveh (ecotded in 02)” He also directed water fom Mf. Musi this aren recorded in 694). I is inscription of (94, he described» vertble porate with orchards, grapes, bbs, 2 lagoon wit anebak aswell eyes, msikann and ther tes. ‘Abunda wife louhed in these areas" I this the forest and [vderland refered tons 10-1819, then was appropri for the Prophet oped ht his forest and garden land weuld be consumed bythe ir ofthe Holy One of frac: Fven with the Asian King's ‘er projet his plamations could not withstand auc a ae “his dation i pay conjestral, bat ha bopeflly cared ‘ome tem: Caiming tht the rb-sthagesspsshes re a Jean fabri ‘ton largely based on I 10 oversimplifis te ise, Thee is eason to baie that I 108-11 sa summary ofthe rab-shageh’sspesces. 22.The Background ofl 14-21 ‘A.srong cas fr the taunt ong. 1:46 beng sane and writen ‘on the cceasion of Sargon’ death was presented by Cisberg and ‘tots "The arguments forthe song being aboot Sargon may be ‘Satie a follow Tr The soag mentions thatthe king fel withthe shin (14:19. ‘Among the Mesopotamian Kings from the ate eighih entry 00, his ‘am only ft Sargon, Sennacherb, pebaps Supharshkun, Ashu ‘halt, EvirMerodch, La bash Marduk and peags Nabonidus” OF coor oceans i Pecceeeccheciethioamre sw sone phe sameeren erthese only Saigon and Sennachoi relly mde the cath embed the Kingdoms sake ls. 1419, 2. The king was taped undefoot and not buried inhi hose (14:16-20, This coresponis to Sargon peel, but nobody else 0 ‘our knowledge '. Ginsberg ho presented argument fe Isai authori based on vocabulary Ths would agin favor Sargon, lah was probably sotalive when Senachei ied in 14, The mention of Hele (=U going to Saphoo (pee 272, 14:13) probably an alls fo he plac of Sargn's death ashe ws ‘ely ile in Taba, which not ofa rom Sapon (Mt Csi) “Two farther historical arguments favering Sargon ate King in ‘hitman can now be aed '-Sapon of. 14:13 was sscited with Sargon because he ex Ploted the mount for coprer ore, The exploiation of Saphon is Ineationd in Sergon's amals "To my knowledge, no ster Mesopo- {Eni monarch mentioned Sapo nhs inscigos exe Tih pie who med on hi cong association ofthe dead King with Helelin 1412 i an alle sono Suporte sion wk he Meponan 2 Song's sition wih El manifests sel nto n9- ist Sargon esigaed Rise alm! Ztail pin tee of EL Sati“ was Sages leading ep inhi inscrp- tons dating betees 722 and 710 B.C, wns 4 tatonal ep lanong Assan Lings up troveh Sargon: afer him only Echaddon ‘cecsionaly employed 1" The promunence of ths tile in Sargon's sigh Soatey tatateny ac Sine et Baiee slay os se nti ea Si 8°08 = (fate ok ptr esp The eae he Eater 995 Ba Uns : Saracen cera hemor 3 Ges Sn nie dons one, Pi 966 so oie Sis of NS hgatae i oc oop ae Blin ge ism ss seh oa ey seat ily oc plan ae ge BO (OTHER PASSAGES FROM ISAIAH » incrigtions—it ined fellows his nare—atets to the inp tance which Sago attached to Eli also shows the close associa tion of Sargon with his particular go, jst ass 1412 depict a cose ‘sociation of Hell wih the deceased king. With one minor exception El isnot mentioned inthe epithets of Neo-Bbylonien kings fom Nabopolasar on, nor does the god have an import plae in Neo Babylonian royal peopagan.” The second reason fr asecating Hele VE wih Sargon is due to ‘he ddieation of Dur Sharan in 706 B.C, Sargon made Ei one of the two foremost states inthe estvites. Ct. his Display Inscription ‘ex poe Beryl (=. er Het der Ln, er Bewoies des uogetaer (und) ce Gite ud Gone, de Asien te ‘ete teen Yon Freudngestgen und Peers (pet) Many states were atthe festive, bu EI merited special metion. neem that oly Asbur, memloned in ls. 167 and 17, was accorded ‘moe ester atthe eves han EI Once again Sagan's eligi ‘rienttion and propaganda gave Eli a special distinction unmatched by any Neo-Astyrian or Neo Babylonian king to my hroedgs. In thi cae, to, the asoition of Hell with the sai ing I 112. 