The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian EmpireAuthor(s): Nadav NaʾamanReviewed work(s):Source: Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins (1953-), Bd. 120, H. 1 (2004), pp. 55-72Published by: Deutscher Verein zur Erforschung PalästinasStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27931733 .Accessed: 20/03/2012 19:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Deutscher Verein zur Erforschung Palästinas is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins (1953-).

http://www.jstor.org

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire

By Nadav Na'aman

Gaza (Gazze) is mentioned for the first time in the annals of Thutmose III, and it was the main Egyptian centre in Canaan in the Late Bronze Age. Later, in the early Iron Age, it became the capital of a kingdom under its own ruler (cf. the sor?nim in biblical historiog raphy, e.g. Josh 13,3). The history of Gaza in the first quarter of the first millennium b.c.e., before the arrival of the Assyrians, is practically unknown, but the city must have kept its

independence for hundreds of years, except possibly for short periods of subjection to neigh bouring powers (e.g., Aram Damascus under Hazael). Its political status compared to its

neighbours is indicated by the prophecy of Amos against the Philistine kingdoms (Amos 1,6-8), which denounces only Gaza, while the punishment falls on all four kingdoms (Gaza,

Ashdod [Isd?d], Ashkelon [(Asqal?n] and Ekron [Hirbet el-MuqannacIT?l Miqn?]). Thus, Gaza was probably the most important Philistine kingdom in the mid-eighth century b.c.e. When Tiglath-pileser III reached Philistia in 734 b.c.e. Gaza had been an established king dom for about 400 years, with its own regime, administrative and religious institutions (for surveys of the history of Gaza, see Stark 1852; Mayer 1907; Eph?al 1971; Katzenstein

1992; Ovadiah 1993; Ehrlich 1996; Humbert 2000). The available documents make it possible to sketch an outline of the history of Gaza from

the Assyrian conquest on, but the data are open to different interpretations. Some fundamental

problems are debated among scholars. For example: the status of the kingdom of Gaza under

Assyrian rule; the kingdom's borders; the scope of the Assyrian intervention in its internal

affairs; the relation between Gaza's rulers and the tribal leaders situated near its borders; and

finally, the changes in its political status between the Assyrian withdrawal from Palestine

(late 630s or early 620s b.c.e.) and the Persian conquest of Egypt (about 525 b.c.e.). To investigate these problems we have documentary and archaeological evidence. There

are diverse documents - including Assyrian, Babylonian and Greek texts, epigraphic inscrip tions from south Palestine, and the Bible. The archaeological evidence is known from exca vations and surveys (see recently yezerski 2003). The long delay in publishing many ex cavations and surveys conducted in southern Palestine and northern Sinai, the results of which are known only from preliminary reports and summary articles, is a serious obstacle to research. Another obstacle is that the Tell of ancient Gaza, located in the middle of the modern city, has been occupied uninterruptedly for thousands years and is covered by modern

buildings (see Phythian-adams 1923). It is therefore practically impossible to excavate the site of ancient Gaza.

In what follows I will try to clarify some of the above-mentioned problems, opening the discussion with Tiglath-pileser's 734 campaign to Philistia, which started a new era in the

history of Gaza after hundreds years of relative stability.

zdpv 120 (2004) 1

56 Nadav Na'aman

Gaza in the Inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III

According to the Eponym Chronicle, the first Assyrian campaign to the coast of Philistia took

place in the year 734 b.c.e. The campaign aimed to block the possible approach of an

Egyptian task force to Philistia, and took the anti-Assyrian coalition headed by Rezin of Damascus by surprise ( a a 1991, 92-93). The annals describing the events of that year have not yet been found, but three summary inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III (Summ. 4, 8 and 9) relate in similar phrases the campaign conducted against Gaza in that year (see the

synoptic table in Tadmor 1994, 222-225). The Gaza episode as related in Summ. 4 may be restored as follows (Spieckermann

1982, 325-330; Tadmor 1994, 138-141 lines 8-15; a5a a 1999a, 401-402; Frahm

1997/98, 403 ad p. 188-189):

"Hanunu of Gaza, [who] fle[d before] my weapons and escaped [to] Egypt -

Gaza, [his royal city, i

conquered. His people], his goods and [his] gods [i despoiled. An imag]e [of the great] gods, my

[lords], and my royal image [i fashioned of gold and set up] in the palace [of Gaza]. i counted (them) among the gods of their land, and established [th]eir [regular offerings?]. As for [him (/. e., Hanunu), the fear of my majesty] overwhelmed him and like a bird he flew [from Egypt...]. i returned him to

his position, [The city of Gaza i turned] into [an Assyrian] emp[orium. Gold], silver, multi-coloured

garments, linen garments, large [horses, ... i re]ceived."

According to the three summary inscriptions, Hanunu of Gaza fled to Egypt and the Assyrian king entered the city, erected his stele in the palace, carried its booty to Assyria and imposed payment of an annual tribute. Hanunu, who fled to Egypt, returned and submitted to Tiglath pileser. He was restored to the throne and became an Assyrian vassal. An Assyrian emporium was established at Gaza in order to control the maritime commerce with Egypt and the Levant

(Tadmor 1994, 222-225; Ehrlich 1996, 94-98, with earlier literature; a a 2001, 260-261).

The authors of Summ. 8-9 combined the taking of the booty and the payment of tribute in one passage, whereas the author of Summ. 4 kept them separate. In the first part of the

episode he mentioned the booty (people, valuable goods and statues of gods), and in the second part he listed the tribute. The "gods" (Hani) are probably the ancestral gods of Ha nunu, rather than Gaza's cult statues ( a'a a 1999a, 401-404; for a different interpreta tion, see uehlinger 2002, 109-115). The deportation probably included members of the

royal family (tadmor 1994, 176 line 15) and statues of the royal house of Gaza, all of which were transferred to Assyria in order to secure the loyalty of Gaza's king. Retaining the statues of royal houses was an effective step that could secure loyalty. Whether the despoiled statues were eventually returned remains unknown1.

The removal of the gods from Gaza is juxtaposed in Summ. 4 with the transfer to Gaza of a golden image (probably a golden plaque in the form of a stele) of the Assyrian king and the

symbols of the Assyrian gods2. This image was established in the palace of Gaza, where a

1 Tiglath-pileser's policy towards Gaza may be compared to that of Sennacherib towards Ashkelon. After the conquest of the city in 701 b.c.e., Sennacherib deported the rebellious king (Sidqa), some members of his family, and "the gods of his (/'. e., $idqa) father's house" (Oppenheim 1969, 287b). 2 Formally, the texts of Summ. 4,10 and 8,17 refer to two images and must be translated in the plural. However, the author was probably describing a golden plaque in the form of a stele, on which were

depicted the king and the symbols of the great gods of Assyria, similar in form to the statues erected

by the Assyrian kings. The plural form was necessary in order to juxtapose the deported statues with the new golden image set in the palace (see Tadmor 1994, 177 note 16; Uehlinger 1997, 310).

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 57

chapel was probably built for it and regular offerings made. The statue must have been a reminder to the king of Gaza who held the real power. In the context of the inscriptions, the

Assyrian image(s) set up in the palace took the place of the statues deported from Gaza to

Assyria.

Tiglath-pileser's most detailed summary inscription (Summ. 8) mentions a campaign to the Brook of Egypt (Nahal Musur), and the setting up of a royal image immediately after the

conquest of Gaza (tadmor 1994, 178 line 18). The toponym umna-hal mu-sur is followed in the text by the apposition 'river' (n?[ru]). Thus, it is evident that the text refers to a river (the Brook of Egypt), not to a place called "the city of the Brook of Egypt", as some scholars

suggested (e.g., Alt 1945, 129-131; 1953, 157; Ephcal 1982, 30.37.93.104; Tadmor 1994, 178 note 18). The river's name, the Brook of Egypt, indicates that from the northern view

point it was considered as the border of Palestine, and that the desert area on its southwest and west was considered an Egyptian territory (see Na'aman 1986, 237-251).

