A. T. (Albert Ten Eyck) Olmstead.

Western Asia in the days of Sargon of Assyria online

. (page 5 of 18)
Online LibraryA. T. (Albert Ten Eyck) OlmsteadWestern Asia in the days of Sargon of Assyria → online text (page 5 of 18)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


as Tiele, Gesch., 258. The Tu'muna occur also Sennacherib, Prism.
I. 41.

^ Bah. Chron., I. c.



BABYLONIA AND SYRIA 45

Aft ab valley was opened and free communications with
Elam secured. For twelve years no Assyrian army invaded
Babylonia, and Merodach Baladan was left to his own de-
vices. But one great mistake was made. Dur ilu was left,
perhaps because, after all, the armies were too small, in the
hands of the Assyrians. So long as they held it, communi-
cations between the allies were always subject to interrup-
tion, while it formed a good base for intrigues with the
anti-Chaldaean party in Babylon or for actual military op-
erations. So long as an advanced post such as this was at
the very doors of Babylon, the southern question could not
be considered settled^

In this same year, 720,^ Sargon was able to devote atten-
tion to the threatening state of affairs in Syria, which
seems to have been completely neglected since the capture
of Samaria by Shalmaneser in 723.^ Now all Syria was

' Failure to follow up advantages is made by Winckler, Sargon, XVIII,
n. 3, to be due to the intrigues of the priestly party at Babylon who were
naturally in favor of Sargon. In Gesch., 125 If., Winckler argues that
Sargon ruled at least Kutha as he bears the title " King of the Four
World Regions.''" But Wilcken, Zeitschr. Deutsch. Morg. Ges., 1893,
482, denies the point of the title and notes that on the boundary in-
scription of Merodach Baladan we have a shaku, or mayor, of Kutha.
The title may therefore have been based only on the holding of Dur ilu,
Winckler, Forsch., I. 97. But it is also possible that the office was only
titular. At any rate, Rm. 2, 97, 1. 4 (719) should be restored ushshu
sha hit Nerlgal karru, " the foundations of the house of Nergal pre-
pared." If this was really the great house of Nergal at Kutha which
was thus restored by Sargon, then Sargon held it. It is also worthy
of note that Kutha did not need to be captured in 710. The occupation
of Kutha by the Assyrians would of course be dangerous in the extreme
to Babylon.

*Both the Annals and K. 1349 agree in placing this in 720, while
Prism B. seems also to fit in with this date.

" The question of the captor of Samaria has been discussed by the
author in the Amer. Jour. Sem. Lang., 1905, 179 ff. It was there con-
cluded that the honor must be given to Shalmaneser. A resume



46 vVESTERN ASIA IN THE DAYS OF HaK'-OX

again in revolt, the two centers being at Hamath under
laubidi and at Gaza under Hanunu.

of the reasons there given may not be out of place. Sargon claims
the conquest of Samaria for himself. But, according to his own ad-
mission, this capture took place in the resh sharruti, or part of his reign
before his first New Year. This New Year began probably April 2,
while he ascended the throne December 28, see n. i. We thus have
four months, in the worst part of the year, the rainy season. The
Assyrians, as it would appear, rarely took the field in the winter and
a regular expedition at this time would be very difficult. We saw some-
thing of the mud which can be found at the end of March while in
Syria. Taking into consideration the somewhat untrustworthy character
of the Annals and its allied documents, as well as the fact that we
have no reference to any capture of Samaria in K. 1349 of year II or
in the Nimrud inscription of year VI or thereabouts, the earlier docu-
ments, we may well doubt the accuracy of Sargon's statement. But to
negative we may add positive evidence. II Kings 17^" is a good source,
going back to practically contemporaneous records. There can be no
doubt that the " king of Assyria " of verses 4-6 was intended by the
author for the Shalmaneser of verse 3. There is here no reason for the
Hebrew writer not telling the truth, for it mattered nothing to him, or
to the fame of his people, if Shalmaneser rather than Sargon took
Samaria. Then either he made a mistake, which is hardly likely, or he
told the truth. Further confirmation is fotmd in the Babylonian
Chronicle, I. 28, where the only event of Shalmaneser's reign is the
capture of a certain Shamara'in. So far as the Babylonian Chronicle
is concerned, this only gives us 727 and 722 as limits. But these can
be reduced by reference to the Assyrian Chronicle. The expedition
cannot have taken place in 727 for the ana, "to [the land X]" comes
before the account of Shalmaneser's accession. This is confirmed by
Bab. Chron., I. 24, where we learn that he reigned only the three winter
months of 727. Winckler, Gesch. Bab. und Assyr., 1892, 2ZZ, is thus
incorrect in placing the fall of Shamarain in this year. Nor can we
place it in 726, as does Maspero, Empires, 212, for Assyr. Chron. reads
for that year ina mati, " in the land," which means that there was
no expedition that year. 722 is likewise excluded, for Rm. 2, 97 reads
for the year kar'\ru which refers only to building operations. We have
thus left only 725-23. When we find that for these three years and
only these three years, we have expeditions mentioned, when we re-
member that the siege of Samaria lasted three years, and when we note
that the Bab. Chron. knew only the capture of Shamarain for this reign,
we are forced to assume that this triangular coincidence cannot be an
accident, and that each refers to the same event.



