You are on page 1of 16

Sennacherib's "Letter to God" on His Campaign to Judah Author(s): Nadav Na'aman Source: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental

Research, No. 214 (Apr., 1974), pp. 25-39 Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1356102 Accessed: 12/10/2010 08:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asor. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.

http://www.jstor.org

III.an examination photographs the two fragments. describing.3and republished H.minted at Nancy early in his reign (1545-1608 C. the ceramic evidence for MIII clearly places the Arabic occupation there in the 8th and 9th centuries C. Winckler. Sennacherib's campaignto Judahin 701 B. Scripta Hierosolymitana 8 (1961). 22f. it of of quently. Leipzig. 1924. Tadmor for his advice concerning the problems dealt with in this paper. BAL . Tadmor.)24These data fall into two distinguishable centuryC. 3.H. 80-84. 1974 GordianIII (238-44) or Elagabalus (218-22). D. Tigl. Handbuch der Keilschriftliteratur (Berlin.Number214 April.2The secondfragment(BM82-3-23. Babylonisch-assyrische Lesesti~cke. Curator of Medieval Coins. Througha comparisonof the transcriptions and. 25. 1963. Winckler. Die Keilschrifttexte Sargons. five Roman coins of the early 4th century. Borger. Sargon. Tadmor.E. Rost. Rome. Rost. pp. The Annals of Sennacherib. suggesting of SargonII. four otherwiseunidentifiableIslamiccoins and one coin of Charles. subse- One piece (K 6205) was first publishedin cuneiformby G.unique erary among the documents concerning Syro-Palestinian the for stylewasthe pointof departure associating two fraggion. with the following exceptions: Borger.D.two datable Islamiccoins 1342-45 and 1389-90). Winckler. Winckler. spansof time: (1) the 1st centuryB. Brady. 1889.Thispeculiar ments as one document. 148 and p. p. TCL III F.Duke of Calabria. Borger. who cites de Saulcy. 570-574. 1.4 The outstandingand characteristic featureof both fragmentsis the specific lit- ent that they comprisepartsof one and the samedocument. Tadmorwho treated its by that it be ascribedto the days literaryand historicalaspects in detail. 131-156.and (2) the Islamicperiod. Une relation de la buitieme campagne de Sargon. 24. Sargon . who read this article in manuscript and made numerous useful suggestions throughout.7. Chicago.as I shall attempt to demonstratebelow. Rost. Die Keilinschrifttexte Tiglat Pilesers III.R. Lorraine. The American Numismatic Society. R. in transcriptiononly.. in the days of Tiglath-pileser III. 2 and has since been associatedwith the episode of Azriauking of Yaudi.19. 232f.E. Tigl. 1898). 1893. Sargon H. Tadmor. 4.-4th Whetherthis can be taken to indicateperiodsof habitationis quite another question. D.C. 7. I must thank Prof. II . by H. Thureau-Dangin. The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur JCS 12 (1958). Luckenbill. As the excavators have already noted. 1967). Paris.131) wasfirst edited. Recherches sur les monnaies des ducs hereditaires de Lorraine. Assoc.C. Azriyau . one Islamiccoin that appearsto be Mamluk. H.E. OIP. SENNACHERIB'S "LETTER TO GOD" ON HIS CAMPAIGN TO JUDAH NADAV NA'AMAN Thedocument dealtwithin the present split paperlhashada somewhat perto beenascribed two different till sonality now.25 The latest coins were very likely droppedby religiouspilgrimswho undoubtedly beganvisitingthis site in the MiddleAges. H.H. 18-20: 103-119. So J. 2. Altorientalische Forschungen II (Leipzig. I am also most grateful to Prof.P. The abbreviations used herein are according to R. Tadmor. Tadmor. Leipzig. 1912.Burgundyand Guelders. Smith in IIIR 9. III . became appar- 25 . Azriyau of Yaudi. Borger.E.its two fragments kings: having the reall style.

.RAMES-jae-mu-ru-ma ri-gim um-na(read ma)-nat [.. .i Ja-u-di [....SI KUR-e a-kin GIM zi-qip GIR..MES ki-i •i ul-tu AN-e [ . -[. l (3) [. (21) [ . AN. I am indebted to Prof........ (20) [...... ina da-n] a?-ni ia AN.. (5) [ .i (16) [.Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research The two fragments are presented here...... (8) [ina ukbus a-r] a-am-me qur-ru-bu'u-pe-e da-an-nim?? [i-n] a mit-hu-us zu-ki GIRII pi[1-~si ....A (18) [. (11) [URUGN URU] LUGAL-ti la KUR Pi-liw-ta-a-asa [m] [Ha] -[za-qi-j] a-a-u a e-ki-mu fi-dan-ni-nu-ufi-ma[. d-ia-az-bil-'u-nu-ti-m [a . qe-reb-•. (2) [..fril ?-i' GALMES GIM kar-pat (19) [ [ ... made available to me by Prof. . A[N] . ] xxxxx [ .[ba-si-un . GU4MES u se] -e-ni ul-tu [Qi qer-bi-•is am-nu.. (9) ANSE. marched...5 fitted together (Fig..... encourag] ed me and against the land of Ju[dah I (3) [.. (2) ... Ja-u-da-a-a GIM [ .al1 -[la-ti.. SID [. 26 .. along with a transcription and translation. .. -ma-a-ti GALMES u-tas!-bu!-u[r!-m] a di?] (13) [ [.KU] R.SiR ti EN-ja na-gu-u mHa-za-qi-j] a-a-u KUR [sa. (14) [. (6) [ ] se-er SU...... .... (12) [ ]Iha? xxx [ .. 1] e-'-u-te ME u-'e-rib (17) [. (4) [.... ] mu-sa-[i ? dUTU-.... ... (7) [diiruanisu]dun!-nu-nu-ma vit-nu-nu KUR-e zaq-ru-ti a-na ni-[til] IGIII.... ] URUA-za-qa-a E tuk-la-te-v ina bi-ri [t mi-i] s-ri-jau KUR . Transcription (1) .[u-di lu al-lik ina] me-ti-iq KASKALII-ja man-da-at-tu LU[GALME KUR.. 1)..... Tadmor.it-qa-at ina e-t [u] -ti 'it-ku-nu-ma e-kil la na-pi-ih-ui (15) [ . I GIMGISgap-ni [ . Anshar. ambur . GISTUKULMI E-ui ui-ra-kisa-n[a epes . . the British Museum. my lord.... ... AN-e 'a-qu-uSUR [...B[AR?ME] S?la ni-bi ana. ..• u] m-ma-na-at KUR MAR. . Shaffer for kindly collating for me the original tablet which is in the Department of Western Asiatic Antiquities.iu AMES-... the tribute of the ki[ngs of Philistia? I received ... .TUki DU-sii-un SA[HARJ] I. Translation: (1) .. 5.GAL GIM KUR-e pa-nu-u-sii-u [n] ed-let-ma ......e-sa-am-ma] [.. is-mu-ma ip-lih lib. A.SAR b-eliu-tak-kil-a] n-ni-ma a-na KUR Ja.. .. In] the course of my campaign. ] x se-ru-us-si-un ina 7-~li x [ xx ]. pi -i-us ina qul-mi-i na-kis ha-ri-su i-te-[a?] -pil-ma ka-x[..um-ru-sa-at [.. H.... The transcription given is based on photographs of the two fragments. ] en E.AN?.SA R gap-wsa-te (10) [URUA-za-qa-a al-me] KUR-ud is-lu-la sal-lat-su ap-pul aq-qur [ina dGira aqmu ...

