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: 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 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 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

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.

p. 18-20: 103-119. four otherwiseunidentifiableIslamiccoins and one coin of Charles. 24. 2 and has since been associatedwith the episode of Azriauking of Yaudi.)24These data fall into two distinguishable centuryC. Sargon H. in the days of Tiglath-pileser III. 22f.C. who cites de Saulcy. Winckler. Sargon . subse- One piece (K 6205) was first publishedin cuneiformby G. III . 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.two datable Islamiccoins 1342-45 and 1389-90). TCL III F. The American Numismatic Society. 1974 GordianIII (238-44) or Elagabalus (218-22).as I shall attempt to demonstratebelow. D. pp. Tadmor. Chicago. Tigl. Une relation de la buitieme campagne de Sargon. R. Recherches sur les monnaies des ducs hereditaires de Lorraine.Duke of Calabria. Borger. the ceramic evidence for MIII clearly places the Arabic occupation there in the 8th and 9th centuries C. Luckenbill. Rost. H.unique erary among the documents concerning Syro-Palestinian the for stylewasthe pointof departure associating two fraggion. 570-574.7. Tadmor. Azriyau . 1967). Altorientalische Forschungen II (Leipzig.Number214 April. Assoc. Curator of Medieval Coins.4 The outstandingand characteristic featureof both fragmentsis the specific lit- ent that they comprisepartsof one and the samedocument.25 The latest coins were very likely droppedby religiouspilgrimswho undoubtedly beganvisitingthis site in the MiddleAges.E. Leipzig. Winckler. 1912. Borger. it of of quently. II .2The secondfragment(BM82-3-23.E. Babylonisch-assyrische examination photographs the two fragments. 232f.19. Die Keilinschrifttexte Tiglat Pilesers III. 1963. So J. As the excavators have already noted.Burgundyand Guelders. Tigl. Handbuch der Keilschriftliteratur (Berlin. 1893. The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur JCS 12 (1958). Smith in IIIR 9.R. Lorraine. I am also most grateful to Prof. describing. 131-156. 148 and p.D. Sennacherib's campaignto Judahin 701 B. Tadmor. Througha comparisonof the transcriptions and. Azriyau of Yaudi. Rome. in transcriptiononly. 3. III. Paris. by H. Die Keilschrifttexte Sargons. Rost.-4th Whetherthis can be taken to indicateperiodsof habitationis quite another question. who read this article in manuscript and made numerous useful suggestions throughout. Rost.its two fragments kings: having the reall style. D. became appar- 25 . Brady. Borger. H. The Annals of Sennacherib. OIP. Scripta Hierosolymitana 8 (1961).H. 1898).P. The abbreviations used herein are according to R. Leipzig. Tadmorwho treated its by that it be ascribedto the days literaryand historicalaspects in detail.E.E.minted at Nancy early in his reign (1545-1608 C. I must thank Prof. suggesting of SargonII. spansof time: (1) the 1st centuryB. Winckler. five Roman coins of the early 4th century. 80-84.and (2) the Islamicperiod. 1924. Tadmor. 2.Thispeculiar ments as one document. Tadmor. 1889. Tadmor for his advice concerning the problems dealt with in this paper. with the following exceptions: Borger. 1. Thureau-Dangin.3and republished H. 7.131) wasfirst edited. BAL . 4. Sargon.C.. Winckler. 25.H. one Islamiccoin that appearsto be Mamluk.