BABYLONIA AND SYRIA 4/

In earlier times Hamath had been of great importance as
the most southerly of the great Hittite cities.^^ In the reign
of Tiglath Pileser, it was definitely brought under Assyrian
control, though not yet made a province.^^ The constant
presence of Assyrian troops in Syria during the last days
of Shalmaneser must have kept it quiet, and so it was
probably in the usurpation of Sargon that laubidi saw the
opportunity for a like usurpation of his own. According to
the testimony of his name, he was of the newer Aramaean

The identification of Shamarain and Samaria was first made by
Delitzsch, Lit. Central Blatt, Sept. 17, 1887, 38, 1290 and is still defended
by him, Assyr. Lesestiicke* 1900 sub voce. Paul Haupt, Proc. Amer.
Orient Soc., 1887, CCLX, has accepted it and has shown that there are
no phonetic laws to prevent it, Winckler, Zeitschr. f. Assyr., II. 351, to
the contrary notwithstanding. Halevy, Zeitschr. f. Assyr., II. 402 and
often, reads Shabarain and equates with the Sibrain of Ezek. 47^" which
he makes also the Biblical Sepharvaim and the modern Shomerieh. But
there is no real reason for reading ha for ma, while reference to Sibrain
is unjustifiable, Ezekiel 40-48 is very late and the text is so corrupt
in 47" that no definite places can be depended upon, cf. the Septuagint.
Winckler, Zeitschr. f. Assyr., I. c, objects that the author of the Bah,
Chron. could hardly have been interested in the capture of far away
Samaria. But, even if the author did not live in a time when Syria was
under Babylonian control, was not Shalmaneser at the time of the cap-
ture King of Babylon by the grace of Bel ? And was not Merodach
Baladan interested a few years later with affairs in Judah ? Or was
Shomerieh better known at Babylon than Samaria? To sum up, for
the capture of Samaria by Sargon, we have only his own claim, made
in a late series of documents which have often been proved incorrect.
Against it, we have the silence of his own earlier accounts with the
direct ascription of the capture by Shalmaneser by two authorities, widely
separated and unprejudiced, while a third, a native Assyrian one, gives
data which fit well into the scheme. It will, therefore, not be difficult
to assume that Samaria was taken by Shalmaneser in 723.

" The cuneiform form of the Biblical Hamath varies between Ham-
matu and Amattu. The name still lingered into Greek times as Amathe,
Jos. Ant., I. 6. 2 although partially supplanted by the Seleucid Epiphania.
It is now called Hama. We visited it July, 1904.

"Annals, 152. Enilu was ruler at the time.