mighty? battering rams brought near... (12) [ ] like a tree [standing out on a ridge? .. ... 27 ... ...... to the (mere) sight. 4i MS/PM/OBJ. (5) [.. like pointed iron? daggers without number reaching high to heaven [. I destroyed.. (9) [. (13) [ ...... . 4 .. No. ] the city of Azekah. ....... (6) [like the nest of the eagle?] located on a mountain ridge.....Number 214 April. which H [ezek] iah had captured and strengthened for himself [. as if from the sky [appears its head? .. (11) [the city of Gath?] a royal [city] of the Philistines.. (10) [the city Azekah I besieged. my lord. which is between my [bo] rder and the land of Judah [ .... breeches . 1974 ... [I burned with fire ....... I devastated.. (8) [by means of beaten (earth) ra] mps.u (4) [. his stronghold. . ... ] surrounded with great [to] wers and exceedingly difficult [its ascent? ... A u s m [.] I captured.... On a........ ] they had seen [the approach of my cav] alry and they had heard the roar of the mighty troops of the god Anshar and [their hea] rts became afraid [. tit Af -A" 44 Ap 4W 4r '.' fir-44:1 ir '?-t -44 .. (7) [its walls] were strong and rivaled the highest mountains. the province of [Hezek] iah of Judah like [... I carried off its spoil...... with the attack by foot soldiers (using) mi[nes.. with the mig] ht? of Anshar. .

-. cattle and she] ep I carried out from its midst [and counted as] (20) [ ..... Line 8: Before the break in the middle of the line appear the signs DA AN SI UD. n. Line 5: It was this line which led fragment K 6205 to be associated with the Azriau episode. 7).. ] the great like a . relates the conquest of a city in Philistia.. the obverse is broken off..Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research like a mountain was barred in front of them and high is (14) [. The suggested reading for this line . describes the conquest of the town of Azekah.. we might possibly restore "like a tree [standing out on a ridge] " (on the basis of TCL 3. (16) [.... 39: 5455. "like the nest of the eagle on 1he basis of the Annals of Sennacherib (OIP II. Our correction of the signs SI+UD as NIM is based on the expression ina alibi danni appearing in the Annals of Sargon (Lie. whereas the second part 11. without the plural. we might restore alaktu... ] skillful in battle he caused to enter into it.3-10.11-20. Line 2: The restorations in this line are based on comparisons with Sennacherib's inscriptions. for on the basis of the structure of the document we have here the description of the city from afar (see also below). .of course removes this difficulty and removes Azriau altogether from the picture. Cf.. (18) [ . 36:77).... and the continuation on the reverse is not preserved.BAR... (21) ... (OIP II. 144-145)...ina birit misrija u mat Jaudi . appears in the Rassam Cylinder of Sennacherib. At this point.... The spelling GIR (MES) AN.. both concerning a single episode . 239). all of them.. 69.. the combination of which does not have a meaning. The first part 11.. to carry earth (19) [ ] against them. 26: 65-68. their warriors] (17) [. The description is more detailed than that concerning Azekah. 28 . ] palace [its top? . At the end of the line. its waters were situated in darkness and [its?] overflow [ . Line 6: At the start of the line we might possibly restore kima qinni ern.. 67: 7-8)... which Hezekiah had previously annexed to his kingdom. I The inscription can be divided into two parts. Rost copied here [I] z-ri-ja-u mit Ja-u-di. the strength of a city in Philistia which had been annexed to Judah. Line 12: At the end of the line. Borger: BAL II. 76. Line 13: The restoration at the start of the line is based on similar spellings in the inscriptions of Sargon and Sennacherib (see CAD D. possibly because it was the more important of the two..the war against Hezekiah king of Judah.. rhetorically and exaggerating... spo[il ... Sargon 8:63). Lines 4 and 11: The spelling Ha-za-qi-ja-a-uappears also in the version of Sennacherib's Annals (OIP II.. In the seventh time his [ .. ] I caused the warriors of Amurru. in spite of the obvious difficulty that the spelling Jaudi wouldbe an incorrect form of the gentilic. pot [of clay? I smashed? ... where the same formulae appear. weapons he bound (on them) to [offer battle . (15) [ ] it was dark and the sun never shone on it. its [mou] th was cut with axes and a moat was dug around it [ . Lines 12-16 describe.

