25.01.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

SECOND BOOK OF KINGS XV. 255<br />

XVI. 8. And Ahaz took <strong>the</strong> silver &nd gold . . . aiid sent<br />

to <strong>the</strong> king of Assyria (2igl.-PiL) a present. This is in<br />

complete agreement with <strong>the</strong> inscription II Rawl. 6 7, com-<br />

posed in <strong>the</strong> last, or ra<strong>the</strong>r last year but one *, of Tiglath-<br />

Pileser's reign. We <strong>the</strong>re read, in line 61 , that <strong>the</strong> king<br />

had received tribute from "Mitinti of Ashkelon, Joahaz<br />

(Ja-u-ha-zi) of Juda, Kosmalak of Edom" (see above<br />

p. 249). <strong>The</strong>re cannot be any doubt that <strong>the</strong> Biblical<br />

Ahaz of tTuda is meant by <strong>the</strong> Judaean Joahaz in this pas-<br />

sage. Beside Ahaz, Uzziah (Ti'^^V) is <strong>the</strong> only one who can<br />

be at all thought-of in this connexion, <strong>and</strong> it is with him<br />

Rawliiison identified <strong>the</strong> Joahaz of <strong>the</strong> <strong>inscriptions</strong>. But<br />

(1) In <strong>the</strong> name Uzziah <strong>the</strong> designation of <strong>the</strong> deity st<strong>and</strong>s<br />

second, in <strong>the</strong> name Jahuhazi it st<strong>and</strong>s first. (2) We should<br />

have expected to find Uzziah's name in <strong>the</strong> previous lists of<br />

kings ofi"ering tribute, e. g. where Menahem of Samaria is<br />

mentioned (Layard 50, 10) in a report upon <strong>the</strong> princes<br />

who brought tribute to <strong>the</strong> Great King in <strong>the</strong> 8'^ year of<br />

his reign. Here, however, Uzziah is not mentioned. Lastly,<br />

(3) Uzziah is called in <strong>the</strong> <strong>inscriptions</strong> Azarjah, as I have<br />

pointed out above. Consequently Jahuhazi must neces-<br />

sarily be ano<strong>the</strong>r person. If this, however, be so, <strong>the</strong>re 264<br />

remains only Ahaz, who was likewise <strong>the</strong> only king of Juda<br />

of whom <strong>the</strong> Bible informs us that he brought tribute to Tig-<br />

lath-Pileser. <strong>The</strong> difi'erence in form, viz. Joahaz in <strong>the</strong> inscrip-<br />

tions instead of Ahaz in <strong>the</strong> Bible, may <strong>the</strong>n be explained<br />

by <strong>the</strong> assumption, ei<strong>the</strong>r that <strong>the</strong> later Jews changed in <strong>the</strong><br />

* See ibid, line 5 : ultu ri's sarrutija adi XVII. palija i. e.<br />

"from <strong>the</strong> begimiiug of my rule to <strong>the</strong> 17"> year of my reign." <strong>The</strong><br />

entire period of <strong>the</strong> Great King's reign amounted to 18 years; see<br />

above note on XV. 29. pp. 233 foil.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!