On the basis of Tiglath-pileser's description of the Gaza episode, in particular the setting of a royal image in the palace and the establishment of an Assyrian emporium, cogan (1993, 407) suggested that Gaza had "a political status beyond regular vassaldom but not yet full

incorporation as a province". However, there is no indication of Gaza's exceptional political or administrative status in documents written in the time of later Assyrian rulers. I have

recently suggested that Assyrian intervention in the territories of vassal kingdoms was the norm rather than the exception. The establishment of an Assyrian emporium at Gaza has

parallels in building projects carried out by Assyrian rulers in other vassal kingdoms in the Levant (i.e., Ashdod, Tyre, Sidon, Arvad, Edom, and possibly Byblos, Judah and Moab) (Finkelstein/Singer-Avitz 2001; a'a a 2001). Moreover, the practice of setting As

syrian royal images with the symbols of the gods of Assyria in palaces and temples of vassal

kings is well documented in the Assyrian royal inscriptions (Yamada 2000, 295-297; see Spieckermann 1982, 322-344). Yamada (2000, 296-270) suggested that the image with symbols of the gods served for the swearing of the oath and as a witness to honoring the oath

imposed on the ruler and the local elite. cole and machinist (1998, XIV-XV.XXIII notes 26-30) further noted that royal divine images functioned as an object of oath. We may conclude that Gaza's treatment was not uncommon, and that there is no evidence of the

kingdom's exceptional status among the Assyrian vassals in the Levant.

Gaza in the Inscriptions of Sargon II

After his victory over Hamath and its allies (720 b.c.e.), Sargon led his troops towards Philistia (for references, see Fuchs 1994, 437 sub voce H?zutu; Oppenheim 1969, 285). Unlike Tiglath-pileser's campaign of 734 b.c.e., on this occasion Egyptian troops crossed the Sinai Peninsula and came to the aid of Hanunu, king of Gaza. The Assyrian army won the battle near Raphia (Refah), the Egyptian task force retreated to Egypt, and Hanunu was taken into captivity and deported to Assyria. Sargon destroyed the city of Raphia, seized "9033

people together with their many possessions" and deported them to Assyria (fuchs 1994, 90 lines 54-57; Oppenheim 1969, 285).

Gaza's new king is not named in Sargon's inscriptions. Since Silli-Bel, the king of Gaza

who is mentioned for the first time in Sennacherib's 701 b.c.e. campaign, was still in power in 667 (Streck 1916, 140-142 line 28), it was probably his unnamed predecessor who

zdpv 120 (2004) 1

58 Nadav Na5aman

succeeded Hanunu on the throne of Gaza. The contributions paid by Gaza and related matters are mentioned three times in the Assyrian documents of the time of Sargon II:

1. A letter of the time of Sargon (ND 2765 lines 33-46) runs as follows (Postgate 1974, 117-118; Deller 1985, 329-330; Weippert 1987, 100 note 36, with earlier literature;

Parp?la 1987 no. 110; Saggs 2001, 219-221):

"I have received 45 horses of the [lan]d?. The emissaries of Egypt, Gaza, Judah, Moab and Ban Ammon entered Calah on the twelfth, with their tribute in their hands. 24 horses of the (emissary) of Gaza in his hand. The (emissaries of) Edom, Ashdod and Ekron [went o]ut? [of i]t? ([TA? MUR]UB4 [??-su? ]-u-ni)."

The governor of Calah reports to the king first that the emissaries of some western

kingdoms, including Egypt, had arrived in Calah and brought horses as gifts to the As

syrian court. Secondly, he informs the king that the Gaza envoy had brought an extra

delivery of 24 horses, either as a special gift, or his deficit from the previous year3. Thirdly, he mentions that the envoys of Edom, Ashdod and Ekron, who must have arrived in Calah earlier, possibly with a gift of horses, had left the city. The letter was sent to

Marduk-remani, the provincial governor of Calah. Since another governor was in office in

712, it was written before this date (Deller 1985, 330; 1987, 219). 2. According to an Assyrian administrative document (ND 2672), the ruler of Gaza dis

patched 17 horses (postgate 1974, 388-389 lines 24-35). The horses must have been of the breed known in the Assyrian documents as mat K?sayu, i. e., 'Nubian' (Postgate 1974, 11). They were delivered to Addu-hati, governor of Subat-Hamath in the time of

Sargon II (postgate 1974, 382 note 2)4. 3. A tablet from Fort Shalmaneser (ND 10078) records the distribution of wine (dalley/

Postgate 1984 no. 135; Deller 1985, 328-330; Weippert 1987, 100 note 36). Among the recipients are delegates from Palestinian kingdoms, who received the wine on two

occasions. The envoys of Ashdod, Edom, Gaza and Judah received wine at an "early time" (p?niutu); and the envoys of Ashdod (KUR Sa-du-d[u-a-a])5, Judah, Edom, Ekron and Ban-Ammon (and possibly others; the tablet breaks at this place), received it on a

"later" occasion (urk?utu). The tablet should be dated to the time of Sargon II (deller 1985, 328-329), and it is possible that these delegations are referred to in tablet ND

2765. 4. In a letter discovered at Nineveh (ABL 568), Sennacherib, the crown prince, informs his

father, Sargon II, of the contributions received from two cities, and their distribution

among dignitaries of the royal Assyrian court (Martin 1936, 40-49; postgate 1974, 111.283-284; parpola 1987, 35-36 no. 34). A closely related list of contributions received from Ashkelon appears in ND 2672 (see above). In light of the close similarity of the dispatches mentioned in ND 2672 and ABL 568, it is evident that the latter contri butions were sent by Philistine cities, one of which must have been Ashkelon. As de

3 For the king of Ashkelon paying to Assyria the deficit of the former year, see postgate 1974, 387 line 3.

4 For references to his correspondence, see Parp?la 1987, 233 sub voce Adda-hati. For the province of Subat-Hamath, see Na'aman 1999b, 421-429.

5 The name of Ashdod is written in two different forms in the Assyrian texts, i. e., Asdudu and Sadudu.

See Weippert 1987, 100 note 36; Ephcal 1999, 5-6.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 59

liveries from Ashkelon and Gaza are listed in ND 2672, it may be speculated that the second delivery was sent from Gaza 6.

According to the Nineveh Prism of Sargon, in 711 b.c.e. the Ashdodites tried in vain to induce some Assyrian vassals (the kings of Philistia, Judah, Edom and Moab) to rebel against

Assyria (Fuchs 1998, 46 lines 25-28; Oppenheim 1969, 287). The designation "kings of Philistia" {sarr?ni mat Piliste) refers to the three kingdoms of Gaza, Ashkelon and Ekron, described in the prism as "payers of tribute and gifts to Ashur, my lord", /. e.y loyal Assyrian vassals.