48 WESTERN ASIA IN THE DAYS OF SARGON

stock which was now supplanting the older Hittite ; though
that this gives a proof that the Hebrew Yahweh was wor-
shiped in Hamath is not certain. ^^ While laubidi was the
nominal leader of the revolt, we must see the real instigator
no doubt in Rusash, the Haldian, whose influence in North
Syria must still have been strong.^^ Of the other cities en-
gaged, Arpad had but recently been the great center of
Haldian influence in Syria and had been taken only after a
three years' siege.^* Damascus had lost its independence
only fifteen years before,^^ while Samaria had met the same

" The more common form of the name is (m il) la-u-bi-'-di, D. 33 ;
N. 8 ; S. 53, but in C. 25; A. 23 ; K. 1349, 16 we have (m) I-lu-bi-'-di.
Since Schrader, Keilinschriften und A. T./ 4, some connection with the
Hebrew Yahweh has been postulated and a worship of that deity as-
sumed for N. Syria, cf., e. g., G. A. Barton, Semitic Origins, 1902,
284 n. M. Jastrow, Zeitschr. f. Assyr., 1895, 222 ff., has attacked this
identification with Yahweh ; according to him, the Assyrian form repre-
sents an original IIu yubidi and he compares the use of El with the
imperfect in Hebrew names. The two variant forms would then be a
correct imperfect and a learned assimilation of the scribe. But a com-
parison of the names given by Johns, Doomsday Book, 40, Zerba'idi,
Zerba'di, Sagil bi'di, Auba'di, Adadi bi'di, Atar bi'[di], Ilu ba[di],
Hadad ba'ad, seems to show a lack of the imperfect preformative in the
cases where we have a well known god. I suspect that Ilubidi is simply a
(m il) la-u-bi-'-di with the la dropped out and the AN then read as ilu.

" Cf. the account of Haldia in chap. H. The connection frequently
assumed between the revolts of Hanunu and laubidi is possible but not
proved. How C. 19 and B. 23 is a proof of this, Tiele, Gesch., 259,
n. 3, I do not see. Rogers, History, II. 155, says that the Assyrians
called Hanunu king of Hamath. This is evidently due to misunder-
standing of Winckler, S argon. XIX. n. 3.

" The Assyrian Arpadda, the modern Tell Arfad, north of Aleppo.
Assyr. Chron., 743-740. A little later, horses came from Arpad, 91-5-9,
136 =:H. 395, a letter of Nadinu.

"The Assyrian Dimashqu. Visited July, 1904. In K. 542 = H. 193,
Harper, Amer. Jour. Sem. Lang., 1897, 13 f., a letter from Naid ilu,
and therefore from our reign (cf. K. 665 where the mentions Sharru
emur anni, eponym of 712). Shimpia, the Qupashi official of Damascus,
is sent to the king according to orders. It may be that Shimpia was



BABYLONIA AND SYRIA 49

fate but three years before.^^ Cimirra represented the
Phoenician coast/^ and Tyre too seems to have taken part
in this revolt.^ There are also indications that Bar Rekab

the head of the Damascus revolt of 720. More probably, it was in
713 (Ashdod), or even later. His first occurrence in the contract
literature is 707, his last, if it is the same, in 669. We are therefore
rather to place him late.

'' Cf. n. 9.

" The place was known as Zamar to the Egyptians, W. M. Miiller,
Asien und Europe, 1893, 187; was Cumuru in the Amarna Letters, 38^,
in spite of Winckler, Mitth. Vorderasiat. Gesellsch., 4, 27 ; the Cemari
of Gen. 10^*, I Chron. i^ ; the Simyra of Greek times, Ptol. V. 14. 3.
The modern Sumra, some distance inland, preserves the name. The
ancient site, however, was more probably where we have now the
Bedawin town of Shakka, near the mouth of the Nahr el 'Abrash. We
visited the latter twice in September, 1904. Both times we con-
tented ourselves with a distant view of Sumra. This I regret the
more, as there seems to be no record of a visit by any recent traveller.
The only person who seems to describe the site from actual knowledge,
the others pick out a site and then identify it with Simyra, is
Thomas Shaw, Travels, 1757, 269, as Mr. Wrench points out to me.
Some natives from a nearby town told me that there was nothing worth
seeing there. They pronounced the name Samra, the first a being long.
K. 596 = H. 190, Delattre, Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch., 1901, 342 ff., states
that a certain Shepa Ashur has gone with his servants from Dur Shar-
rukin to Cimiri. He may have gone to become governor, or he may
have gone for cedars for the new palace.

