by
Damien F. Mackey
“… there is a clear parallel between the Inscription of Esarhaddon and a text of Assurbanipal [who] … says that he has brought the peoples that live in the sea and those that inhabit the high mountains under his yoke, and this reference, as we understand it, is very like Esarhaddon’s text, since it is also “a general summary”.”
Arcadio Del Castillo and Julia Montenegro
Why this particularly interests me is due to my identification of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal as one and the same king, as well as being alter egos of the mighty Nebuchednezzar:
Aligning Neo-Babylonia with Book of Daniel. Part Two: Merging late neo-Assyrians with Chaldeans
Arcadio Del Castillo and Julia Montenegro have made a valiant effort to identify the elusive biblical “Tarshish” in their article:
THE LOCATION OF TARSHISH: CRITICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Revue Biblique, 123, 2016, pp. 239-268
But what struck me when reading through this article is yet another case of, as it seems to me, a ‘historical’ duplication, Ashurbanipal claiming what Esarhaddon claimed.
Writing of the neo-Assyrian sailing efforts, the authors tell as follows (pp. 252-254):
… the only record we have of them sailing the Mediterranean is when Sargon II gained control of Cyprus, which was further secured by his successors, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, and Assurbanipal, 668-627 BC….
My comment: As Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal, is just the one king according to my article above, so, too, with:
Assyrian King Sargon II, Otherwise Known As Sennacherib
The authors continue:
Of course, the text of the Assyrian Inscription of Esarhaddon defines the extent of the Assyrian king’s domain, in maritime terms, from one area in the direction of the other, but we believe its extent would have been within maritime limits of the Assyrian Empire itself, in which case Tarshish would very probably have been in the Red Sea or the Indian Ocean. Thus, the text is perfectly consistent with King Solomon’s policy of procuring the products he needed in the regions to the South and East of his kingdom, which in Antiquity formed a vast emporium of all kinds of luxury goods; and since these regions had to be reached by sea, Solomon ordered a fleet to be built in Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Akaba with ships of Tarshish, for which he sought the aid of Hiram I of Tyre, who sent his men, the unrivalled seafarers of Antiquity, because the Israelites had not, until then, had any contact with the sea. It is difficult to imagine the Phoenicians helping Solomon reach places with which he had no contact using routes only known to themselves, such as the Far West; however, helping him reach destinations nearer home by routes that were generally known does seem reasonable. What is conclusive is the fact that in Esarhaddon’s Inscription the reference to the kings of the middle of the sea comes after enumerating his conquests, which are listed as: Sidon … Arza … Bazu … Tilmun … Shubria … Tyre … Egypt and Pathros … and Kush.
And, since Bazu seems to be situated in the northwest of Arabia and Tilmun on the Persian Gulf, very possibly Bahrain … what seems more logical is to assume that it is a delimitation in both seas of the cosmic ocean, this is the Upper Sea and the Lower Sea. So it would be a broad area that extended beyond the Mediterranean; and reference is made to it just before saying that the Assyrian king had established his power over the kings of the four regions of the Earth … which is an obvious parallel with the part of the text studied in reference to his maritime empire.
What can of course be readily accepted, as we have said, is that there is a clear parallel between the Inscription of Esarhaddon and a text of Assurbanipal, which is inscribed on Prism B: after stating that he ruled from the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea and that the kings of the rising sun and the setting sun brought him heavy tribute, Assurbanipal says that he has brought the peoples that live in the sea and those that inhabit the high mountains under his yoke … and this reference, as we understand it, is very like Esarhaddon’s text, since it is also “a general summary”. And in this case, everything appears to indicate that the peoples referred to were to be found in both seas. Esarhaddon’s text defines the maritime dominion of the Assyrian king from one area to another, but of course it must fall within the actual maritime limits of the Assyrian Empire itself, so its boundary cannot be defined in the Far West, since we would soon leave the area under Assyrian rule. Therefore Tarshish would very probably be on the Red Sea or the Indian Ocean ….
[End of quote]
No comments:
Post a Comment