Gaza under the Late Assyrian and Babylonian Empires

The city of Gaza is not mentioned in the description of Sennacherib's campaign to Palestine, either in the list of tribute payers near Sidon, or in the description of the fighting (frahm 1997, 53-55 lines 32-60; 58-59; Oppenheim 1969, 287-288). However, Silli-Bel, king of

Gaza, is mentioned among the Philistine rulers to whom Sennacherib assigned Judahite ter ritories at the close of the campaign (Luckenbill 1924, 33 line 34; see 70 line 30; Oppen heim 1969, 288). Taking into account the strategic position of Gaza on the way to Egypt, and the fact that an Egyptian task force crossed Philistia on its way to Eltekeh, we may assume that Gaza was forced to participate in the anti-Assyrian alliance, and that Egyptian troops were stationed in the city7. When the Egyptian task force retreated, the king of Gaza surren

dered to Assyria, and like other Philistine rulers (/. e., Padi of Ekron and Sharru-lu-dari of

Ashkelon), whose kingdoms had been forced to take part in the anti-Assyrian coalition, was

treated favourably and received some territories detached from the kingdom of Judah. In 695

b.c.e., the king of Gaza dispatched to Nineveh a tribute of 1 talent of silver (Fales/Post gate 1995, 43 no. 54).

Silli-Bel is listed in the inscriptions of Esarhaddon among the Palestinian and Cypriot Assyrian vassals who were mobilized for work in the construction of Nineveh (borger 1956, 60 line 57; Oppenheim 1969, 291). He is listed once again in an inscription of Ashurbanipal among the Assyrian vassals who participated in his campaign to Egypt in 667 b.c.e. (Streck 1916, 140-142 line 28; Oppenheim 1969, 294).

Nebuchadrezzar captured Gaza in the course of the conquest of Syria-Palestine in 604 b.c.e. In 601/600 he crossed northern Sinai but was defeated at Magdolos (Herodotus II 159). In a counter-attack Necho II conquered Gaza (Jer 47,1), but could not hold it and retreated to

his land (Freedy/Redford 1970, 475 note 57; Lipinski 1972; Lipschits 1998, 468-469). Gaza and Ashdod are mentioned in the list of Philistine and Phoenician kings and their

kingdoms that appears in a broken prism written in Nebuchadrezzar IPs seventh year (598

b.c.e.) (Unger 1931, 286 lines 23-29; Oppenheim 1969, 287-288; Na3aman 2000, 40-41, with earlier literature in note 25), whereas Ashkelon and Ekron had been destroyed before

6 The tablet was collated by parpola, who demonstrated that the formerly suggested reading for Rev.

1 ([...] ma-da-t? mA-zu-r[i...]) is erroneous (see parpola 1987, 255). The assumption that the

tribute was sent by Azuri, king of Ashdod, must be abandoned. Rev. 1 may tentatively be restored

[PAP an-ni]- r? ma-da-t?-^mA-ta\...]; "[All thi]s (is) the tribute of Ata[.. .]". Was Ata[.. .] the ruler

of Gaza in the time of Sargon II? 7 Kitchen (1983, 249-251) suggested that Gaza then served as the Egyptian headquarter and as a

base for operations.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

60 Nadav Na'aman

that year and are missing from the list. This is the latest textual evidence of Gaza as kingdom under its own ruler. Later, at an unknown date, it was annexed by the Babylonians, and under

the Persian Empire was included in the Arabian territory of northern Sinai (see below).

The Boundary System of Gaza in the Late Eighth - Seventh Centuries b.c.e.

In Iron Age II three Philistine city-states were located along the southern coast of Palestine

(fig. 1): Ashdod, Ashkelon and Gaza. The boundaries that separated them are clear: W?d? Ibt?h (Nahal Evtah) between Ashdod and Ashkelon, and W?d? el-Hes? (Nahal Siqm?) be tween Ashkelon and Gaza. The natural northern boundary of the kingdom of Ashdod is Nahr R?bin (Nahal S?r?q), and that of the kingdom of Gaza on the south is W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bds?r). Assuming for the moment that these were the boundaries of the three neighbouring kingdoms, the coast of Ashdod would have extended over about 23 km8, that of Ashkelon over about 18 km and that of Gaza over about 20 km.

On the eastern side, the three Iron II kingdoms must have reached the western borders of the kingdom of Gath. Following Hazael's conquest of Gath in the late ninth century b.c.e. (2 Kgs 12,18), Ashdod expanded eastward and annexed the city of Gath. Ashkelon and Gaza also took advantage of Gath's decline and expanded eastward, up to the western border of the

kingdom of Judah. The kingdom of Gaza possibly reached the line of Tell en-Nag?le - Tell

es-SerVa. On the assumption that the kingdom of Gaza's southern border reached W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bas?r), its southeastern border must have passed W?d? es-SerVa (Nahal Ggr?r), up to its juncture with W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bos?r).

Against this 'minimalist' approach to the border system of Gaza, which demarcates its southeastern and southern borders along W?d? es-SerVa (Nahal Gor?r) and W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bas?r), Oren (1993a) has suggested a maximal delineation of Gaza's borders. His point of departure is the distribution of Assyrian centres in the western Negev and northern Sinai. Among these centres are Tell el-Hes?, Tell es-SerVa, Tell Abu Hur?ra, Tell Gemme, Tell

Abu Sal?ma and er-Ruq?s, taking it for granted that all these centres were built within the confines of a single kingdom, that of Gaza, and thus mark its borders. Moreover, oren assumed that Gaza effectively controlled large territories and villages located in the sparsely inhabited regions of the western Negev and northern Sinai9. By identifying the Brook of Egypt (Assyrian Nahal Musur) as W?d? el-Aris, he delineated the borders of Gaza between W?d? el-'Ar?s on the southwest, Tell el-F?r"a (south) on the southeast and Tell el-Hes? on the northeast.

8 For the assumption that Ashdod's northern border in the Iron Age passed along Nahr R?b?n (Nahat ??r?q), see Na'aman 1998. In the Late Bronze Age Joppa was an Egyptian centre, and following the Egyptian withdrawal from Canaan in about the mid-twelfth century B.c.E. it became the port of the newly-established kingdom of Ekron (for a different interpretation, see FiNKELSTElN 1996, 228-231). After Ekron's destruction in about the mid-tenth century B.C.E. the area of Joppa passed either to Ashdod or to Ashkelon. In the late eighth century the city and its hinterland were in Ashkelon's hands, and in 701 B.C.E. Sennacherib transferred the area of Joppa to Padi, king of Ekron. It is thus evident that Joppa, with its hinterland, changed hands many times and was never an independent city. This explains its handing over by the Persian king in about the mid-fifth century to Eshmunazer, king of Sidon (donner/R?LLIG 1966-69 no. 14 line 18). 9 For a similar delineation of the territory of Iron I Gaza, see FiNKELSTElN 1996, 228-231.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 61

Fig. 1. Southern Palestine and Northern Sinai in the Seventh Century B.c.E.

(1) Nahr R?bin (Nahal S?r?q); (2) W?d? Ibt?h (Nahal Evtah); (3) W?d? el-Hes? (Nahal Siqm?); (4) W?d? ?azze (Nahal Bss r);

(5) W?d?es-SerVa (Nahal Ggr?r); (6) W?d? eWAr?L

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

62 Nadav Na5aman

The assumption that the distribution of the Assyrian centres located in southern Palestine and northern Sinai is congruent with the boundaries of the kingdom of Gaza is not supported by the evidence. First, the Assyrian built their centres in the territories of almost all vassal

kingdoms in the Levant (see recently: Finkelstein/singer-AviTZ 2001; na'aman 2001, with earlier literature), so the attribution of all the above-mentioned Assyrian centres to the

territory of Gaza is arbitrary. Second, the reality of borders that pass through sparsely inhab ited areas, where there were few permanent settlements, must be examined in light of the textual evidence. After all, local leaders might control territories and settlements located in

peripheral areas and their tribal territories were not controlled by neighbouring kingdoms. Oren produced no evidence that the rulers of Gaza effectively controlled the sparsely inhab ited areas of northern Sinai and the southwestern Negev, or that those areas were considered

part of its territories.