^* C. 21. For discussion see chap IV, n. 62. There were two Tyres,
one on the mainland, the other on the island. For Egyptian times, cf.
Miiller, op. cit., 189. Here Haven Tyre, the island city, seems to be
the one to be distinguished from Tyre proper. In the Assyrian in-
scriptions we have somewhat the same conditions, for we find a governor
of Tyre in 648, Johns, Deeds, II. 136, the name being changed to Kar
Esar haddon. Yet Island Tyre was always independent under kings.
As Palaetyrus, the name still lingered in classical times, although the
statements of Strabo, XVI. 2. 24, to the effect that it was thirty stades
from the island city, and of Pliny, H. N. V. 19 (17). 76, that it was
nineteen Roman miles in circuit must apply to the scattered suburbs all
along the coast. In spite, then, of certain objectors, e. g., C. Clermont-
Ganneau, Etudes d'Archeologie Orientale, 1880, 74, we have a right to
assume a Tyre on the mainland and near the island city. Historic
probability also leads us to the same conclusion. So long as it was



50 WESTERN ASIA IN THE DAYS OF SARGON

of Sam'al, a state near to Arpad, forgot his allegiance to

thought that the Phoenicians had held the control of the sea for in-
definite ages, the situation of Tyre on an island need not be wondered
at. But now we know that Egyptian and Mycenaean fleets swept the
sea to a decidedly late period, certainly to a period later by much than
the settlement of Phoenicians along the seaboard. We also have
traditions that the Phoenicians were immigrants who came from the
east. When they first reached the seacoast, being still landsmen, and
found other and hostile, or at least piratical fleets controlling the sea,
they would hardly choose an exposed island for their first home. They
would rather do as was done at Tiryns, Corinth, Athens, Troy, and
many another site of that age, choose an acropolis near enougn to the
sea for trade but far enough away and defensible enough to be safe.
Both natural conditions and the meaning of the name Cor, " rock,"
make us look for such an acropolis in the plain opposite the island.

There is only one position which corresponds with what we demand.
This is the isolated " rock " which rises abruptly from the plain about
a mile and a half SE. by E. of the gate of Tyre. It was probably about
two thirds of a mile from the original coast line. Tiryns, with which
we may best compare it, is one and a quarter miles away from the coast,
but much of this is late alluvial filling. The " rock " rises, according to
Sepp, quoted Survey of Western Palestine, Memoirs, 1881, I. 69, forty or
fifty feet high, and this I think not far wrong. Tiryns is fifty-seven
feet high. Sepp makes it six hundred feet in circumference. I think
this is too small, and I seem to be confirmed by the Saillardot-Renan
map of Tyre and vicinity. Tiryns is nearly a thousand by over three
hundred feet, but this space is divided into three terraces on which are
three separate citadels. Kitchener, Survey, 50, estimates the present
population at about thirty, and with this I agree. This space is certainly
small for so famous a city as Tyre. But was the earliest Tyre so very
large? If Tiryns, when a flourishing Mycenaean city, could keep its
main buildings on so small a site, the much less important Tyre could
surely hold our situation. This rock could easily accommodate several
hundred persons, and the early village would hardly have more. As
the city grew, the new houses would be grouped around the rock but the
people would retire to its citadel when the enemy came.

It is the usual fate of an acropolis to become the home of the gods
after peace has allowed its citizens to descend to the more convenient
plain. This seems to have happened in the case of old Tyre, for to-day
the most prominent edifice on the rock is the shrine of the Muslim saint,
Nebi Ma'shuk, and his wife, whose name, the " Beloved," would con-



BABYLONIA AND SYRIA 51

Assyria, perhaps his boasted love to Tiglath Pileser^ did
not extend to the supplanter of his dynasty, and joined
the coaHtion.-^

The allies do not seem to have acted in concert, it would

nect him with Tammuz-Adonis, the old Phoenician god, even did not
another trace of his worship exist in the feast the Tyrians still celebrate
in his honor, in July, the month which in antiquity bore the name of
Tammuz. Sepp, /. c.