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

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

weapons he bound (on them) to [offer battle . The description is more detailed than that concerning Azekah. Borger: BAL II. the obverse is broken off.. both concerning a single episode . Line 8: Before the break in the middle of the line appear the signs DA AN SI UD. Cf. The spelling GIR (MES) AN. appears in the Rassam Cylinder of Sennacherib. we might restore alaktu.... their warriors] (17) [. without the plural. (OIP II... 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.. we might possibly restore "like a tree [standing out on a ridge] " (on the basis of TCL 3. (21) .. 7).. 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).. ] palace [its top? ... Line 5: It was this line which led fragment K 6205 to be associated with the Azriau episode. its waters were situated in darkness and [its?] overflow [ . (18) [ . describes the conquest of the town of Azekah... 76. all of them. 239).. Lines 4 and 11: The spelling Ha-za-qi-ja-a-uappears also in the version of Sennacherib's Annals (OIP II. The suggested reading for this line .. 36:77).. and the continuation on the reverse is not preserved... spo[il ....3-10. pot [of clay? I smashed? . I The inscription can be divided into two parts.... The first part 11. 69. to carry earth (19) [ ] against them.. ] skillful in battle he caused to enter into it. the strength of a city in Philistia which had been annexed to Judah. the combination of which does not have a meaning. At the end of the line.. (15) [ ] it was dark and the sun never shone on it. 28 . Lines 12-16 describe.. cattle and she] ep I carried out from its midst [and counted as] (20) [ . Line 12: At the end of the line. n. 26: 65-68. its [mou] th was cut with axes and a moat was dug around it [ .11-20. possibly because it was the more important of the two. "like the nest of the eagle on 1he basis of the Annals of Sennacherib (OIP II.. where the same formulae appear. 144-145). ] I caused the warriors of Amurru. In the seventh time his [ .ina birit misrija u mat Jaudi .Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research like a mountain was barred in front of them and high is (14) [.. Rost copied here [I] z-ri-ja-u mit Ja-u-di. Sargon 8:63). 67: 7-8). At this point. Line 6: At the start of the line we might possibly restore kima qinni ern.. which Hezekiah had previously annexed to his kingdom.of course removes this difficulty and removes Azriau altogether from the picture. in spite of the obvious difficulty that the spelling Jaudi wouldbe an incorrect form of the gentilic.. whereas the second part 11.......the war against Hezekiah king of Judah. Our correction of the signs SI+UD as NIM is based on the expression ina alibi danni appearing in the Annals of Sargon (Lie. rhetorically and exaggerating. ] the great like a . 39: 5455... relates the conquest of a city in Philistia. (16) [.-..BAR... .

contemporaneous with the present document. 28:21.7. D. differing from the dry. JNES 19 (1960). T. is the tunnel hewn by Hezekiah in Jerusalem (2 Kings 20: 20). All this points to fine.5. 7.8-10. This line is restored on the basis of many of Sennacherib's inscriptions in which this expression recurs (OIP II. Vincent. Luckenbill. Also noteworthy is the structure of line 9: . monotonous style of the Annals. 1961).). n. The WaterSystem of Gibeon (Philadelphia. etc. iplab libbasun. 11. then each is described from afar (11. Such a structure is evident in the present text.6 The inclusion of the water-source within the fortifications enabled the besieged to hold out for a very lengthy time.0lo These specific expressions are treated below in the same order as they appear in the text. C. There is no doubt that. 11)."8 The external traits of such documents are the fine literary style. finally.9 But a considerable number of expressions would bring us down beyond the time of Sargon. 172 f. 12). the sign 'al appears in its entirety.7 Line 16: The subject of this sentence is not clear. It should be noted that part of the descriptions do not at all suit the landscape of the Shephelah in Palestine. 1974 Line 14: The scribe seems to depict the palace jutting out from the fortifications on one flank of the city. Line 18: Auxiliary forces of the vassal kings take part in the siege operations. 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. followed. 82. to the days of Sennacherib his son. AJSL 41 (1924/5). as well as several . Bauer. Line 20: In the cuneiform published by G. and the developed literary structure. these are clearly literary cliches transferred from mountainous regions. 133 f. Lines 18-20 describe the siege and conquest of the city.). D. Sargon. 9. by a description of the fighting and conquest (11. H. Jerusalem sous Terre ( of the most typical features of Palestinian archaeology in the period of the Israelite monarchies. See the note to line 2 of our text. muru-ma zuma. and bibliography there. B. See Tadmor. Line 15: An authentic description of a water tunnel . 219 f. Hezekiah brought troops within the city. 1911). Hazor (London. upon comparison of its two parts. ZA 40 (1931). L. 2).. 13-17). stylistically and in lexicon.9.Number 214 April. H. Pritchard. whereas today only the upper part is visible. Firstly. Line 17: Among the preparations for the siege. . A. after which details of the fortifications and means of defence are given (11. 10. 1967).. 29 . A famous example of such an installation. Yadin. 6-7. still extant today. Oppenheim. II On the basis of its style. probably because he was not sure of the loyalties of the Philistine inhabitants of the city. 1. 18-20). 250.) from that of Sennacherib to Palestine (701 B. Y. 14-15)... 27:75-76. Tadmor assigned the "Azekah inscription" to the type scholars refer to as "Letters to God. Smith (IIIR. 161 f. ism descriptions unparallelled in known Akkadian literature (11. 8..C.. 33:26.C. together with their parallels in the version of Sennacherib's Annals: 11 Ai~ur beli utakkilannima ana ma•tGN lu allik 6.6. J. each place is identified (11. Note that only little more than a decade separates Sargon's eighth campaign (714 B. this text is especially close to the "Letter to God" describing the campaign of Sargon II to Urartu in 714 B. well-planned writing on a very high standard.