Contrary to Oren's suggestion, Assyrian royal inscriptions indicate that the local tribal leaders of northern Sinai and the western Negev cooperated with the Assyrians, who assigned them to supervise their tribal territories (see alt 1945, 131-135; 1953, 160-162; tadmor 1966, 89-92; Na5aman 1979, 69-72.84; Ephcal 1982, 93-94.99-100). For example, Tig lath-pileser appointed IdibPilu as a "gatekeeper facing Egypt" (tadmor 1994, 168 line 6).

He also appointed Siruatti the Me'unite to the office of q?pu over the area 'below Egypt' (Na'aman 1997). Sargon placed the s?h (lunas?ku) of the city of Laban (whose name is

unfortunately broken) in charge of the deportees settled near the Brook of Egypt (Nahal Musur) (Na3aman 1979, 71 and note 6; fuchs 1998, 57). The toponym rllbn is mentioned after Raphia in Shishak's topographical list, and Alt (1945, 133-134) suggested identifying it with the Laban mentioned in Sargon's inscription. Laban was probably a tribal centre located in the Raphia area, where Sargon settled deportees to replace those that he deported in his 720 b.c.e. campaign (Alt 1945, 130-134; Na5aman 1979, 81-82).

Esarhaddon in his second year (679 b.c.e.) conducted a campaign against Arza, a city located in the border zone of the Brook of Egypt {Nahal Musur), plundered the city and

deported Asuhili, its king, and its inhabitants (for references, see borger 1956, 130 sub voce Arza; Oppenheim 1969, 290.292). Asuhili was probably a local s?h, leader of the pastoral groups who lived in the area of Nahal Musur, and his status in this area was similar to that of the s?h of Laban in the time of Sargon II ( a5a a 2001, 264-265). IdibPilu, Siruatti, the s?h of Laban and Asuhili were tribal leaders who lived in the area near the border of Egypt, and their tribal territories were not included in the kingdom of Gaza's territory. It is thus clear that Gaza's southern and eastern borders passed north and west of their territories.

Preparing to cross the Sinai desert and conquer Egypt (671 b.c.e.), Esarhaddon arrived in

Raphia and there made the final preparations for crossing the desert (borger 1956, 112 lines 16-18). He described it thus: "Camels (ansegammali) of all the kings of the Arabs I gfathered and goatskins I l]oaded on them" (borger 1956, 112 rev. lines 1-2). A parallel fragmented passage mentions goat- and waterskins (borger 1957/58, 118 ?77 line 10)10. The Arabs controlled both the road and other means of transportation, making it necessary to cooperate with them (Ephcal 1982, 137-142). The king of Gaza, who, according to Oren's assump

tion, effectively governed the area of Raphia, played no part in the preparations to the cam

paign and evidently had no power in this area.

10 For the amount of water necessary for the army to cross the Sinai desert, see the estimation of Cruz-Uribe 2003, 22-23.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 63

Sargon ITs inscriptions state that he "opened the sealed h[arb]our (k[?r]u) of Egypt, mingled Assyrians and Egyptians together and made them trade with each other" (Gadd 1954, 179 lines 46-49; fuchs 1994, 88 lines 17-18). Oren (1993b; Oren et al. 1986) identified the "sealed harbour" as the well-planned and heavily fortified site of er-Ruq?s. The site is located along the coast, about 7.5 km south of W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bos?r), and covers an area of about 20-25 acres. Its geometric configuration, internal plan, massive defense system and mud brick platforms

- all these elements indicate that it was built by the Assyrians and served as their main port on the coast south of Gaza. Oren's suggested identification of

er-Ruq?s with the "sealed harbour" that Sargon built is fully vindicated by his excavations at the site.

Sargon's statement, that he opened "the sealed harbour of Egypt", is remarkable. It indicates that the Assyrians considered the area of er-Ruq?s to be Egyptian territory, and contradicts the assumption that W?d? e l-Aris, located about 60 km southwest of it, marked the border of Egypt.

Reading the Assyrian royal inscriptions, it becomes clear that before the conquest of

Egypt, the city of Raphia, located 21 km south of the estuary of W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bds?r), far northeast (47km) from W?d? el-"Aris, was the southernmost place they reached in their

campaigns. This is indicated by two references:

(1) In 720 b.c.e. Sargon fought an Egyptian task force led by the army commander Re5e

(Egyptian Raia or RaHa), and after his victory destroyed the city of Raphia and deported its

people (see above). At er-Ruq?s, about the midway between Raphia and W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bds?r), he built the new port to serve as a major harbour for the commerce with Egypt, thereby competing with Gaza for the profits from the Egyptian trade. The new harbour also secured the naval and continental transportation between Gaza and Raphia.

(2) In his campaign to conquer Egypt (671 b.c.e.) Esarhaddon camped at Aphek (Tell Ras el- ), near the southwestern border of the province of Samaria, and proceeded southward "as far as (adi) the town of Raphia, to the border zone (ana ite) of the Brook of Egypt". The location of Raphia is defined by reference to the region of the Brook of Egypt (/. e., ana ite

nahal m?t musur is an adjunct sentence to adi Rapihi), just as the location of the city of

Aphek is defined by reference to the province of Samaria (Apqu sa p?ti m?t Same<ri>na)

(Borger 1956, 112 line 16)n. In Raphia Esarhaddon loaded on camels as much water as

they could carry for crossing the desert, and continued on its way to Egypt. It is evident that

Raphia appears as the last settled station on the way to Egypt. The two references indicate that the area between W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bos?r) and Raphia was considered a kind of buffer zone

separating the kingdom of Gaza from the Egyptian territory. Further support for this conclusion may be drawn from the location of the Brook of Egypt

(Nahal Musur). Two conflicting identifications of its place were proposed: W?d? Gazze

(Nahal Bos?r) and W?d? el-Ans. Enclosed are the transcription and translation of the five key references that appear in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III (no. 1), Sargon II (no. 2) and

Esarhaddon (nos. 3-5):

11 Rainey's translations of ana ite ("as far as, towards") and sa ite ("which is beside") are not sup

ported by textual evidence (Rainey 1982, 131; 2001, 60).

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

64 Nadav Na^aman

1. ina uruNahal Musur rn?run [sa . . .] (Tadmor 1994, 178 line 18).

"[I erected] my royal stele at the Brook of Egypt, a ri[ver that . ..]".

2. [. ..] sa patti uruNahal M[usri . . .] (fuchs 1998, 28 line 5).

".. . (situated) at the border zone of the Brook of Eg[ypt . ..]".

3. umArza sa ite Nahal m?t Musri (borger 1956, 33 line 16). "Arza (situated) at the border zone of the Brook of Egypt".

4. uruArza sa p?ti Nahal m?t Musri (borger 1956, 50 line 39; Heidel 1956, 14 line 57). "Arza (situated) at the border zone of the Brook of Egypt".

5. adi Rapihi ana ite Nahal m?t Musur (borger 1956, 112 line 17). "As far as the town of Raphia, to the border zone of the Brook of Egypt".

I rendered the three nouns itu, pattu and p?tu by "border zone", since these terms, like the

cognate Hebrew term gsb?l, refer to an area rather than to a borderline. It is evident that

Raphia and Arza were located near the Brook of Egypt. Mazar (1952) suggested identifying Arza as Tell Gemme, on W?dT Gazze (Nahal Bos?r),

and his suggestion was accepted by some scholars ( a a 1979, 72-73, with earlier

literature; Van Beek 1993, 672; Wapnish 1996, 287-288)l2. I recently discussed the ar

chaeological evidence of Tell Gemme, in particular the rib vaulting over the doorways be tween the rooms and the ostraca. These indicate that at least some of the inhabitants who lived on the site had come from the Zagros mountains (Na3aman/Zadok 1988; Na'aman 2001, 263-266). It fits Sargon's statement that he settled deportees, who probably came from the

newly-established Assyrian provinces in the east, in the border zone of the Brook of Egypt (fuchs 1998, 28.57).