When the Phoenicians gained control of the sea, the inland site
was found inconvenient, especially since a fine site for a port existed
among the islands just off the coast. An analogous situation was
faced by Athens at the close of the Persian Wars. Before that, the
acropolis and the region directly around it was the city par excellence.
After that time, Athens held control of the sea, the Piraeus was rebuilt
and became of even greater importance. Themistocles, who better
than any other man in antiquity understood the meaning of " sea
power," made no attempt to conceal the fact that he considered the
Piraeus the more important of the two and often said that, if the
Athenians ever were worsted on land, they should go to the Pireaus
and use that as a base for a warfare on sea. Thuc. I. 93. What
Themistocles saw, but could not persuade the Athenians to do completely,
the less sentimental Tyrians did. The island city became the more im-
portant, the shrines and public buildings were collected together in a
situation which for more than a thousand years proved impregnable,
and the old city, probably actually increased in numbers, became only
a suburb. It is quite possible that this transfer of the main city to
the island was caused by Hiram, for we are told that he connected the
islands, built temples and the great square, Menander in Josephus.

" The Bar Rekab inscription, in F. von Luschan, Ausgrabungen in
Sendschirli, 1893, 79.

^*' Sam'al, which plays so large a part in earlier times, suddenly dis-
appears. Prism B. is the only Sargon document which refers to it
and the reference there must be placed in 720 cf. chap. I. n. 47. If it
is allowable to connect the "my governor" of K. 1672. I. 3 with the
" city Samalla " of 4, we may assume that Sam'al already had a gov-
ernor, Winckler, Forsch., I. 22; II. y:^. At any rate, in 681 we have
a governor of Sam'al as eponym. Winckler, Keilinschr. und Alte Test.^
67 f. places here the reference to laudu in N. 8. After much hesitation,
I am a little more inclined to attribute it to Judah. Maspero, Empires,
283, adds Bit Agusi to the list of revolted states. I do not know his
authority.



52 WESTERN ASIA IN THE DAYS OF SARGON

have been too much to expect of a Syrian confederation, or
perhaps Sargon was too quick for them. laubidi took up
his position at Qarqar,^^ to the north of Hamath, to meet the
advancing Assyrians. Once before, 854, the Syrians had
met Assyrians on this field and had defeated them and
saved Syria for the time.-^ Now they were in turn defeated,
and laubidi fell into the hands of the victors. This was the
first success of the reign, and it needed to be emphasized.
A horrible punishment, only too common, was decreed for
the unfortunate laubidi. He was carried to Assyria and
flayed alive. Later, a vivid bas-relief was set up on the
walls of the new capital, a warning against revolt to the

-^ For the name Qarqara Schrader, Keilinschr. und d. Alte Test.,^ 84,
compares the Qarqor of Jud. 8^" and the Karkor of Eusebius, Onom.
But the edition of Klostermann, 116, has Karkaria as the place existing
in the days of Eusebius. The actual location of Qarqar is uncertain.
Maspero, Empires, 70, n.* makes it Qala'at el Mudiq, the ancient
Apamea of Lebanon, Ptol. V. 14. 15. Harper, Code of Hammurabi,
1904, 7, and cf. map, reads (al) IM.KI as Karkar, Code III. 61 and
makes it the Syrian city. He also finds here the Syrian Aleppo. But
this Hallab = ZA.RI.UNU.KI is clearly a Babylonian city, as is shown
by the Hammurabi inscription, King V, and by the geographical lists
where the names occur along with cities which are certainly Babylonian.
Qarqar is called al naramishu, his " beloved city " in D. 34. This can
hardly mean his capital. Possibly it means his birthplace. We
should note that Qarqar is in his '' country " of Hamath, mat being
regularly used before Hamath, This use of Hamath is also frequent
in the Bible, e. g., Riblah is, according to II Kings 23^ in the land of
Hamath. A hitherto unnoticed case of such use is to be seen in the
expression usually translated " entrance of Hamath " which occurs in
the delimination of the ideal boundaries of the Holy Land. The ex-
planation current is not without difficulties, cf. e. g., G. B. Gray, Num-
bers, 1903, 140. The Septuagint on Jud. 3^ Labo Emath, gives the clue.
Libo is not a verbal form but a proper noun, the Libo of the Antonine
Itinerary, 198. 3, and the modern Lebweh, which we visited July,
1904. K. 6674 = H. 225, Delattre, Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch., 1900, 269,
a letter from Uhati reads " peace to the desert of the land of Hamate."