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

24. 22. 31 . and .C. and apparently also its continuation. or both of the documents may have been composed quite independently. 113 f. it could not be from the time of Sennacherib.). 20. (e) The portion of the campaign described in our text.21 In our opinion. Thus. 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. The survival of one example only for each king is most probably coincidental. D. Eretz-Israel 5 (1959). ZA 34 [1922]. however. 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. ANET. Several typical expressions are common to our text and to the Annals version of Sennacherib. for in all the other historical texts only the usual spelling Ags'urappears. as can be inferred from the version in the Annals. 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. 1974 moned before Sennacherib near Tyre (OIP II.20 According to this argument. Sargon. whereas all the others were found at Kuyunjik. OIP II. 82. the regular historical texts should not be applied to the problem of spelling in our text and. thus possibly alluding to the interdependence of the two. and on the other hand. for instance. whose main temple was in the city of Ashur. We must further remember that the "Letter to God" was meant to be read before the god Ashur. which has not been preserved. on the one hand. which might corroborate the assumption that our literary text served as the example. and see Tadmor. Only Sargon's "Letter to God" was found at the city of Ashur (B. Sargon II. 23.23 It is clear that a redacted summary or brief report would emphasize specific facets of the campaign. even if a certain difficulty does remain. Meissner. Against this we must note first the special character of our text. Since the "Azekah inscription" is an historical text.25 We can perhaps also assume that it was composed in order to magnify and glorify the god Ashur. Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal) does not necessarily point to the custom of a king writing only one such "Letter" during his reign. 288. in spite of its having been the second city of the realm.Number214 April. The fact that we have only a single "Letter to God" from several Assyrian kings (Shalmaneser IV. from the Bible and from Sennacherib's reliefs (R. 161 f. Scholars have already noted that the Annals version is of an unusual literary quality. the same spelling does occur in the documents of Sennacherib. Tadmor. 32-33: 18-23. 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.22 The "Letter to God" may have served as the source for the shorter version in the Annals. which appears as Aniar. it is known that Lachish was conquered during Sennacherib's campaign to Judah.). and would omit other facets or describe them only in passing. which seems to have been a doubtful success as far as the Assyrians were concerned. 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.besides Jerusalem . to explain and give an excuse for the events of the campaign to Judah. are described more briefly in the version of Sennacherib's Annals. IEJ 8 [1958]. 340. Lachish. 25. differing considerably from all other of Sennacherib's historical texts. 159-160 (Hebrew). 30: 54). Barnett.24 Thus. so the argument runs. Sennacherib. is not at all mentioned in the Annals version. ARAB II. 21. probably in Ashurbanipal's city in Judah is mentioned there by name. (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.