We may conclude that until the Assyrian conquest of Egypt (671 b.c.e.) the area between W?dT Gazze (Nahal Bas?r; the Brook of Egypt) and Raphia was considered the frontier of the

Assyrian empire, and that northern Sinai was considered to be Egyptian territory. Gaza's southeastern and southwestern borders probably reached the line of W?d? es-SerVa (Nahal Gdr?r) and W?dT Gazze (Nahal Bss?r), the areas beyond these wadis being controlled by the

Arabs, who cooperated with the Assyrians, and due to the latter's dependence on their trans

portation, gradually gained greater power and economic strength (briant 1982, 153-176).

The Shifting of the Border in the Sixth - Fifth Centuries b.c.e.

Esarhaddon's 671 b.c.e. campaign, in which he crossed northern Sinai and conquered Lower

Egypt, marked a shift in the history of northern Sinai. His son, Ashurbanipal, conducted several campaigns to Egypt and succeeded in expanding the Assyrian domination to Upper Egypt. This was the first time since the end of the Late Bronze Age that an empire effectively controlled the road that crossed northern Sinai, although for only a short time.

Assyria no doubt made efforts to strengthen its grip over the main routes of northern Sinai, and must have built at least some centres in strategic locations along the road. How

12 For the identification of the Brook of Egypt as W?d? el-(Ans, see Rainey 1982, 131-132; EPHcal

1982, 103-105; Ahituv 1984, 203 note 631; Oren 1993a, 102-103; Stern 2001, 114; cf. Hooker 1993.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 65

ever, it is archaeologically impossible to separate the building projects initiated by the As syrians in northern Sinai after the conquest of Egypt from the earlier projects, in particular since the surveys of northern Sinai did not address this problem, but treated the late eighth

-

seventh century period as a chronological unit (see oren 1993a; 1993c, 1391-1393; Stern 2001, 114-115412-416; yezerski 2003). Tell Abu SalTma (S?h Zuw?yid) is a case in point. The site is located about 15 km west of Raphia (Refah), and a fortress with an Assyrian temple was discovered in the excavations13. However, we cannot decide whether it was built before

or after Esarhaddon's campaign to Egypt. The scope of the Assyrian building operations in northern Sinai after the conquest of Egypt cannot be established.

The process of settlement in northern Sinai grew rapidly after the Assyrian conquest of southern Palestine in the late eighth century and the new economic opportunities that emerged as a result of the pax Assyriaca. We may assume that the Assyrian conquest of Egypt further accelerated this process. After the Assyrian retreat from Egypt, the Egyptians took its terri tories in Palestine and probably pursued a similar policy in their relations with the vassals and

nomads, so that prosperity and economic growth continued uninterrupted. Under the Neo-Babylonian empire the kingdom of Gaza was still considered the south

ernmost region in Asia. This is indicated by one of Nabonidus' royal inscriptions. The Bab

ylonian king summoned his troops from all over his realm, defining its southwestern border as "the land of Gaza on the border of Egypt (p?t m?t Misir)" (langdon 1912, 220 lines

39-40). In another inscription commemorating his mother, Adad-Guppi\ Nabonidus men tions Egypt (Misir) as marking his southwestern border (p?tu) (Gadd 1958, 48 line 42; 62 line 19). It is therefore clear that, as in the time of the Assyrian empire, Gaza's southern border was considered in the sixth century to be the southernmost frontier of the Neo

Babylonian empire (see Vanderhooft 1999, 39 note 142). 1 Kgs 4,21-24 [MT 5,1-4]: "Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the River to the

land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. [. ..] For he had dominion over all the

region west the River from Tiphsah to Gaza". According to this late (post deuteronomistic) text, Solomon's kingdom extended from the Euphrates to Gaza, which, just like the south

western border of Nabonidus' kingdom, marks the border of Egypt. Thus Solomon was

depicted as the ruler of an enormous kingdom, equal in extent to the Assyrian and Babylonian

territory of eher nari ("Beyond the River"). A new concept of the place of Sinai in the boundary system emerged after Cambyses'

conquest of Egypt in about 525 b.c.e. (for the campaign, see recently Cruz-Uribe 2003, with

earlier literature). This is reflected in the history of Herodotus, who wrote his work after the

organization of the Persian province system by Darius I (521-486). Herodotus (III 5) de

scribes the extent of the satrapy of "Beyond the River" (eher n?riTAbar-nahar?) as follows

(the translation follows godley 1938):

13 For the excavations on the site, see reich 1984, with earlier literature. In the Hellenistic period Tell

Ab? Sallma was probably called Bytyl, and in the Byzantine period was called Bitulion (alt 1926;

abel 1939, 227-228.544-548; 1940, 224-227; Tsafrir/di Segni/Green 1994, 91, with earlier

literature). Albright (1924, 154-155) suggested identifying Byzantine Betulion with Biblical Beth

el (1 Sam 30,27) and Bethul/Bethuel (Josh 19,4; 1 Chr 4,30). Although this suggested identification

is untenable (Alt 1935, 309-310), the ancient site may well have been called Bethel, possibly after

the temple erected there by the Assyrians.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

66 Nadav Na'aman

"Now the only manifest way of entry into Egypt is this. The road runs from Phoenice as far as the

borders of the city of Kadytis, which belongs to the Syrians of Palestine, as it is called. From Kadytis

(which, as I judge, is a city not much smaller than Sardis) to the city of Ienysus the seaports belong to

the Arabs; then they are Syrian again from Ienysus as far as the Serbonian marsh, beside which the

Casian promontory stretches seawards; from this Serbonian marsh [. . .] the country is Egypt. Now

between Ienysus and the Casian mountain and the Serbonian marsh there lies a wide territory for as

much as three days' journey, wondrous waterless".

On the basis of a philological analysis, Leuze (1935, 105 -108) demonstrated that the borders of Philistia ("from Phoenice as far as the borders of the city of Kadytis") exclude the men

tioned toponyms; that the seaports of the Arabs includes Gaza/Kadytis 14 and Ienysus; and

that the territory of the Syrians ("from Ienysus as far as the Serbonian marsh") excludes the mentioned toponyms. He thus concluded that Gaza was at that time in the hands of the Arabs, and his conclusion was accepted by other scholars (e.g., MlTTMANN 1983, 132.140; lemaire

1990, 45-46.74; Well 1991, 51-52; Rainey 2001, 59-60),5. Herodotus (II 158; III 5) wrote that the borderline between the fifth satrapy of the Persian

empire ("beyond the River") and the sixth (Egypt) ran close to Mount Casius. The shifting of the border and the inclusion of northern Sinai in the fifth satrapy

- contrary to the concept of

the border under the Assyrian and Babylonian empires - were the result of Cambyses' con

quest of Egypt and its annexation to the empire's province system. The conquest of Egypt radically changed the 'northern' concept of Sinai as an Egyptian territory whose border was located on the Brook of Egypt (Nahal Musur). Northern Sinai was no longer viewed as a kind of 'no-man's land', a territory that was attributed both in Egypt and in Palestine to the

kingdom located on its other end (Na'aman 1986, 237-251). In the fifth century b.c.e. northern Sinai was inhabited and considered an integral part of the province to the north of it.