" Shalmaneser II, Monolith, II. 87 ff.



BABYLONIA AND SYRIA 53

petty princes who brought their tribute to Dur Sharrukin.^^
After the battle, Qarqar was taken and burned and
Hamath, which seems to have lain not far off, was also
captured, its low-lying position giving little opportunity for
defense. Of its inhabitants many were killed, others were
made captive, while the flower of the troops, two hundred
charioteers and six hundred horsemen, was added to the
standing army which Sargon was now forming to take the
place of the old feudal levy.^* The position of Hamath on
the great road from the north to Egypt was important, as
its relation to the modern railway shows. To secure it, a
colony of six thousand three hundred native Assyrians was
settled here, and an Assyrian governor was placed over
them.^^ The site of this city is now represented, no doubt,
by the big bare mound which stands in the center of the
modern town, and here, if we should excavate, we should
probably find not only the relics of an earlier Hittite people,
but even cuneiform documents of the sort already found in
the mounds of Palestine.^

The capture of Hamath seems to have ended the revolt

^^ Botta, Ninive, II. pi. 120; also in Maspero, op. cit., 235.

^* Cf. under the last chapter,

^A. 23 if.; D. 35 f.; especially S.I. 51 ff. which here adds much new
matter.

^ In all Syria, I have not seen a mound which so struck me as worth
excavating. It is a splendid big tell, in the middle of the town and
at present absolutely bare. The railroad has now reached Hama, and
in the growth which is likely to follow the mound will probably be
covered with buildings. When we remember that already five Hittite
inscriptions have been found at Hama, the outlook for results is
promising. I do not think any trouble would need be feared. The
accounts of the fanaticism of the people are much exaggerated. We
visited without special escort and photographed the main mosque and
the one where Abul feda is buried.



54 WESTERN ASIA IN THE DAYS OF SARGON

in the north, and the other cities submitted.^^ Then he
moved south to attack Hanunu of Gaza,- around whom
the revolt in the south centered. Gaza held one of the most
important positions in the ancient world. As the last Syrian
city towards Egypt on the great Syro-Egyptian trade route,
and as the seaport of the Arabian caravan road, its posses-
sion was no less valuable from the commercial than from
the military standpoint. This was thoroughly understood
in Egypt where the holding of advance lines on Syrian soil
has always been a fundamental part of the national policy.
As soon as the Ethiopian rulers began to secure Lower
Egypt, it was felt that an advance on Syria was to be part
of the general prqgram. Already, in the time of Tiglath
Pileser, the first attempt had been made and Hanunu had
been won over. The attempt failed, and Hanunu was forced
to flee to Egypt. During the weaker reign of Shalmaneser
he returned, deposed the Assyrian protege Idibi'il, and re-
gained his throne. In this he was helped by a certain Sibu

^ The sneering question, " where are the gods of Hamath and of
Arpad?" II Kings i8**, cf. 19*', seems to refer to this event. What-
ever its date, the source was good. Amos 6^ may be a possible inter-
polation of this date, Bickell, in Schrader, Keilinschr. und d. Alte Test.,'
445 n. The part of the Annals which probably told of the conquest
of the minor states is lost.


1 2 3 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Online LibraryA. T. (Albert Ten Eyck) OlmsteadWestern Asia in the days of Sargon of Assyria → online text (page 5 of 18)