The cuneiform inscriptions and the Old Testament - The Search For ...

140 THE aUNEIFOBM INSCRIPTIONS AND TEE 0. T.
mast. ed. Lagarde I. 88, 6). And this agrees with the
fact which we learn from the List of Governors, that Sal-
manassar III (783— 773), already referred-to , made in
the year 775 an expedition into the cedar-country (m§,t
frini), that is to say the Lebanon-district (see my remarks
on 1 Kings V. 13, Vol. I, pp. 172 foil.). On that occasion
he may have penetrated into the trans-jordanic region and
destroyed this Arbela. But here again I cannot refrain
from doubts respecting this whole combination. Would the
prophet have actually omitted to define the Assyrian Great
King as such, i. e. as an Assyrian, by the addition of "king
of Assyria", while in other cases (e. g. X. 6), as the reader is
aware, he speaks of "kings of Assyria"?—Now Tiglath-
Pileser (Pul) in his great triumphal inscription II Rawl. 6 7
line 60 (see above Vol. I, p. 249) mentions a Moabite king
Salamanu i. e. jobLJ'* * as a prince who paid tribute to him.
According to the Bible, Hosea was a contemporary of Mena-
hem, and therefore of Tiglath-Pileser (Pul) also (comp. too
the chronological excursus below). Hence there cannot be
any doubt that Salman of Moab was a contemporary of
442 Hosea. Now we know from 2 Kings XIII. 20 that the
Moabites in the time of Joash made an incursion into Israe-
lite territory. They were afterwards, it is true, subjugated
by Jeroboam II (2 Kings XIV. 25). After his death, however,
when troubles broke out in the Northern kingdom , they
must have once more made themselves independent. Per-
haps they even assumed the offensive, and, in an incursion
into the territory of Israel, destroyed the town of Beth-
Arb^l. In the case of a contemporary prince, reigning
* )07K' appears as a proper name also on a Palmyrene inscription;
see de Vogii^, Syrie Ceutrale 1 p. 55 No. 76.