The territory controlled by the Arabs was excluded from that of the fifth satrapy (see Abel 1939, 543). This is indicated by the passage cited above (Herodotus III 5), and by Herodotus III 91:

"The fifth province was the country (except the part belonging to the Arabs, which paid no tribute) between Posideion, a city founded on the Cilician and Syrian border by Amphilochus son of Am phiaraus, and Egypt; this paid three hundred and fifty talents; in this province was all Phoenice, and the part of Syria called Palestine, and Cyprus".

As for Gaza, the city developed under the Persian kings and became the most important city in Palestine. Herodotus (III 5) described it as a town "not much smaller than Sardis". Its rise and prosperity resulted from Ashkelon's decline after its destruction in 604 b.c.e., and from its prominent place in the south Arabian trade and the commerce with Egypt under the Babylonian and Persian empires. Herodotus II 159 wrote that "Necho [. . .] met and defeated the Syrians at Magdolus, taking the great Syrian city of Kadytis after the battle". Gaza is explicitly called a "great Syrian city"

- /. e., its inhabitants are those Herodotus (III 5; VII 89) calls "Syrians of Palestine". Assuming that Herodotus' description of Gaza reflects the reality of his time, it suggests that the majority of the city's inhabitants were autochthonous 'Philis tines', although political and economic control was in the hands of the Arabs (see Leuze

1935, 107).

14 For the name Kadytis (which is interpreted as a nisbe-form, "that of Gaza, Gazaean"), see QuAE gebeur 1995.

15 For a different opinion, see Katzenstein 1989, 71; Mildenberg 1990, 140-141.145-146.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 67

We may conclude that, according to Herodotus, the fifth satrapy extended between the town of Posideion, on the southern border of Cilicia, in the north and Mount Casius in the south. The Arabian territory between Gaza's northern border and Ienysus in the south (usually located near el-cAnS; see already Stark 1852, 223-224)16 did not belong to the satrapy,7.

According to Pseudo-Scylax ? 104, the borders of Syria and Phoenicia extended from the

Thapsakos River (the Orontes River) in the north, to Ashkelon in the south (leuze 1935, 204-229, with earlier literature; Galling 1938; Elayi 1982). The description concludes with the words: "This is the border of Coele-Syria. The sailing along the coast from the

estuary of Thapsakos to the city of Ashkelon amounts to 1700 stadia". The delineation of Pseudo-Scylax, written in about the mid-fourth century b.c.e., differs

from that of Herodotus in that it concentrates on the Phoenician cities and their settlements

along the coast and ignores the Syrian cities. Assuming that Galling's amendment to the first lines of the text is valid (Galling 1938, 70-71), the description opens with Arados

(Arwad) and leaves a territorial gap between the Orontes and Arados. The text ends with Ashkelon and omits the area between Gaza and Mount Casius. It is thus evident that the

Coele-Syria referred to in Pseudo-Scylax differs from Herodotus' satrapy of "Beyond the River".

Conclusions

Summing up the discussion, it is clear that throughout the Iron Age II, Gaza's southern border was located near the border zone of W?d? Gazze (Nahal Bas?r; the Brook of Egypt). That its rulers sometimes held the area of Raphia is a possibility, but cannot be established with

certainty. The area of northern Sinai was controlled by Arabian tribal leaders, each having its

tribal centre and territory. Their settlements may be described as a kind of urban centres in a

nomadic environment (compare rowton 1973; 1976). Following the conquest of Syria Palestine, the Assyrians appointed some tribal leaders as their representatives in these periph eral areas. The Arabs gained political and economic power from the cooperation with the

empires, and from the accelerating settlement process in the peripheral areas in the course of the 7th - 5th centuries b.c.e., and gradually consolidated their hold in these areas. This is evident from Herodotus' description of the Arabian control of the emporia of northern Sinai,

including the major city of Gaza, in the fifth century b.c.e. Under the Persian empire the Arabs alone had a king and semi-independent status, and this is reflected in Herodotus' statement that their territory in northern Sinai was not included in the Persian taxation system (Herodotus III 91)18. A direct line may be drawn from the independence of the Arab leaders in northern Sinai before the Assyrian conquest, when they cooperated with the Philistine

rulers, to their growing political and economic power as a result of their cooperation with the

Assyrian empire, and finally to their independence and control over the coast between Gaza and Ienysus under the Persian empire.

16 Abel (1939, 539-541) suggested that the name Ienysus has the structure of a Greek name that

appears in Herodotus with the suffixes -ssos, or -ussos. He therefore disassociated the town from

Rhinocorura (el-'ArTs) and located it in the vicinity of S?h Zuw?yid. 17 For the road system of northern Sinai in the Persian period, see Graf 1993, 161-167, with earlier

literature. 18 For the Arabs on the periphery of Palestine in the Persian period, see Ephcal 1982, 192-214; Knauf

1990; Graf 1990; Lemaire 1990, 45-54, with earlier literature; 1997.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

68 Nadav Na'aman

There are no textual evidence concerning Gaza's relations with the tribal leaders on its southern and southeastern borders prior to the Assyrians conquest of 734 b.c.e. There must have been agreements between the two sides whereby the tribal leaders kept their autonomy and were allowed to engage in their long-distance trade in return for customs and presents. The two sides benefited from the revenues gained from the commerce, and the agreements must have been kept, since neither side was able to take the place of the other.

The relations of Gaza's rulers with Assyria were entirely different. I have recently tried to show the aggressive nature of the policy implemented by the kings of Assyria in the Levant, and the extent of Assyrian intervention in the internal affairs of their vassals (Na'AMAN 2001). Tiglath-pileser III wrote that he turned the city of Gaza into an Assyrian emporium (bit k?ri). The text probably refers to the construction of an emporium near Gaza, which may tentatively be identified with the heavily fortified late Iron II settlement of el-Bla'h?ye, situ ated near the city of Gaza (Humbert/SADEQ 2000). Sargon built the new port of er-Ruq?s, which competed with Gaza for the revenues from the trade with Egypt and for the profits of the Arabian trade. The many anti-Assyrian rebellions that broke out in kingdoms along the

Mediterranean coast, including the two revolts of Hanunu of Gaza, were the direct results of the Assyrian imperial activity. Under Assyrian rule, Gaza possibly declined; but following the destruction of Assyria, and later that of Ashkelon, its northern neighbour, Gaza gained power and reached its zenith under the Persian empire, when it was controlled by the Arabs, held the foremost position among the coastal cities of Palestine, and was described as "not much smaller than Sardis" (Herodotus III 5).

Territory is no doubt an important component in the strength and economic power of kingdoms. But there are other factors, no less important, such as location, naval and conti

nental routes and means of transportation, capital and internal organization. Alhough its territorial extent was limited, Gaza took advantage of these means and became one of the

most important cities in Palestine in the first millennium b.c.e.

Bibliography Abel, F. M.

1939 Les Confins de la Palestine et de l'?gypte sous les Ptol?m?es, Revue Biblique 48, 207-236.530-548.

1940 Les Confins de la Palestine et de l'?gypte sous les Ptol?m?es, Revue Biblique 49, 994_9^q

Ahituv, S. 1984 Canaanite Toponyms in Ancient Eevotian Documents (Jerusalem. Leidend

Albright, W. F. 1924 Egypt and the Early History of the Negeb, Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society 4,

m -im Alt, A.

1926 Bitolion und Bethelea, Zeitschrift des Deutschen Pal?stina-Vereins 49, 236-242.333-335. 1935 Beitr?ge zur Historischen Geographie und Topographie des Negebs, III. Saruhen, Ziklag,

Horma, Gerar, Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society 15, 126-141 (= a. alt, Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel, II [M?nchen] 1953, 435-450).