Smith (IIIR. muru-ma zuma. these are clearly literary cliches transferred from mountainous regions. A. still extant today. n. Also noteworthy is the structure of line 9: .C. this text is especially close to the "Letter to God" describing the campaign of Sargon II to Urartu in 714 B.9. by a description of the fighting and conquest (11. 1. 13-17). Sargon. to the days of Sennacherib his son.. H. Tadmor assigned the "Azekah inscription" to the type scholars refer to as "Letters to God..one of the most typical features of Palestinian archaeology in the period of the Israelite monarchies. B. 82. See Tadmor. monotonous style of the Annals. ZA 40 (1931).). See the note to line 2 of our text. after which details of the fortifications and means of defence are given (11.. contemporaneous with the present document.8-10.6. 2). D. There is no doubt that. and the developed literary structure. Lines 18-20 describe the siege and conquest of the city. ism descriptions unparallelled in known Akkadian literature (11.). 7. 161 f.6 The inclusion of the water-source within the fortifications enabled the besieged to hold out for a very lengthy time.Number 214 April. Note that only little more than a decade separates Sargon's eighth campaign (714 B. followed. 27:75-76.C.0lo These specific expressions are treated below in the same order as they appear in the text. Yadin. 6-7. Line 20: In the cuneiform published by G. together with their parallels in the version of Sennacherib's Annals: 11 Ai~ur beli utakkilannima ana ma•tGN lu allik 6. 219 f. 14-15). 12). the sign 'al appears in its entirety. 18-20).. as well as several . J. L. 1967).5. This line is restored on the basis of many of Sennacherib's inscriptions in which this expression recurs (OIP II. D. JNES 19 (1960)... is the tunnel hewn by Hezekiah in Jerusalem (2 Kings 20: 20). probably because he was not sure of the loyalties of the Philistine inhabitants of the city. iplab libbasun. It should be noted that part of the descriptions do not at all suit the landscape of the Shephelah in Palestine. Luckenbill. . Line 18: Auxiliary forces of the vassal kings take part in the siege operations. AJSL 41 (1924/5). Vincent. The WaterSystem of Gibeon (Philadelphia. 28:21. upon comparison of its two parts. 1961). 33:26. 11).9 But a considerable number of expressions would bring us down beyond the time of Sargon.7 Line 16: The subject of this sentence is not clear. and thus it is not surprising that in the writing of such a standard as that of our text there should appear stylistic features and expressions close to those of Sargon cf. whereas today only the upper part is visible. Bauer. Jerusalem sous Terre (London. 11.7. Such a structure is evident in the present text. Line 15: An authentic description of a water tunnel . Hazor (London. C. Hezekiah brought troops within the city. 10. Oppenheim. 172 f. each place is identified (11. Firstly. Line 17: Among the preparations for the siege. 250.) from that of Sennacherib to Palestine (701 B. 9. then each is described from afar (11. II On the basis of its style. 8. and bibliography there. Pritchard. A famous example of such an installation."8 The external traits of such documents are the fine literary style. 29 . well-planned writing on a very high standard. 1911). All this points to fine. differing from the dry. 1974 Line 14: The scribe seems to depict the palace jutting out from the fortifications on one flank of the city. H. T. Y. stylistically and in lexicon. 133 f. finally. etc.

C. 1953).Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 12. It is much simpler to assume that the text refers to Sennacherib's campaign of 701 B. s. Abel. 63: 10-11.v. 69: 19. See the note to line 20. mitequ). no mention is ever made of a campaign against Judah. Sargon. 18." appearing in Sennacherib's account of his campaign to Palestine (OIP II. Tadmor.C. such a campaign is quite prominent in all of Sennacherib's inscriptions. 25: 54. such an annexation would appear as if long done." used by the earlier kings. . we should read i-na me-ti-iq h[a!-ar-ra-ni-ja]. 14. OIP II. in the description of that very same campaign. 1938). A. in my opinion. for it is surely doubtful that. There is one occurence where it seems to appear in the inscriptions of Sargon (C.. Gadd. "fourfold. Another similarity can be seen in adi 4-gu. In contrast.14 ummanat mdt Amurri kali'un15 alpi u seni ultu qirbisu ugsamma gallati amnu16 We must note that all these expressions (besides the first) appear specifically in passages describing Sennacherib's campaign to Palestine in 701 B."18 We should remember that a "Letter to God" was a sort of personal report of the king to Ashur the god on his activities during campaigns carried out in the god's name.is on the latitude of Ashdod.Tell Zakariye in Judahl9 . Sargon 44: 275. whereas in the inscriptions of Sargon. Borger. BAL I. ina meteq gerrija12 bit tuklhti13 ina ukbus aramme qurrubu/qitrub fup? mithus zik epe-pilgi. The expression ina meteq gerrija as an opening of a new paragraph.C. was among the kings sum- 30 . XLVI). The central positioning of Judah here would suit a campaign by Sennacherib." Azekah . it would be difficult to assume that the king would write a report to his god on a campaign in which he did not even participate. as compared to ina 7-4u. OIP II.v. 17. but according to the cuneiform (ibid. The expression ana meteq gerrija appears once in the Annals of Sargon. "in the seventh time. Iraq 16 [1954].. F." in our text.C. this term came to replace the conventional palf^. LI..and indeed this would seem to hint at the date of our text as well. the invasion of Judah taking place only later.C. For the reasons behind the use of the term gerru in Sennacherib's inscriptions. 177: 54. "campaign of war.AHw 649b. but in a different meaning. and it is clear that such a description would have been impossible prior to the annexation of Ashdod as an Assyrian province in 712 B. and such texts were composed for only the most outstanding of the campaigns conducted by the king." used in his inscriptions to denote his successive campaigns. 85. 32-33: 21-23. Kleine Schriften II (Munich. Geographie de la Palestine II (Paris. 13. only the combination maitAmurri appears and always as a geographical name. 39: 58). 30: 45. (b) Sargon himself apparently did not participate in the campaign to Philistia in 712 B. 236 f. See Lie. 15. 76 f. A common expression in Sennacherib's inscriptions. whose territory had been annexed by the Assyrians already in the days of Sargon. 31 f. The appearance of the expression ina mjteq gerrija in Sennacherib's inscriptions stems. at the start of which Ashdod was conquered and annexed..appears only at the beginning of Sennacherib's reign and is common in his inscriptions (OIP II. (a) In all of Sargon's inscriptions. 30: 59). pl. s. M. but not one by Sargon. at which time the king of Ashdod. 30: 58. 19. J. . It is difficult to assume that this refers to the campaign in 712 B. bit tukldti. 16. (c) Near the name of the city of Azekah there appears in this text (line 5) the statement "which is between my [bo] rder and the land of Judah.17 . Alt. Several other factors strengthen our ascribing this tablet to Sennacherib rather than Sargon. from the term gerru. his place at the head of the army being taken by "Tartan. Sargon. Thus. see Tadmor. 31: 68. 132: 68) is similar to the one occurring in our text."regnal year.. In Sennacherib's inscriptions the expression sarrani mat Amurri kalilun (OIP II.