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

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

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

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

in the light of the known facts. however.C. Tiglath-pileser moved the border of his kingdom to the Mediterranean seaboard and included parts of North Syria within the framework of Assyrian territory. III.Bulletinof the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch ated a new balance of power between Philistia and Judah. 20-24: 123-141. His purpose is thus revealed as an attempt to create a series of states of equal strength on the AssyrianEgyptian border.. It gives details of the territorial arrangements made by the king of Assyria in northern Syria following his victory (annexation of Hatarikka. 11. 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. 36 . does the name of the land of Azriau appear. but it seems possible to identify further elements which joined in the rebellion. we have no source relating the background of the Assyrian campaign to Syria in 738 B. Rost. Tiglath-pileser III conquered the lands of Arpad and Unqi and annexed them to Assyria (Annals. During this campaign. Tigi. we hear little more of the conflict between Assyria and Egypt till the days of Esarhaddon.C. and thus a lessening of the threat of an Assyrian invasion into Egypt proper. Tadmor. Tiglath-pileser III turned northward and conducted a campaign to Ulluba..125-132) and the resulting exile of the population (Annals. 11. we are left with only one. Upon the annexation of Arpad and Unqi.C. in the spelling Az-ri-a-[u]. and bibliography there. According to the description of this episode in the Annals. the biblical Hadrach. in the variant spelling Az-ri-ja-a-i. in reaction to which there was an Assyrian campaign to Syria. while the Syrian states held the status of vassals. and the long years of quiet on this border for the remainder of Sennacherib's reign are witness of the success of this policy. Thus the question of the identity of this person cannot be solved directly. and in line 131.C.C. This latter text of the version of the Annals of Tiglath-pileser III was published in cuneiform by G. a rebellion broke out in Syria.. This step may have been interpreted in Egypt as an Assyrian retreat from the region. as far as the passages are preserved. (Or could there have been some agreement on the matter between the two rivals?) In any event. Smith (IIIR 9. Tiglath-pileser III diverged from the policy upheld since the days of Shalmaneser III. Thus. and the northern Mediterranean coast. according to which the border of Assyria remained along the Euphrates (on both banks). Rost. but only the end of the events.C. Hatarikka and the northern coastal cities took part in this rebellion. In 739 B. Hence. Nowhere in the text. we should review briefly the background of the wars in Syria in 738 B. In doing so.132-133). In 740 B. Azriyau. The name Azriau appears in the fragment twice: in line 123. Annals. southwest of Urartu. 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. 49.82-101).C. 3) and was included in the Annals of this ruler published by P. 11.49 Perusal of this text shows that it describes only the final phase of the events of 738 B. in 738 B. and the answer must be sought elsewhere. or on the actual war conducted in that same year between Assyria and the Syrian alliance.

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

and thus presents a problem as far as Amos' period of activity is concerned. In any event. Azriyau. It is against this background that we must review the question of the identity of Azriau of the text with Azariah king of Judah. 54.C. much closer to the arena of the war. according to the reconstruction presented here. 53.143-145) whereas Unqi had been annexed to Assyria two years earlier. Rost. It would seem that this late exile was the direct result of the rebellion of the cities of Unqi in 739 B. she surely would have been severely punished. See most recently W. Tadmor that the list of payers of tribute to Assyria. and certainly Judah would not have avoided payment of a tribute demanded even of states which did not participate in the alliance at all. the states of Unqi and Hatarikka took a part. The fact that the king of Assyria mentions Judah only in a routine list from late in his reign.55 Indeed.C. and bibliography there. The region to which the foreign population was sent (Annals. 738 B. as some scholars have held.143-150) corresponds with the territory of the allies who fought against Tiglath-pileser that same year.the king of though scholars are divided as to the exact position within this reign. 38 . 11. 11. Amos (KAT) (Stuttgart. following which Tiglath-pileser decided to break up the internal structure and the identity of this land by settling foreign populations in its cities.C. and this is a further indication that it did not take any central role in the struggle against Assyria up to that time. in my opinion.53 From the data we have gathered here. except for the essential identity of names. appearing in the Annals following the exiles to Syria. In contrast. it is apparent that in the war conducted in north Syria in 738 B. and thus forestall the possibility of further disturbances.. 72: 11. exiles were brought to them on a large scale (Annals. (a) The entire episode takes place in northern Syria and there is no evidence that southern kings took any part in the events.C. Byblos and Israel . clearly indicates that Assyria had no score to settle with Judah. 219.C. The exiles to the cities of Unqi were part of the exiles by Tiglath-pileser to Syria in 738 B. above). Even such states as Hamath and Damascus. Damascus. (b) Judah is mentioned only once in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser. there is no evidence that even one of the southern Syrian or Palestinian states participated. however.C. includes a list of states which did not participate in the alliance and who preferred to pay tribute. 1971). (c) Judah is mentioned early in Sargon's reign as a land "which lies far away" (see p. 55. or whether the final date of Amos' prophetic activity is to be reconsidered. 266-267. against this. Judah does not even appear in the list of payers of tribute in 738 B. Rudolph. There is nothing to support such an identification. 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). did not join the alliance.C.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. III.C. 32. as did the northern coastal cities. there are several weighty factors which shed considerable doubt on this identity. Tigl. is later than Jeroboam. Had Judah stood at the head of a rebellion against Assyria in this year. 95-96. Tadmor..54 This list includes such states as Hamath. We must agree with H. in a routine list of vassal states paying tribute to Assyria around 732 B.all southern neighbors of the bloc of states which did rebel against Assyria in 738 B. 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 . and never mentions or even hints that it was his great rival during the years of struggle over rule in Syria.

