Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
When did Shoshenq I Campaign in Palestine?*
Peter James and Peter van der Veen
As argued elsewhere (in Centuries of Darkness and now in many other papers, including
some in this volume), Shoshenq I – founder of the 22nd Dynasty – was not the Shishak
who invaded Judah c .925 BC. In our opinion, genuine dead-reckoning from the highest
attested years from the monuments (see e.g. James & Morkot and Thijs in this volume),
HSLJUDSKLFDO GDWLQJ IRU H[DPSOH WKH %\EOLWH ¿QGV RI HDUO\ QGG\QDVW\ VFXOSWXUHV
with Phoenician inscriptions – see van der Veen, ‘Early Iron Age Epigraphy... ’ in this
volume) and the archaeology of Megiddo (see Chapman also in this volume), show that
Shoshenq I must have been a pharaoh of the mid to late 9th century BC rather than the
WK,QWKLVFDVHZKDWUHÀHFWLRQPLJKWWKHUHEHRIKLVFDPSDLJQLQELEOLFDORUH[WUD
biblical records?
Introduction
The old idea that Shoshenq I’s toponym list from the to show that, having received the appropriate gifts, this
Bubastite portal (for illustrations see Dodson in this Pharaoh could represent northern Mesopotamia as a
volume) was merely derived from those of earlier Egyptian tributary state. There is no question here of Amenhotep
conquerors was long ago challenged (Simons 1937, 101) III having ‘destroyed’ Assyria or a single town in it. The
and is now agreed to be debunked (see Kitchen 1986, reference to Assur here shows that such lists sometimes
432, n. 49) – in fact this list proves to be one of the most included countries or cities which a pharaoh could claim
original compositions of this genre. A number of analyses to have at least ‘neutralised’ and which were no longer a
have also shown that Shoshenq I’s placename list focusses threat to Egypt. Still, the character of the Amenhotep III
on the Negev and northern Israel, rather than Judah lists is very different from that of Shoshenq I. As noted
(for references see conveniently Bimson, ‘Shishak and above, Shoshenq’s list was certainly not copied from those
Shoshenq...’ in this volume). Another outdated idea, that of earlier pharaohs, while all the place-names involved as
the list reÀects an itinerary of towns actually destroyed far as they can be identi¿ed are in Palestine, the Negev and
by Shoshenq, is surely far-fetched (James 2002, 177). in Transjordan. It is hence reasonable to assume that they
Shoshenq’s list contains over 150 names! In the same vein, either reÀect towns which paid tribute and/or which were
in the case of the extensive lists of other pharaohs (such captured by some means, either by threat or aggression.
as that of Thutmose III, whose great list includes some By one means or another Shoshenq could claim to have
350 toponyms – see Simons 1937, 199-122) there is, quite them under his control. The presence of a Victory Stela of
simply, no possibility that destruction or even military Shoshenq I at Megiddo (see Chapman 2009 and Chapman
assault (as opposed to submission) was always involved in this volume) proves beyond doubt that his army reached
(see e.g. Hoffmeier 1989, 187-188). at least this far north. The very existence of the Victory
Stela and the text accompanying the toponym list from the
The exact meaning and purpose of such toponym lists still Bubastite Portal which refers to the defeat of ‘Asiatics’
requires much further study.[1] In some cases, for example (see below) make it fairly certain that battles were involved
the inclusion of Assur (Assyria) in lists of Amenhotep III[2], and that force was needed to take control of at least some
we are dealing with claims that (from our perspective) look of the towns listed.
like mere exaggeration – the intention was presumably
We thought it necessary to discuss brieÀy the above caveats
* Our thanks to John Bimson for reading and Marinus van
as much of the literature merely assumes that the toponym
der Sluijs for commenting on earlier drafts; Peter James is list reÀects straightforward conquest or even destruction
indebted to the Mainwaring Archive Foundation for their of sites. The situation is likely to be more complex. Yet –
kind support of his research. for the reasons outlined above – while some of the towns
on Shoshenq’s list may have merely submitted without
[1] See Kitchen 2009, 129-135. See also, for instance, Grimal military conÀict, it is reasonable to assume that the list
2008, 56-64. Also see the entire volume on the subject in
represents the itinerary of a (largely) aggressive campaign.
which this article was published: Adrom, Schlüter & Schlüter
This poses a problem for the conventional chronology.