in spite of its having been the second city of the realm. as can be inferred from the version in the Annals.25 We can perhaps also assume that it was composed in order to magnify and glorify the god Ashur. D. Scholars have already noted that the Annals version is of an unusual literary quality. but only in two types of text: those originating in the city of Ashur (mostly building inscriptions) and in two inscriptions from Nineveh dealing with the bit akitu in the city of Ashur. which appears as Aniar. 24. the same spelling does occur in the documents of Sennacherib.no city in Judah is mentioned there by name.24 Thus. 20. and on the other hand. Thus. and see Tadmor. OIP II.22 The "Letter to God" may have served as the source for the shorter version in the Annals. whereas all the others were found at Kuyunjik. Sargon. Barnett. probably in Ashurbanipal's library. for instance. 159-160 (Hebrew).23 It is clear that a redacted summary or brief report would emphasize specific facets of the campaign. and apparently also its continuation. Since the "Azekah inscription" is an historical text.). Tadmor. 113 f. Lachish. Sargon II. it is known that Lachish was conquered during Sennacherib's campaign to Judah. and . differing considerably from all other of Sennacherib's historical texts. (d) The dating of the "Azekah inscription" to the days of Sargon is based principally on the specific spelling of the name of the god Ashur. 288. 31 . Meissner. ANET.). 30: 54). Several typical expressions are common to our text and to the Annals version of Sennacherib. and would omit other facets or describe them only in passing. Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal) does not necessarily point to the custom of a king writing only one such "Letter" during his reign. on the one hand. are described more briefly in the version of Sennacherib's Annals. it could not be from the time of Sennacherib. thus possibly alluding to the interdependence of the two. 25. so the argument runs. 340. 82.C. or both of the documents may have been composed quite independently. which has not been preserved. The fact that we have only a single "Letter to God" from several Assyrian kings (Shalmaneser IV. The survival of one example only for each king is most probably coincidental. ARAB II. ZA 34 [1922]. The conclusion arising from this can be summed up as follows: Our document is to be dated to the days of Sennacherib and is to be considered a "Letter to God" written close upon the termination of his campaign to Palestine in 701 B. which might corroborate the assumption that our literary text served as the example. to explain and give an excuse for the events of the campaign to Judah. which seems to have been a doubtful success as far as the Assyrians were concerned. whose main temple was in the city of Ashur. Eretz-Israel 5 (1959). Sennacherib.20 According to this argument.besides Jerusalem . Against this we must note first the special character of our text. from the Bible and from Sennacherib's reliefs (R.Number214 April. it definitely is not so serious as to cancel out the cumulative weight of the other evidence for the dating of the document to the time of Sennacherib. however. 23. is not at all mentioned in the Annals version. 32-33: 18-23. Only Sargon's "Letter to God" was found at the city of Ashur (B. 1974 moned before Sennacherib near Tyre (OIP II.21 In our opinion. even if a certain difficulty does remain. 161 f. 22. the regular historical texts should not be applied to the problem of spelling in our text and. for in all the other historical texts only the usual spelling Ags'urappears. 21. We must further remember that the "Letter to God" was meant to be read before the god Ashur. (e) The portion of the campaign described in our text. we cannot accept the argument that the omission of Azekah from Sennacherib's inscriptions (even if composed shortly after his campaign to Judah) might indicate two different campaigns. and it is quite likely that our text was even originally written there and copied by the scribes of Ashurbanipal or simply transferred from Ashur to Nineveh during the building up of the library there. IEJ 8 [1958].

I doubt whether the alliance mentioned above ever crystallized. BAr 29 (1966). H. who dwell by the sea. 28. in conspiracy with the several lands neighboring Judah. some two signs.C. against Babylonia III The transfer of the "Azekah inscription" to the days of Sennacherib somewhat changes the balance of evidence on the relationship of Judah with Assyria in the days of Sargon. I have adopted here the dates of 727-698 B. 27. was directed against Ashdod alone. to set (him) at enmity with me. and asked him for (military) aid.C.26-27. Judah is mentioned a second time in one of Sargon's inscriptions.33 Ashdod was annexed by Assyria (as possibly 32 . 32. in the light of the Egyptian hesitancy to take an active part in the conspiracy against Assyria.C. during which year he fought both and in the west." Hezekiah appears in this description as one of the initiators of alliance with Egypt. The translation above is based on a photograph of the prism. and the same fate befell nearby Ekron. According to the photograph.C.. We can follow H. 188: "28-36". appearing in the reliefs from Dur-Sharrukin. we should read in line 29: da-bab sa-ar-ra-a-ti at!-me-e nu-ul1-la-a-ti.. n. show that Judah had at most a secondary role in this revolt. in 11. Sargon is termed "the subduer of the land of Judah which lies far away. 188: 28-36. n. 27. this sentence. Judah. Sargon I. The main difficulty in the translation here stems from the opening with the preposition ana referring as if to the list of rulers at the start of line 26.. We shall try to review here briefly the known factors on those relations. they sent evil words and unseemly speeches31 (with) their presents to Pharaoh king of Egypt. for the reign of Hezekiah.ANET. The subject of sentence. Sargon..C. ARAB II. Sargon. Hezekiah may have supported this alliance as well.26 In an inscription written around 717 B.. It is difficult to suppose that Sargon was able to do much in Philistia in 720 B. it is impossible to translate the passage as if the ruler of Ashdod were the subject of the sentence. See n.Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 26. 86 f. Tadmor.28 but the term "which lies far away" and the fact that Judah is not mentioned in any inscription relating the events of 720 B. in the plural. Sargon I. and that the subject was also in the plural. 29. and the main sufferer in the campaign was Ashdod. Tadmor. 31.to 712 B. It is thus clear that the only verbs in this passage occur at its end. in line 25 some four signs are missing. 226 f.. But according to all the Assyrian sources. (Tadmor. Tadmor.."27 This appellation undoubtedly refers to the insurrection of 720 B. above. Below is the passage mentioning Judah in this connection:29 "Togeth [er with? the kings] 30 of Philistia. see A. Alt. According to the photograph. Kleine Scbriften II (Munich. Ed [om and] Moab. kindly made available to me by Prof. Tadmor in assigning the conquest of Gibbethon and Ekron. 195. in connection with the revolt of Ashdod which began in 713 B. a prince who could not save them. Thus. 287. 243). 1953). For summary articles on Philistia in the days of Sargon. 30. Considering the lacuna. 83.C. at which time Sargon prevailed over an alliance of states headed by Hamath.. payers of tribute and gifts to Ashur my lord. Winckler. It would seem that Hezekiah was quick to surrender before the king of Assyria and to pay the demanded tribute so that his country would not be harmed during the Assyrian campaign along the Philistine coast. Tadmor.. 33. the campaign of 712 B. Winckler. Sargon.. I suggest restoring the line as follows: a-na tap!?-[pu?-ut? LUGALME S1] a KUR GN KUR with ana tappilt serving as an adverbial complement in the GN2. 82 f.C. 146. and the continuation is entirely complete. whose principal towns were conquered.. would be the ruler of Ashdod and the rulers of other lands mentioned in line 26. therefore.32 It can be assumed that all the rulers mentioned hastened to submit to Assyria immediately upon the appearance of Assyrian troops in Philistia.C. 38. in which Gaza and Samaria also took part.