Yusuf Alamy representing the Department. like Yaubi'di. 12. 1908). W.e. 1973. O. 48. that there is a connection between the element Yau appearing in Syria and the theophoric element Yahu commonly found in Judah. Raffiq Sarraf and Mr. and only in his final years did he change his policy and openly stand at the head of an alliance against Assyria.160 meters East and 3. the usurper at Hamath who stood at the head of the rebellion against Assyria in 720 B. and will do so till new. 36 R YU) for future survey reference on the site. and fourteen students from the University of Utah. JORDAN . Hezekiah continued the same line during most of his reign. grids were surveyed with one or both instruments. Olmstead. Grids were laid out on the basis of the UTMG system by transit survey to an estimated accuracy error of distribution and triangulation of .Number214 April. Seventy-one 30 m. n. The most extensive electronically instrumented sub-surface site survey yet to pleted during the period of June 4 to June 25. 80% of the surveyable ancient city) completed. at the site of ancient Petra The survey was conducted by the American Expedition to Petra. As we have attempted to demonstrate above. A permanent marker was established at the AEP baseline intersection (i.000 meters North . WesternAsia in the Days of Sargon (New York. upheld since the early days of Assyriology. a pitfall for the modern historian. Was he an Aramean of Hatarikka. Bennett and Dr. Hammond. On the other hand. with Dr.?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.: Ahaz kept to a steady line throughout his reign. and bibliography there. Poe as co-directors. of UTMG 735.C. California State College at Sonoma. the University of New Mexico.358. and that the identity of names is incidental. 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. 39 . 1973.1 under the direction of Dr. Completed June. The identity of the northern Azriau remains without solution. 1974 Judah . Series K 737.see JORDAN 1:50.03%. 3050 1. including the years in which he was regent under his father Azariah/Uzziah. and Brigham Young University. 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. he accepted the yoke of Assyria and was most cautious in his dealings with her. 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. H. Edition 1. HAMMOND be conducted at an archaeological in the MiddleEast was successfullycomsite in Jordan. T. C.1973 PHILIPC. Cf. Mr. relevant documents are found. cooperation the Department Antiquities. A. Yacoub Oweis. the identification of Azriau as a Syrian ruler strengthens the assumption.000.C. 1. Philip C.should be regarded as two separate individuals. x 30 m. MAGNETOMETER/RESISTIVITY SURVEY AT PETRA.900 square meters (ca. Mr. in with of the through assistance of the Director-General of Antiquities. Consisting of the senior staff. 56. This policy was also supported unflinchingly by Isaiah the prophet. M. Sheet Petra. with a total of 63.