The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and BabyloniaPinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Religion
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia
Pinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
In the two following years (648 and 647 B.C., according to Assyrian
reckoning), Shalmaneser was not to all appearance engaged in any
expeditions of importance, or at least their importance is unknown. In his
fourteenth year, 846 B.C., however, he crossed the Euphrates again, and
met Ben-Hadad for the last time. As before, the latter was in alliance
with Irḫulēni of Hamath and the “twelve kings of the sea-coast above and
below.” Again the Assyrian king fought with them and defeated them,
destroying their chariots and teams, and capturing, as before, their
war-material, and “to save their lives, they fled.”
Naturally all these historical details are of great interest and value.
The question naturally arises whether, being so much alike in wording and
results, they may not all refer to the same expedition, which the Assyrian
king repeated to fill up his annals? As a rule, however, the annals of the
Assyrian rulers are exceedingly correct, and there is consequently but
little reason to doubt the accuracy of Shalmaneser’s statements. It is
noteworthy that, in all these descriptions of expeditions to the west,
twelve kings are mentioned, whilst in the first instance eleven only are
enumerated, and in the other two the twelve are spoken of as if in
addition to Adad-idri and Irḫulēni of Hamath. Ought we, therefore, to
translate “the twelve kings,” meaning the eleven which are referred to
along with and including Aḫabbu of the Sir’ilâa, or are the twelve kings
referred to in the account of the second and third encounters with
Ben-Hadad merely an indefinite number, meaning “a dozen,” _i.e._“twelve
more or less”? As it is impossible that Ahab of Israel should have been
one of the Syrian league all this time, the latter must be held to be the
more probable explanation—“In those days Adad-idri of the land of Imēri-šu
(and) Irḫulēni of the land of Hamath with a dozen kings of the sea-coast
trusted each other’s might, and came against me to make war and battle.”
Notwithstanding all his efforts, however, as detailed in his annals,
Shalmaneser II. was still very far from the subjugation of the
“sea-coast,” as he calls Palestine and Syria, and realizing that he had a
hard task before him, he returned to his own country and occupied himself
in the two following years in Mesopotamia, Ararat, and Namri, south-east
of Assyria. The following year, 843 B.C., for the first time during his
reign, he was at peace, superintending the felling of trees in the Amanus
mountains for use in the palaces of Assyria. This period of rest was in
all probability necessary to enable the army to be reorganized for further
campaigns in that part of the world which he seems to have set his heart
upon subjugating.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account