15 bes is the El Sargn combination, Especially the sth reason asumes tht the prope was closely fami iar with Assyrian propaganda, aftr noted above” An iniguing pit that some Judnsne were lest cerainy present athe Du Sharubia festivities. Immediately following the Ell passage quoted the, Sargon describe bs fast with te val Kings dnd eer digi tans If Hezekiah was presen at his elation and ti key — nism AAT al Seen Vy 173 ph 7248 Te eapcs ‘Setar (10 tb I pe of we le. ere gm VAD) i oe pg "Pam by Pad K-35 75.7, agp na shige gn Ar i ns Ma ip Th Ff Aesth eas se onan abe coe0 ccuaeren two then he and oter members of the Jaan cour probably sa the ‘ocesion of states, with the Ell sate inthe leading oe Tf Sargon isthe deceased king of Is. 144-2, why is he called the ‘ng of Babylon? This the only peoblmn with equating the king with ‘Sargon. Sargon was, fle al beter known a King of Asya. There ‘se Io possible explanations for his being called the king of Babylon inthe ntodution tothe taunt 1440. rt ith Himself may have called Sargon king of Babylon. The Talis ot wrong. nor ist wholly unsitble. Sargon spent tre of his Tat five yea tulng in Babylon ie, T1007)" an he sone fo Ingratte hiel oth Babylonian gos ® The te years mentioned in Sargon's Cyprs Stele were reckoned onthe Bass of his Kingip ‘over Bayon. "On the ober and Sargon did otal hl “king Babylon” in his ies. He prefered the more cautious epitet “gover: nor of Babylon atkanak Babi) Despite these actors sil ard to dace why laiah woud call Sargon king of Babylon insted of King of Assyria. Ths the second explanation maybe the corest on “An edior placed he orginal taut aginst Sargon ino new one, the jue of Babylon ‘The authorship forthe surrounding passages, I. 131-144 ant 1422-27, will nt be dicaneed here, nora I optimistic that the ‘question of thei authorship wil ever be eed with any eoafidence An Mi, Te Fons of he Arron Empire 1062 (SAAS SEN Gt tod," nf Spend Sere a Wi Pat Th igo ag SAAB. Tene Sp DS 3-2 (a oe a et {agony my Kip wp td ere NO. {iy tose! isn ss Bayon dh‘CHAPTER THREE, “THE FIRST PHASE OF THE CAMPAIGN: PHOENICIA 3. Preliminary Remarks A the final stage of poping hie book, Ine eightceamy Phoen- an 'itery was town ito a quandary dec, 2 ew reaing by ‘Naaman in «Khorsabad inscription of Sargon If Nama reading ‘fv el sgn is comeand it probably then anther King ot “Tye has Become know to ws, Sta (sa), atest in Sarpon's tals nan incident which coca between 710 and 707 B.C: This, discovery rege that some eareflly though ot reonstrctons of late eghh-entury Phoenician history be revised, though hw to revise thom sane Is Lal of Senachei's anal dene with Eow- ow ofthe Mesader sey? Moe scholars had sumed he Wa, but this smo longer so sse. Was Ll lo king of Tyre in 701 oe ae King of Som as Seonacerb' anna Inet Rim? in what follows, tty describe the situation in Phoenzi shorty before Senacheri's invasion, It lagely a conventional hsorcal viewport, which tive el detenible despite the new discover. Lae in Sargon eign the capt of southern Phoenicia was Tyre, which ald the coast fom Sidon nthe noth to Acco inthe south skola ove pact oral of Cypr* The king af Tye, Ellis, is SLSR Se cigytac ee one tn tig of Sash bed W Sem. Ane Somer te Soe Sarees See acter ite meee ae eer re pase Rieeraeaem unten Pe ried2 CoNrTeR THREE known in Senacheri's anna as Lali lied, king of Sidon? 1 seems likely thatthe crowne of Sidon and Tye were united in one Person at his time, The years of Lal's eign ae unclear he Was ng fyi eign nasa ey lng The been of Tye ret icin and the kingship of Lull over ‘Tyte are importa point o remember, because Seonacherit’s anal void meatonng Tyre “Altboush Tyre was the center of small empte,tblongd othe Assyrian empire and had obligations tot Phoenicians proved sie, men and timber to help bald Sargon's new capt, Dar Shain? “hey provided toops fo the Assyrian any. They paid Asya ‘ual bat as well atolls and tates on trade” Asya ls mponed ‘esictons on thi trading partes According 1 Sargon's anal. Tyr also benefited from Asetian tule. Sargon cooperated with Shits