The data indicate that till 711/710 B.Hilakkuand TilGarimmu) were lost forever. last of the rulers of the Twenty-third dynasty at Tanis. Only after the quelling of the rebellion in Babylonia in 689 was Sennacherib free to deal with Anatolia without hindrance from behind. Only by annexing Ekron could Assyria gain territorial continuity between Gezer (the southernmost border-point of the kingdom of Israel. The key to this problem would seem to lie in the Assyrian policy in Philistia. The rulers of the Delta refused him aid and he even wandered to Nubia in search of support. BASOR 141 [Feb. 212-215. the Nubian dynasty gained control over all Egypt and subjugated the local princes (Albright. Anatolia36 and on the border of Egypt. A History of Cilicia during the Assyrian Period. Goedicke. the northern border of ancient Egypt..C.. the ruler of Nubia. the final aim of which was the annexation of all Philistia. and in these years he consolidated his hold in the eastern provinces (Melid.C. H.).. Gurgum and Que). the southernmost borderpoint of Philistia. 1956]. and upon his death many of the Assyrian provinces in Anatolia rebelled.).C. H. 79 f.34 though for unknown reasons the local dynasty was left in power. (b) Osorkon IV. and thus Ashdod remained an isolated province surrounded by vassal states. 311-313). Bings. Alt (op. pp. BASOR 171 [Oct. Yamani the ruler of Ashdod fled to Egypt after failing in his rebellion. 1970 (Diss.37 We should attempt to ascertain the reasons behind this change in policy. in an attempt to regain control over the Assyrian territories there.. Only in 696 B. 19481. A. 23 f. 81 f. (cf... cit. Kummuh. For a detailed discussion. J. 83).C. 87 f. The opportunity to throw off the Assyrian yoke came upon the death of Sargon on the battlefield in 705 B... 1920]. following which rebellion broke out simultaneously in Babylonia..).. 240 f.C.35 The border of the Assyrian Empire was thus moved twice in the days of Sargon. Sargon seems to have been killed during his campaign against Tabal (see most recently Tadmor. 1963]. 1974 was Ekron). 1 f. why did the Assyrians rush to annex a somewhat removed territory as Ashdod prior to more adjacent areas such as Ekron.C. and Landsberger went so far as to ascribe the destruction of the palace at Sam'al on the Syrian Anatolian border to this war (B. nn. 81 f.Number214 April. Albright. about in 711/710 B.C. once in 720 and again in 712 B. who initiated the plan. (?? 286-292). W. op.) and the kingdom of Ashdod.). did Sennacherib conduct his first campaign into Anatolia. see Landsberger. His son Sennacherib had a different policy. cit. This about-face in Egyptian policy towards Assyria seems to have occurred with the rise to power of the Twenty-fifth (Nubian) dynasty as the sole rulers of Egypt in 711/710 B. now annexed.C. The kingdom of Judah appears not to have suffered in the days of Sargon. ARAB II. 37. ibid. But the border with the Assyrian provinces and the proximity of Assyrian rule obviously presented a continual pressure on Judah. Sam'al [Ankara. Sargon. Sargon.. AUSS 4 [1966]. The weak point in this theory is that if such a plan had existed. which lies on the main route from the north to Egypt. S. 1953]. still ruled in 716 B. 97.. when they had been conquered at the very same time? 35. 286-289). and it was tangent upon Judah on the north and on the west. F. 239 f.C. to the Pelusian branch of the Nile. some ten years after the outbreak. Die Provinzeinteilung [Leipzig. (cf. BASOR 130 [Apr. D. and until his death it remained subservient to Assyria. 4 f. 64 f.. but failed in Til-Garimmu (E.C. but Sargon. was killed before he could carry it out.) explained the lack of territorial continuity between Ashdod and the nearby Assyrian provinces by assuming that there was a definite Assyrian plan according to which the annexation of Ashdod was only the first step.. 34. 33 . thus. All the western Anatolianprovinces(Tabal. Ann Arbor. He succeeded in Que. in his desire to preserve peaceful relations with Assyria. The extent of the rebellion is indicated by the fact that even such a central province as Que was among the rebels (ARAB II. turned the rebellious vassal over to the Assyrians (Tadmor. Shortly afterward. A. Landsberger. Horn. and even Egypt took an active role in the impending struggle. which had been annexed by Assyria in 720 B. 36. Alt. whoever rules Philistia rules the approaches to Egypt (from el-Arish. the rulers of the local dynasties still ruled in Egypt: (a) Hoshea the son of Elah wrote to Tephnakht ruler of the city of So/Sais after 727 B. and the bibliography there.). however. (c) In 712 B. nn. Forrer. is about 150 kilometres!).

