The Cuneiform inscriptions and the Old Testament; - The Search For ...

SECOND BOOK OF KINGS XV. 229
Undoubtedly we must regard this second campaign of
the great monarch to Sapija as an energetic assertion of
Assyria's supremacy, and when even the mighty king of
South-Babylonia, Merodach-Baladan, stooped to greet the
Northern conqueror with a kiss of homage , it can scarcely
be gainsaid that Babel also in some way recognized his
supremacy. And finally this is placed beyond all doubt
by the circumstance that the Ptolemaic canon notes down
(1) for the year 731, as well as (2) for the year 726 (the
first complete year of Salmanassar's reign, the successor of
Tiglath-Pileser) a change of ruler in Babylon, and, what
is remarkable enough , mentions two kings as the contem-
porary possessors of this title, viz. Chinzer (Ukin-zir, see
Assyr.-Babyl. Keilinsch. p. 155 no. 61, and comp. above)
and P6r. The practice otherwise followed by the compilers
of the canon forbids the supposition that there were two
kings reigning in succession in about the same year. In such
a case one of the two would have been altogether passed 238
over. Hence this strange statement can only be properly
understood on the assumption that one of the two was the
superior, and the other the subordinate king ; Keilinsch. u.
Gesch. pp. 453 foil. If we connect this with the circum-
stance that the length of reign assigned by the canon to
Por as king of Babylon exactly corresponds to the interval
that comes between Merodach-Baladan's act of homage in
731 and Tiglath-Pileser's death, and also bear in mind
that there was no Assyrian king who had the name Ukin-
zir or one like it, we may consider it extremely probable,
nay even certain, that Por was the superior king referred
to. We have besides a satisfactory explanation of the
name Por or Ptlru , which is unintelligible as an Assyrio-
Babylonian word and has not hitherto been exhibited in