King of Tye, to rhe sea of some toxblesome Greeks ("iz am-na--a-onians)" The Greek, ete citer pirates who diated trad or serous trade competion, ‘Rei detest by Sargon reputedly “reught peace to Que and Tyre CConneted with this event was the subsion of seven ings of located ia Cyprs. who rove rote gis to Sargon in Babylon? » Sateen eaten ey and spiny (3a Rome Rp aa Tse Sp Roe mnt “aaa Nave aa Sr (18) gS 17 For ae nea apres one” 18 10680 zea wed oe ea ot ‘oul Poencan (Rast The Hs Tye. pp. 62150. Seine ne nea tae eR wn ran er Seacrest Beattie an arenes ae Stee earn 7 Seer and a Snapanaiee Ora he ke 169849. 19194.C1 Ni Nama ORAS 6988p. TE FIRST PHASE OFTHE CAMPAIGN: PHOENICIA. 93, [Near the end of his eign Sago’ intuence in Cypms was so song that be could havea tele in is noe setup thee (707-708 B.C) “Ofcourse argos sce in Cpr was oly possible with Poe icin ships. How ch Phoenicia eally benefited from Assan fle Fe unkoown, We can oly say Dat Lal, King of Tye and Sion, was rae: ‘ttn fhe ext ean with Cynder. died Yo 697 BC. CEM. 25 low, esata ceeietani tes ie nos Pci Howe of Obes Iam Zain 9 Deen Son and Sap, cee tala rt at ee heen ea en ty opgnnen Pe Benny emma nam ne recent ae ge Cc me wrmsea ere omer penne RD Ste eee Rien Nae, sn ona oe4 ‘CHAPTER THREE st eth flaming snr fhe wap A, yd, Dverhined teed thy abel Hay ee ened Pa ns al hoe sve hem sn pede ad use my lr pen, a seal wie ncraps remasks on translation. The wonds "and * do not appear inthe Rasim Cinder, bat sxe found in recension as early as Cylinder C (697 BC)" The under lying Akkaion of “perished.” Sadsu emi, iniates the death of ts Suet shown by'avanan inthe anus of Ashu Pram Bad oi ar mt ua lion nt. (698, 6463.6)?” lin ar mat Arua meade (683 BC)" sean itp ene Srlatua tre asesie ishgcigctantatitenaonirye ‘Roagacanieaneneeere tine epee ae tee iui ssortaenieeean Bho coa cremtautts race Exe peat cnatanmanee amr Site heoeeante cman inhciategeetcommmr ners Silly 1 the cae of Lu Souree For stats that Ll was at Tee ong ee ne ‘ec vn Bp Bap ek ee ae ahem Sackmicreumnise reer | monrintertaehtae CEES nue + DSc nae “THE FIRST PHASE OF THE CAMPAION: PHOENICIA 95, en ett anguring Ty was et 59 tae Why ‘eis et ent spe Scud es, ‘er La “ete important Pow ie sone sang sn of weapon of hm stata) ‘he “orp AS” ee nn he Aye ten ti camps" Asn es Lacey a weer te Pownce ofl eat sud See rh cme Al st Sto hd a nce seed ‘Sane hee tsa he piece of Penn. ny (La a ese nc or bs cay. Tle aot Ear oo in Asya elise ec woud exp, eepeseot may to me sot ng ha "he Pmican spose eck wih Somat nallag ou ‘np of Son en he tro fo lee Peni Tu ng oan pry be cas ios earopon Hvag eee Tes wh tpi Asn Seen td paid ie ewe ‘sn pt Asan poly ean ee Syl caine Te tte sale te ems wich pene in the id cnplgn nT eta tho te iy OF posn he Arye ng, he Aye nant pnts no Seber cen’ tenis mele ys pce hl Sitpone ose Dupe i cheac pein hsm i sme fo sersting hsp of can Pee he es cy ‘Sneed oe dn Btls 70 snd Sena he doin ‘Sn my wc The eg ec a gon ‘ming Son fo Aca Sond he plo he Kg SS Tye nt mele singh Semis peay 2 Me re of Fase yay a SS nace cme ga wa tcasscoagente barn voaan talons i ame ea Da ce iow gelato Ns te ae ep sh {itimemicusnmenn36 coanrren Tine, ‘moved the Phoenician capil fem Tye to Sion this tine Third Seanache reiasated the tibet payments fom Phoenicia o Assyria 1 inthe past. Forth we can narow the dae of L's death ot noted in the Rassam Cylinder (70 B.C second moh)” no a abet, 1 2627s, which includes the fll accoum of Sennacherib's cama of 700 The caest Known death noice for Lil isin Clinger © (697 BC),” so we ry conclode that Luli died becween 700 cd (687. I sonal reensions of Sennacherb’s annals are published, ‘we maybe able omarow the date dwn artes ‘Those are the main poss. The anna azo presea co problems, ‘manly due fo omission. First the rege of Lal not spected. A Tae ext stats that be Mato CyprsWhy wa his information not inclnded? Second the prominence of Sidon probably doesnot eet the situation in Phoenicia before