1945 Neue assyrische Nachrichten ?ber Pal?stina und Syrien, Zeitschrift des Deutschen Pa l?stina-Vereins 67, 128-159 (= a. Alt, Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel, II [M?nchen] 1953, 226-241).

1953 Tiglathpilesers III. erster Feldzug nach Pal?stina, in: a. Alt, Kleine Schriften zur Ge schichte des Volkes Israel, II (M?nchen). 150-162.

BORGER, R. 1956 Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, K?nigs von Assyrian (Archiv f?r Orientforschung. Beiheft

9; Graz; reprint Osnabr?ck 1967).

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 69

1957/58 Die Inschriften Asarhaddons (Archiv f?r Orientforschung. Beiheft 9), Nachtrag und Verbesserungen. Archiv f?r Orientforschung 18. 1 -118.

Briant, P. 1982 Etat et pasteurs au Moyen-Orient ancien (Paris, Cambridge).

COGAN, M.

1993 Judah Under Assyrian Hegemony. A Reexamination of Imperialism and Religion, Jour nal of Biblical Literature 112, 403-414.

Cole, S.W./P. Machinist

1998 Letters from Priests to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal (State Archives of As svria 13: Helsinkii.

Cruz-Uribe, E.

2003 The Invasion of Egypt by Cambyses, Transeuphrat?ne 25, 9-60.

Dalley, S./J.N. Postgate

1984 The Tablets from Fort Shalmaneser (Cuneiform Texts from Nimrud 3; Oxford). Deller, .

1985 SAG.DU.UR.MAH, ?L?wenkopfsitula, L?wenkopfbecher", Baghdader Mitteilungen 16, 327-346.

1987 SAG.DU.UR. MAH. Eine Nachlese, Baghdader Mitteilungen 18, 219-220.

Donner, h./w. kollig

1966-69 Kanaan?ische und Aram?ische Inschriften, I-III, 2nd edition (Wiesbaden). Ehrlich, CS.

1996 The Philistines in Transition. A History from ca. 1000-730 . C. E. (Leiden). Elayi, J.

1982 Studies in Phoenician Geography during the Persian Period, Journal of Near Eastern

Studies 41, 85-110. hPH al, 1.

1971 Gaza, in: H. Tadmor (ed.), Encyclopaedia Biblica, VI (Jerusalem), 116-122 [Hebr.]. 1982 The Ancient Arabs. Nomads on the Borders of the Fertile Crescent 9th - 5th Centuries

B. C. E. (Jerusalem, Leiden). 1999 On the Pronunciation of Some Proper Names, Eretz-Israel 26, 5-7 [Hebr.]

Fales, F.M./LN. Postgate

1995 Imperial Administrative Records, IL Provincial and Military Administrations (State Ar chives of Assvria 11 : Helsinki!

FlNKELSTE?N, I.

1996 The Philistine Countryside, Israel Exploration Journal 46, 225-242.

FiNKELSTEIN, L/L. SINGER-AVITZ

2001 Ashdod Revisited, Tel Aviv 28, 231 - 259. Frahm, E.

1997 Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften (Archiv f?r Orientforschung. Beiheft 26; Horn). 1997/98 Rezension von H. Tadmor, The Inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III King of Assyria

(Jerusalem 1994). Archiv f?r Orientforschune 44-45, 399-404.

Freedy, .S./D.B. Redford

1970 The Dates in Ezekiel in Relation to Biblical, Babylonian and Egyptian Sources, Journal nf the American Oriental Society 90. 462 ? 485.

Fuchs, A.

1994 Die Inschriften Sargons IL aus Khorsabad (G?ttingen). 1998 Die Annalen des Jahres 711 v. Chr. nach Prismenfragmenten aus Ninive und Assur

(State Archives of Assyria Studies 8; Helsinki). Gadd, CI.

1954 Inscribed Prisms of Sargon II from Nimrud, Iraq 16, 173-201.

1958 The Harran Inscriptions of Nabonidus, Anatolian Studies 8, 35-92.

Galling, .

1938 Die syrisch-pal?stinische K?ste nach der Beschreibung bei Pseudo-Skylax, Zeitschrift

des Deutschen Pal?stina-Vereins 61, 66-96 (= K. Galling, Studien zur Geschichte

Israels im Persischen Zeitalter [T?bingen] 1964, 185-210).

GODLEY, A.D.

1938 Herodotus I-IV, 2nd edition (Loeb Classical Library; London, Cambridge).

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

70 Nadav Na'aman

Graf, D. 1990 Arabia during Achaemenid Times, in: H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg/A. Kuhrt (ed.),

Achaemenid History, IV. Centre and Periphery (Leiden), 131-148.

1993 The Persian Royal Road System in Syria-Palestine, Transeuphrat?ne 6, 149-168.

Heidel, A.

1956 A New Hexagonal Prism of Esarhaddon (676 B. C), Sumer 12, 9-37.

Hooker, P. .

1993 The Location of the Brook of Egypt, in: M. P. Graham/W. P. Brown/J. K. Kuan (ed.),

History and Interpretation. Essays in Honour of John H. Hayes (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Simplement. Series 173: SheffieldV 203-214.

Humbert, J.-B. (ed.) 2000 Gaza M?diterran?enne. Histoire et arch?ologie en Palestine (Paris).

Humbert, J.-B./M. Sadeq 2000 Fouilles de Blakhivah - Anth?don, in: humbert (ed.) 2000, 105-120.

Katzenstein, H.!. 1989 Gaza in the Persian Period, Transeuphrat?ne 1, 67-86. 1992 Gaza. Prehellenistic Gaza, in: D.N. Freedman et al. (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictio

nary, II (New York et al.), 911-915. Kitchen, . A.

1983 Egypt, the Levant and Assyria in 701 BC, in: M. G?RG (ed.), Fontes atque Pontes. Eine

Festgabe f?r . Brunner (?gypten und Altes Testament 5; Wiesbaden), 243-253. Knauf, E. A.

1990 The Persian Administration in Arabia, Transeuohrat?ne 2, 201-218.

Langdon, S. 1912 Die neubabvlonischeri K?niasinschriften ( Vorderasiatische Bibliothek 4: Lein/i^V

Lemaire, A. 1990 Populations et territoires de la Palestine ? l'?poque perse, Transeuphrat?ne 3, 31-74. 1997 Les Min?ens et la Transeuphrat?ne ? l'?poque perse. Une premi?re approche, Transeu

ohrat?ne 13. 129-139.

Leuze, O. 1935 Die Satrapieneinteilung in Syrien und im Zwei stromlande von 520-320 (Schriften der

K?nigsberger Gelehrten Gesellschaft. Geisteswissenschaftliche Klasse 11/4; Halle; re

print Hildesheim 1972). LiPiNSKi, E.

1972 The Egypto-Babylonian War of the Winter 601 - 600 B. C, Annali dell'istituto Orientale di Napoli 32, 235-241.

LiPSCHITS, O. 1998 Nebuchadrezzar's Policy in 'Hattu-Land' and the Fate of the Kingdom of Judah, Ugarit

Forschungen 30, 467-487.

LUCKENBILL, D. D. 1Q94 The Annak nf 5sennarherih /Oriental Institute Pnhliratinn? ?? Chimoni

Martin, W.J. 1936 Tribut und Trihiitleistuneen hei den Assvrern fSrudia Orientalin 8/1: Helsinkii

Mayer, . A. 1907 History of the Citv of Gaza from the Earliest Times to the Present Dav (New YorkV

Mazar, .