in turn.39 Analysis of the Annals version reveals that Sennacherib's campaign to Palestine was conducted as follows: at first the king conquered the Ascalonite enclave at Jaffa. The second city is denoted "a royal [city] of the Philistines" which Hezekiah had taken and fortified for his own purposes. mentioned in the Annals (OIP II. B.42 at the mouth of the Vale of Elah on the route connecting Lachish and Beth-shemesh. We do not know who the ruler or rulers paying tribute to Assyria at the beginning of the text were (line 3). 39. See the discussion in the final section of this paper. 40. Hezekiah abandoned the traditional Judean policy. At this point.40 from there he proceeded to Ekron. To this we may add the Egyptian attitude regarding Philistia as within her sphere of influence from earliest times. he previously having purposely avoided any direct conflict. by force. for the campaign itself has been dealt with extensively in a long list of papers and books dealing specifically with it. in whose land Sennacherib had encamped on his way to Judah. which was entirely surrounded by Assyrian provincial territory. the factors behind Hezekiah's revolt. This discussion leads us to conclude that only at the end of his reign did Hezekiah openly oppose Assyria. 42. 30: 50-60). which had been surrounded by Assyrian territory .43 Among the eastern towns of Philistia. See also the notes to 11. Childs.Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research The Assyrian hold in Philistia gradually grew. 41. and he now stood at the head of an alliance supported by Egypt. and it is difficult to conceive that such a detailed document as ours should skip over the entire first part of the campaign. After the fall of Philistia. 19. reaching a peak with the annexation of Ashdod by Sargon which was undoubtedly interpreted in Egypt as a threat to Egyptian territory.12-16. London. Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis. expressed in the open support given by Egypt to the rebellious movement against Assyria.without the more important cities having been harmed in any actual manner. for this tribute was paid when Sennacherib was still near Tyre. Fear of Philistia becoming a springboard for an attack on Egypt.41 In our document there is a quite detailed description of the conquest of two cities belonging to Hezekiah. meeting an Egyptian force at Eltekeh on the way. which pursued a more cautious course in its dealings with Assyria. The first to be mentioned is Azekah (modem Tell Zakariye). Sennacherib turned toward Judah. 34 . Thus. The rebellion throughout the Assyrian Empire and the definite Egyptian support are. and the kings of Philistia may be intended. and it is at this point in the campaign we can place our text. 43. above. 1967. 38. and the ambition of again seizing a bridgehead in Asia led to the crystallization of this new Egyptian policy. We should note the detailed description devoted to this region. and it is possible that Sennacherib conquered the Jaffa enclave. at Ekron he took the city without a seige and at about the same time Ascalon surrendered to him. I do not think this refers to the tribute of "all the kings of the land of Amurru". the conquest of Philistia resulted in the surrender of the rebellious cities and the placing of rulers loyal to Assyria on the local thrones . The detailed description of the city is indicative of its importance. and bibliography there.38 IV It remains to ascertain where our new document fits into the scheme of Sennacherib's campaign. S. See n. only two would suit the present case: Ekron and Gath of the Philistines. intending to annex it to one of the adjacent administrative units.

and thus it does not at all suit the description in the document (cf. between the two principal centers of Jerusalem and Lachish. 23-34. Macalister. ?? 770. and thus its stratigraphy and the dates of the city walls (ascribed by the excavators to Rehoboam) remain vague. Nos. See the summary discussion and bibliography in A. we can suggest regarding Gath of the Philistines as the city denoted in our text.). 4.C. 30-38. 1974 We know that Ekron had not been annexed to Judah by Hezekiah. 46. S. 1970].46 Thus. indicating that there might have been an Assyrian palace there. Stern.. cit. W. If it is proper to ascribe these sealings to the reign of Hezekiah (cf. Christian News from Israel 17 (1966).and thus it does not suit the present case. with bibliography there). We may also mention several lamelekh seal-impressions of the four-winged type (only) found at this same site (ibid.. It is on this background that we are able to understand also the steps taken by Sennacherib during and after this campaign: He avoided destroying the rebellious cities of Philistia and was content to receive their surrender and place loyal rulers in power. An additional interesting detail concerning the "warriors of Amurru" (line 18). At this time Judah was undoubtedly the strongest nation on the Assyrian-Egyptian frontier. is also revealed: These troops are probably to be identified with the payers of tribute to Sennacherib at the beginning of his campaign. 48. transferring them to four Philistine cities. dedicated to Panammuwa his father (H. in The Encyclopaedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land [Jerusalem. Sennacherib even annexed western border regions of Judah. R6llig. Naveh. Kanaaniische und Aramiiische Inschriften [Wiesbaden. and Azekah fell first. in contrast. 47. 1966]. 107). F. and who apparently had been forced to send auxiliary units to accompany the Assyrian army. In Ashurbanipal's campaign to Egypt. see E. 431 f. 17. as mentioned in the Annals (OIP II. Among the finds (not in situ) were five fragments of a small Assyrian limestone relief (Bliss & Macalister. IEJ 8 [1958]. 30: 50-56). op. Tell es-Safi was excavated early in modern archaeological research (F. AASOR 2-3 [1923] 15). No. 608-610 [Hebrew]. he fought tooth-and-nail in Judah. The participationof vassalkings in Assyriancampaigns is also indicated in the stele inscription of Bar Rakib king of Sam'al. Albright. Excavations in Palestine.48 Both the descriptions in the royal Annals and the "Letter to God" indicate the strength of Judah under Hezekiah and the great degree of resistance encountered by Sennacherib during his campaign there.44 In contrast. The mention of Azekah before the Philistine city causes a difficulty. The sieges of these two cities may have begun at one and the same time. Aharoni. A similar difficulty exists concerning the Annals version describing Sennacherib's campaign to Palestine. 876). 87-100). Rainey. The Land of The Bible [London. 35 . thus opening the route into the heart of the land. It should be remembered that we are dealing with a literary text in which the author was not restricted by any desire for precision in his presentation of the course of events. leading to its being mentioned first in the description. Bliss & R. for Azekah is located east of Philistia. on a level plain. Fig. Gath (identified with Tell es-Safi)45 is located not far from Azekah. The pottery evidence points to a considerable settlement there in the Iron Age (for a recent summary. 45. who took part in the siege operations alongside the Assyrians.Number214 April. Donner & W. London. Y. 1898-1900. nor was Sennacherib forced to put it to a siege (according to the Annals) . 41. 2-3. then this might be direct evidence that Gath of the Philistines had been taken into the administrative framework of Judah in that period. A. and thus cre44. 1967] . Ekron is generally identified with Tell Muqanna'. lying on a high hill (which would suit my restoration in line 12) and would thus have required a water installation (line 15). 214). J. which was built after the destruction of the city during Sennacherib's campaign of 701 B. No.47 This also serves to clarify the Assyrian plan of attack on Judah: penetration through the central region and conquest of two key cities in the Shephelah. vassal kings from Syria and Palestine also participated (ARAB II. it undoubtedly was a large and well-fortified city in this period. J. 1902). F.