Senascherb' invasion, As noted above the strongest city in Phoenicia and woe hom of Lal was Tye “Tobe sare calling Lal the king of Sidon not Fle, ba ese ing The question arises a1 why Tye snot mentioned Royal inscriptions ont data for varios reasons ety beim portant space may be to lied rte normation doesnt fi no ‘he design of he tory. This fs reasons probably th explnation for ‘he omission of Cyprus and Tyre inthe anal. Both sands were cn ‘es of Lal's manewvers and mentioning them ws to pital sn sive in 700 Pthaps the destiny of the two islands ad no yet been determined so the seribes ome them incase the Assyrians safle setback, or maybe the Assia had aleay had setback with ‘id to them. Ths the scribes ignored Tyre and pctended that Sidon ‘Mone BAL He pp. Tenn) and der Natl) Me Ree domed eB Pal OTT whe cy ec tea sea hat pi oe a Ay cms ‘Te tinny soy Lon Seach sion of Paine Yoo os 98, 8 ‘THE FIRST PHASE OFTHE CAMPAIGN: PHOENICIA. 97 ‘nd Heenan still ws the main apt of Phoenci. They lo empho ‘ne the great distance Lal had led instead of nang Cypes. ‘We are ths faced with he problem of what happened to Tyee and ‘Cyprsdarng the imvason of Phoenicia Considering father usages ‘hom Senachen'sinscipons may help ws to answer this Swrse Two Rasa Cline, 100B.C* ‘enh al Yara kar moma ar gut rly kr pie Kr yur fa ane nr ot abana pst wt ‘a ool of Chae, he Amiens, the nd ofthe Maan, of Qos Blak Pasi ad yey who ad ot submited to my ok pert ade tho cay tsk ad ey mae chs ‘This passage comes from the account of Sennacheri's “Place with ‘outa Rival” Versions ofthe text had been writen before 70D, at 3 oe might expect, capes from Pilsia and Tyr ae not mentioned ‘them. Some aeons in his passage are dubious. The people frm iad ag Que bad probably teen tsubssive to Sugon, bot Sea aches" ad they my have been deported in argos iho. Fora the mai importnce ofthis pasage that Tye i he ely Phoenician city mentioned. None ofthe ees which surrendered 10 Sennachri in 7O1 are on he is, 0 we may infer tht Sennacherib ‘manly Baned Tyee forthe retelion in Phocicia and people associ ted with Tye were singled ot for punishment ‘Despite the mention of Tye the passage is stil obscure. The ro- bem the sign KUR before ri As the anscripton shows, ll he toponyme are designaie with KUR excep the Aras, who Were organi into tikes. As one may expect, KUR i followed by names ft whole countries, not of ees. "Tyr isthe one exception this In the ease of Tyre, three of the fve variant text have the KUR detent ‘ative ob ext has the ety dteinaive URL one text is without & {ater bake di ce elie nr bo, ‘Scar i macnn ints ven fons ep er ‘he Baan Chon tw cage Sargon aa ta he ‘ase 265121988 9.97) The pees of ns at Qe ely eae en (Senne enn we as # pen One al se ey mele. Sen ed arn Syren sh ocho98 canrren TREE, determinative" URU is probably a mistake in which cate “Tyre” could ao designate a county, 46. Phoenicia. Whether the scribes i fended KUK suri wo ince the ity of Tye is urclear. Thus we do ot know wheter Sennacherib cone th lan ity by 700 or st Soe Tine Bole 2and 3. 17-204 BC." and Lal king of Sioa, became aes fy bale an ype in temic oe seen wa repent ey Year, the Mang send of my lr Ash mean, epee ‘Tt on bya one ae placed ibe ony op pon. “Tie souce doesnot mention Tye, but itlery states Ll’ fate, The lca ana rugl ina ere ttn of Rasa was eplaced by KUR “adnan (Cypes). The cam tht Ua died in the sate year heed ‘mst be seen with epic. Arnot above the caries ily date (of Lal's death was 700, ater the Rass Cylinder had been writen, ‘The pase ina ftinma St (in that very yest) echor a od Mesopo lamian epe-herokc mou in whch kings accomplish spectaclar mi tay feats within a single year." Despite th proba He, however, the phrase sgests tht Lal's death was loser 0700 thant 697 ‘Bulls 2 and 3 lo cla tha Ll ied nthe “ang splendor of the weapon of Ashur” As noted hove Ash's weapon asthe Ase ran atl standard. The word for “lamin splendor rab was pumescuig te Ram ri, wich spay 2 meke (p97.