1952 Yurza. The Identification of Tell Jemmeh, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 84, 48-51.

Mildenberg, L. 1990 Gaza Mint Authorities in Persian Time. Preliminary Studies of the Local Coinage in the

Fifth Persian satraov. TranseuDhrat?ne 2. 137-146. Mittmann, S.

1983 Die K?ste Pal?stinas bei Herodot, Zeitschrift des Deutschen Pal?stina-Vereins 99, 130-140.

Na'aman, .

1979 The Brook of Egypt and Assyrian Policy on the Border of Egypt, Tel Aviv 6, 68-90. 1986 Borders and Districts in Biblical Historiography. Seven Studies in Biblical Geographical

Lists (Jerusalem Biblical Studies 4; Jerusalem).

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

The Boundary System and Political Status of Gaza under the Assyrian Empire 71

1991 Forced Participation in Alliances in the Course of the Assyrian Campaigns to the West, in: M. Cogan/I. Ephcal (ed.), Ah, Assyria ... Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient

Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor (Scripta Hierosolymitana 33;

Jerusalem), 80-98. 1997 Siruatti the Me'unite in a Second Inscription of Tiglath-pileser, III. Nouvelles Assyrio

logiques Br?ve et Utilitaires 1997/4 no. 150, 139. 1998 Two Notes on the History of Ashkelon and Ekron in the Late Eighth-Seventh Centuries

B. C. E., Tel Aviv 25, 219-227. 1999a No Anthropomorphic Graven Image. Notes on the Assumed Anthropomorphic Cult

Statues in the Temples of YHWH in the Pre-Exilic Period, Ugarit-Forschungen 31, 391-415.

1999b Lebo-Hamath, ?ubat-Hamath, and the Northern Boundary of the Land of Canaan, Uga rit-Forschungen 31, 417-441.

2000 Royal Vassals or Governors? On the Status of Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel in the Per sian Empire, Henoch 22, 35-44.

2001 An Assyrian Residence at Ramat Rahel?, Tel Aviv 28, 260-280.

NA5AMAN, N./R. ZABOK 1988 Sargon IPs Deportations to Israel and Philistia (716-708 B. C), Journal of Cuneiform

Studies 40, 36-46.

Oppenheim, A. L.

1969 Babylonian and Assyrian Historical Texts, in: J.B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near

Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd edition, with supplement (Princeton), 265-317.556-567.

uren, fc. d.

1993a Ethnicity and Regional Archaeology. The Western Negev under Assyrian Rule, in: A.

Biran/J. Aviram (ed.), Biblical Archaeology Today, 1990. Proceedings of the Second

International Congress on Biblical Archaeology (Jerusalem), 102-105. 1993b Ruqeish, in: E. Stern (ed.), The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in

the Holy Land, IV (New York et al), 1293-1294. 1993c Northern Sinai, in: E. Stern (ed.), The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excava

tions in the Holy Land, IV (New York et al), 1386-1396.

Oren, E. D. et al 1986 A Phoenician Emporium on the Border of Egypt, Oadmoniot 19, 83-91 [Hebr.l.

ovadiah, a. 1993 Gaza, in: E. Stern (ed.), The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the

Holv Land, II (New York et alX 464-467. PARPOLA, S.

1987 The Correspondence of Sargon II, I. Letters from Assyria and the West (State Archives of Assyria 1: Helsinki).

Phytian-Adams, W. J. 1923 Second Report on the Soundings at Gaza, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 55, 11-36.

Postgate, IN. 1974 Taxation and Conscription in the Assyrian Empire (Studia Pohl. Series Maior 3: Rome).

quaegebeur, J. 1995 A propos de l'identification de la ?Kadytis? d'H?rodote avec la ville de Gaza, in: K.

van Lerberghe/A. schoors (ed.), Immigration and Emigration within the Ancient Near East. Festschrift E. Lipinski (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 65; Leuven), 245 270.

Rainey, A. F.

1982 Toponymie Problems (cont.), Tel Aviv 9, 130-136. 2001 Herodotus' Description of the East Mediterranean Coast, Bulletin of the American

Schools of Oriental Research 231. 57-63. Reich, R.

1984 The Identification of the 'Sealed kam of Egypt', Israel Exploration Journal 34, 32-38.

RowTON, M.B.

1973 Urban Autonomy in a Nomadic Environment, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 32, 201 -

215.

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1

72 Nadav Na3 aman

1976 Dimorphie Structure and the Tribal Elite, in: Al-Bahit. Festschrift Joseph Henninger zum

70. Geburtstag (Studia Institut! Anthropos 28; Sankt Augustin), 219-257.

S AGGS, H.W. F.

2001 The Nimrud Letters, 1952 (Cuneiform Texts from Nimrud 5: London).

Spieckermann, H. 1982 Juda unter Assur in der Sargonidenzeit (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des

Alten und Neuen Testaments 129: G?ttingen).

Stark, K.B. 1852 Gaza und die ohilistaische K?ste (Jena).

Stern, E. 2001 Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, II. The Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian Periods

732-332 B. C. E. (New York). Streck, M.

1916 Assurbanipal und die letzten assyrischen K?nige bis zum Untergang Niniveh's, I ? III ( VnrHf?ra<:iflH<:r,hp RihlinthfV 7? I fingi? ^

Tadmor, H. 1966 Philistia under Assyrian Rule, Biblical Archaeologist 29, 86-102. 1994 The Inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III King of Assyria. Critical Edition, with Introduc

tions, Translations and Commentary (Jerusalem). TSAFRIR, Y./L. DI SEGNI/1. GREEN

1994 Tabula Imperil Romani Iudaea Palaestina. Eretz Israel in the Hellenistic, Roman and

Byzantine Periods. Maps and Gazetteer (Jerusalem). T?JELL, S.S.

1991 The Southern and Eastern Borders of Abar-Nahara, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 284, 51-57.

Uehlinger, e. 1997 Figurative policy, Propaganda und Proph?tie, in: J.A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Vol

ume. Cambridge 1995 (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 66; Leiden, New York,

K?ln), 297-349.

2002 Hanun von Gaza und seine Gottheiten auf Orthostatenreliefs Tiglatpilesers III, in: U.

H?bner/E.A. Knauf (ed.), Kein Land f?r sich allein. Studien zum Kulturkontakt in

Kanaan, Israel/Pal?stina und Ebirn?ri f?r Manfred Weippert zum 65. Geburtstag (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 186; Freiburg, G?ttingen), 92-125.

Unger, E.

1931 Babylon, die Heilige Stadt nach der Beschreibung der Babylonier (Berlin, Leipzig). Van Beek, G.W.

1993 Jemmeh, Tell, in: E. Stern (ed.), The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations

in the Holy Land, II (New York et al), 667-61r4.

Vanderhooft, D.S.

1999 The Neo-Babylonian Empire and Babylon in the Latter Prophets (Harvard Semitic

Monographs 59; Atlanta).

Wapnish, P.

1996 Is s?ni ana l? m?ni an Accurate Description or a Royal Boast, in: J.D. Seger (ed.),

Retrieving the Past. Essays on Archaeological Research and Methodology in Honor of

Gus W. Van Beek (Winona Lakei. 285-296.

Weippert, M.

1987 The Relations of the States East of the Jordan with the Mesopotamian Powers During the First Millennium BC, Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan 3, 97-105.

Yam ad a, S.

2000 The Construction of the Assyrian Empire. A Historical Study of Shalmaneser III (859 824 BC) Relating to His Campaigns to the West (Culture and History of the Ancient

Near East 3; Leiden).

Yezerski, I.

2003 The History of North Sinai during the Iron Age Period - Archaeological and Historical

Aspects [unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Beer Sheva; Hebr.].

ZDPV 120 (2004) 1