It gives details of the territorial arrangements made by the king of Assyria in northern Syria following his victory (annexation of Hatarikka. and in line 131.C. 11. we are left with only one. During this campaign. (Or could there have been some agreement on the matter between the two rivals?) In any event. we should review briefly the background of the wars in Syria in 738 B. however. In 739 B.Bulletinof the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch ated a new balance of power between Philistia and Judah.C.82-101).C. His purpose is thus revealed as an attempt to create a series of states of equal strength on the AssyrianEgyptian border. Thus the question of the identity of this person cannot be solved directly. Nowhere in the text.132-133). Annals. does the name of the land of Azriau appear. Hatarikka and the northern coastal cities took part in this rebellion. but only the end of the events. and thus a lessening of the threat of an Assyrian invasion into Egypt proper.. 3) and was included in the Annals of this ruler published by P. 11. Thus. and the answer must be sought elsewhere. Rost. in the light of the known facts. in the spelling Az-ri-a-[u]. and the northern Mediterranean coast. Rost. in the variant spelling Az-ri-ja-a-i. Upon the annexation of Arpad and Unqi.49 Perusal of this text shows that it describes only the final phase of the events of 738 B.. a rebellion broke out in Syria. According to the description of this episode in the Annals. southwest of Urartu. according to which the border of Assyria remained along the Euphrates (on both banks). or on the actual war conducted in that same year between Assyria and the Syrian alliance.C. 36 . the biblical Hadrach.C. III. This latter text of the version of the Annals of Tiglath-pileser III was published in cuneiform by G. Tigi.. in reaction to which there was an Assyrian campaign to Syria. Tiglath-pileser III diverged from the policy upheld since the days of Shalmaneser III. Hence. In 740 B. in 738 B.C.C. as far as the passages are preserved. Tiglath-pileser III turned northward and conducted a campaign to Ulluba. we have no source relating the background of the Assyrian campaign to Syria in 738 B.125-132) and the resulting exile of the population (Annals. and the long years of quiet on this border for the remainder of Sennacherib's reign are witness of the success of this policy. 11. Smith (IIIR 9. 20-24: 123-141. Tiglath-pileser moved the border of his kingdom to the Mediterranean seaboard and included parts of North Syria within the framework of Assyrian territory. Tadmor. Tiglath-pileser III conquered the lands of Arpad and Unqi and annexed them to Assyria (Annals. The name Azriau appears in the fragment twice: in line 123. This step may have been interpreted in Egypt as an Assyrian retreat from the region. but it seems possible to identify further elements which joined in the rebellion. and bibliography there. 49. Azriyau. we hear little more of the conflict between Assyria and Egypt till the days of Esarhaddon. while the Syrian states held the status of vassals. headed by rulers loyal to Assyria and thus to prevent the possibility of any one of them gaining sufficient power to lead the others against Assyria with Egyptian support. In doing so. V Ascribing document K 6205 to Hezekiah rather than to Azariah considerably changes the balance of evidence concerning the "Azriau episode": Instead of two texts describing the events of the war in 738 B.

C. who distinguishes between the two names. (e) All the citings of Kullania in the Assyrian documents. after Qarne and Dani but before Arpad (ABL 372. in Amos 6:2. (c) Within the description of the annexation of Unqi in the Annals. C. It would seem that the conquest of these two cities echoed throughout the Syro-Palestinian region in this period. Amos was alluding to Tiglath-pileser's campaign to Syria in 738 B. but in a slightly different spelling Kullania. 213.C. is found in the Bible. JNES 22 [1963]. the cities of ChronUnqi appear. and is extended to refer to the entire province. n. 225). as is so often the case with such names (Kullania appears in the documents with the determinatives KUR and URU. In our opinion. the city of Calneh is mentioned together with "Hamath the great" as an example and warning to Israel not to rely upon her strength against Assyria. 52. the capital of Unqi. and this has been accepted by most scholars dealing with this period (an exception is M. 206.C. 36." this expression in the Assyrian inscriptions serves to denote the founding of a new provincial capital over the ruins of the former capital. For the various citings and spellings of Kunalia and Kullania. ibid. AOAT 6 (1970). RLA II.). There. the capital of the land of Unqi. The reasons behind the identifications of the two above places have not been noted previously. It can be assumed that the former is the formalistic-traditional spelling used by the scribes in the royal inscriptions." which would be quite fitting if we identify this land with Unqi (see below.). the name does appear. Parpola. as far as they can be related to known places. (d) In the list of Syrian cities to which Tiglath-pileser sent exiles in 738 B. the spelling Kullania appears only in economic and administrative documents and in letters. 225). In contrast. and thus the prophet chose it as an example which would be familiar to all his audience. alongside Arpad (ABL 43) and in a list of cities sending horses to Assyria. (and also suits the biblical form "Calneh"). 1974 50. In my opinion. Kullania (biblical Calneh) is identical with the city of Kunalia/Kinalua.51 The fact that Kullania appears as the most important destination during the campaign indicates that the rebellion against Assyria broke out in the areas conquered and annexed by her in 740 B. 51. from south to north?). Kullania is thus the name of the Assyrian province.C. below). a site north of Arpad. there appears the entry "Kullani was conquered. during which the Assyrians conquered Kullania and Hatarikka (the northern part of the land of Hamath).. Forrer suggested regarding these two names as one city. But the place-name Kunalia does not appear in any Assyrian document later than its annexation. see S. Kullania is identified by Gelb as Kullan-k6y. Thus.52 37 . whereas the latter spelling reflects the pronunciation of the name during the 8th and 7th centuries B. 11. this has been rejected by Gelb (AJSL 51 [1935]. The prophet Amos is generally placed in the days of Jeroboam II (784-748 B. 431.. and this denotes the capital of the province. and under this name it appears in the later Assyrian documents.92101). Astour. Further indirect evidence for the fact that Kullania was the central aim of the Assyrian campaign of 738 B. 5 3). as well)."50 In our opinion.C. suit admirably the region of Unqi: The name appears between Samaria and Arpad (ADD 951). CB1. but rather by some other name which should be sought by indirect means (see [c].C. we may assume that the new Assyrian province was not called by its old name. We may thus assume that Kullania was the capital of Unqi. and after Simirra (ibid.Number214 April. between Megiddo and Sam'al (ADD 952). and thus are presented here: (a) The spelling Kunalia appears only in the Annals versions of the Assyrian kings from Ashurnasirpal II to Tiglath-pileser III. In the Eponym Chronicle for 738 B. conquered by Tiglath-pileser III and rebuilt as the Assyrian provincial capital.). 189 f. identical with the territory of the former kingdom of Unqi. The Assyrian campaign in that same year is denoted in the Eponym icle as a campaign during which "Kullani was conquered. But Unqi does not appear in any Assyrian document later than its annexation.. there appears the formula "the city of Kinalia I reorganized..C. Neo-Assyrian Toponyms. mentioned several times in the Annals of the Assyrian kings. are these places listed here in a geographical order. (b) It is known that Unqi was annexed to Assyria by Tiglath-pileser III (Annals. see Astour. and regards them as two different places. giving its name to the entire Assyrian province. explaining the appearance of this form in the Assyrian administrative documents (for a phonetic comparison of the spellings.

in a routine list of vassal states paying tribute to Assyria around 732 B. Tigl. Damascus. The exiles to the cities of Unqi were part of the exiles by Tiglath-pileser to Syria in 738 B. Azriyau. and thus presents a problem as far as Amos' period of activity is concerned. as some scholars have held.C. or whether the final date of Amos' prophetic activity is to be reconsidered.all southern neighbors of the bloc of states which did rebel against Assyria in 738 B. We must agree with H. appearing in the Annals following the exiles to Syria. The fact that the king of Assyria mentions Judah only in a routine list from late in his reign. (c) Judah is mentioned early in Sargon's reign as a land "which lies far away" (see p. is later than Jeroboam.C. The cumulative effect of these factors brings us to the conclusion that the Azriau of the Annals of Tiglath-pileser III and Azariah of the Bible . III. in my opinion. 95-96.C. It would seem that this late exile was the direct result of the rebellion of the cities of Unqi in 739 B. however..C. 32. Judah does not even appear in the list of payers of tribute in 738 B. 219. above). It is against this background that we must review the question of the identity of Azriau of the text with Azariah king of Judah. exiles were brought to them on a large scale (Annals. according to the reconstruction presented here.C. and this is a further indication that it did not take any central role in the struggle against Assyria up to that time. clearly indicates that Assyria had no score to settle with Judah. there are several weighty factors which shed considerable doubt on this identity. In any event. 11. In contrast. 738 B.54 This list includes such states as Hamath. she surely would have been severely punished. following which Tiglath-pileser decided to break up the internal structure and the identity of this land by settling foreign populations in its cities. except for the essential identity of names. and never mentions or even hints that it was his great rival during the years of struggle over rule in Syria.. and certainly Judah would not have avoided payment of a tribute demanded even of states which did not participate in the alliance at all. 54. and bibliography there. 55. (a) The entire episode takes place in northern Syria and there is no evidence that southern kings took any part in the events. includes a list of states which did not participate in the alliance and who preferred to pay tribute. Byblos and Israel . It is beyond our present scope to determine whether this late date points to the intrusive character of Amos 6:2 (or the passage 6:1-7). the states of Unqi and Hatarikka took a part.55 Indeed.C. Had Judah stood at the head of a rebellion against Assyria in this year. The region to which the foreign population was sent (Annals. Tadmor that the list of payers of tribute to Assyria. See most recently W. 11. it is apparent that in the war conducted in north Syria in 738 B. 266-267.53 From the data we have gathered here. as did the northern coastal cities. much closer to the arena of the war. and thus forestall the possibility of further disturbances. Tadmor. Rost. against this. Amos (KAT) (Stuttgart.C. 1971). 53.143-145) whereas Unqi had been annexed to Assyria two years earlier. there is no evidence that even one of the southern Syrian or Palestinian states participated. 38 . Rudolph.the king of though scholars are divided as to the exact position within this reign.143-150) corresponds with the territory of the allies who fought against Tiglath-pileser that same year. There is nothing to support such an identification. 72: 11. (b) Judah is mentioned only once in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser. Even such states as Hamath and Damascus.Bulletinof the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch The rebellion of the cities of Unqi can also be deduced from the fact that following the Assyrian campaign of 738 B.C. did not join the alliance.

and will do so till new. Consisting of the senior staff. H. Series K 737. A.e. the usurper at Hamath who stood at the head of the rebellion against Assyria in 720 B. As we have attempted to demonstrate above. 39 .900 square meters (ca.03%.Number214 April. The survey team employed four proton differential magnetometers and two soil resistivity instruments to locate and map the archaeological materials buried beneath the modern surface. the University of New Mexico. A permanent marker was established at the AEP baseline intersection (i. that there is a connection between the element Yau appearing in Syria and the theophoric element Yahu commonly found in Judah. the identification of Azriau as a Syrian ruler strengthens the assumption. On the other hand.1 under the direction of Dr. 36 R YU) for future survey reference on the site. x 30 m. Hezekiah continued the same line during most of his reign. 80% of the surveyable ancient city) completed. with Dr. and Brigham Young University. Mr. This policy was also supported unflinchingly by Isaiah the prophet.160 meters East and 3. 12.000. Bennett and Dr.358. Seventy-one 30 m. M. 1974 Judah . Poe as co-directors. MAGNETOMETER/RESISTIVITY SURVEY AT PETRA. Edition 1. 1973. a pitfall for the modern historian. in with of the through assistance of the Director-General of Antiquities. O. 1973. Yusuf Alamy representing the Department. Was he an Aramean of Hatarikka.?56 This separation of Azriau from Azariah frees us of a stumbling block to the understanding of the Judean policy towards Assyria in the second half of the eighth century B. at the site of ancient Petra The survey was conducted by the American Expedition to Petra. 56. Olmstead. The work of the Expedition was assisted by a grant from the Research Grants Committee of the University of Utah and by the Department of Antiquities of Jordan.C. cooperation the Department Antiquities. WesternAsia in the Days of Sargon (New York.000 meters North . and fourteen students from the University of Utah. The name Yaubi'di in northern Syria indicates that the element Yau was found in this region in personal names and in a period quite close to that of our Azriau. California State College at Sonoma. Yacoub Oweis. he accepted the yoke of Assyria and was most cautious in his dealings with her. Cf. Hammond.C. and only in his final years did he change his policy and openly stand at the head of an alliance against Assyria. JORDAN . The identity of the northern Azriau remains without solution. including the years in which he was regent under his father Azariah/Uzziah. 3050 1.should be regarded as two separate individuals. of UTMG 735.1973 PHILIPC. Sheet Petra. like Yaubi'di. with a total of 63. upheld since the early days of Assyriology. HAMMOND be conducted at an archaeological in the MiddleEast was successfullycomsite in Jordan.: Ahaz kept to a steady line throughout his reign. The most extensive electronically instrumented sub-surface site survey yet to pleted during the period of June 4 to June 25. 1. Raffiq Sarraf and Mr.see JORDAN 1:50. Philip C. grids were surveyed with one or both instruments. T. and that the identity of names is incidental. C. Completed June. Grids were laid out on the basis of the UTMG system by transit survey to an estimated accuracy error of distribution and triangulation of . Mr. and bibliography there. n. 1908). relevant documents are found. W. 48.