(eds) 2008.
If Shoshenq I was the biblical Shishak why would he
[2] For instance Edel & Görg 2005, 20-23, 33, 43, 128-130. have attacked many towns in northern Israel, within
127
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
JAMES & VAN DER VEEN (EDS): SOLOMON AND SHISHAK (2015): BICANE COLLOQUIUM (CAMBRIDGE 2011)
the kingdom of his vassal and protegée Jeroboam? (See Written in an Aramaean dialect, the stela was most likely
Bimson, ‘Shishak and Shoshenq...’ in this volume.) set up by Hazael of Damascus in the late 9th century. It
demonstrates that the Aramaeans were in control of Dan at
A similar dif¿culty might seem to apply to a revised model, this time, and also claims a successful campaign against a
in which Shoshenq I campaigned in Palestine sometime king of Israel and his ally the king of Judah (‘of the house
in the mid-to-late 9th century. As noted elsewhere in this of David’). The name of the Israelite king is broken ([...]
volume (van der Veen & James, ‘Zeraত the Kushite...’), ram), but its restoration as ‘Jehoram’, the name of Ahab’s
the alliance between Egypt and the northern kingdom son and successor, is probable, given that no other king
continued long after the time of Jeroboam I, indeed down of Israel bore this name element.[6] Hazael claims to have
to its last ruler Hoshea (late 8th century BC). For example killed both kings, going on to devastate various towns and
the Egyptians sent a small force to join Ahab of Israel and laying siege to a city which may well have been Samaria.[7]
the coalition of Syrian kings that faced the Assyrians at Hazael of Aram-Damascus is probably also referred to on
the battle of Qarqar in 853 BC. Given this, who were the yet another old Aramaic basalt stela fragment found at Tell
‘Asiatics’ that Shoshenq claimed to have defeated? A¿s in central Syria, in association with a personal name
partially preserved in the next line containing the Israelite/
Judahite divine element yhw.[8] The broken name could be
The Aramaean domination of Israel
restored as Jehoram (of Israel), Ahaziah (of Judah), Jehu
(of Israel) or even Jehoahaz (of Israel).[9]
Relations between Israel and Syria were soon to change
after 853 BC. Under Ahab’s successors (and perhaps under
It is probable, then, that the cities which Shoshenq I
Ahab himself), the kings of Damascus made repeated raids
into northern Israel, not just ravaging territory but annexing claimed to have seized in northern Israel were not in the
numerous cities into their mini-empire. For example, we control of the Israelites but the Aramaeans. In the lower
are told in 2 Kings 7:6 that at the time of the prophet Elisha chronology argued in Centuries of Darkness, Shoshenq I
(c. 850-830 BC or possibly later) the Aramaeans besieged would have ruled during the last third of the 9th century
Samaria.[3] As if by a miracle, the Aramaeans heard the BC.[10] Straighforward dead-reckoning arrives at a date
sound of horses and chariots approaching, upon which
reading of the stela fragments see Reinhold 2003, 121-155.
they Àed. The narrator explains that the Aramaeans feared
that the Israelite king had hired ‘the kings of the Hittites’ [6] A somewhat later date for the stela has been proposed
and ‘the kings of the Egyptians’ to rescue them. It seems by Athas 2005, who besides his excellent treatment of the
therefore that the Egyptians were still considered to be the inscription suggests a different reconstruction of the existing
allies of the Israelites at this time.[4] fragments (see especially his p. 191). But his reconstruction
has not been accepted by other scholars. For a brief criticism
The domination of northern Israel by Hazael and his son of Athas’ work, primarily based on the historical connection
between Hazael and the Israelite/Judahite kings, see Rollston
Ben-Hadad ‘III’ (Bar-Hadad) is a major theme in the biblical
2010, 51-53.
accounts of the reigns of Jehoram and his successors Jehu
and Jehoahaz (see Miller & Hayes 1986, 262-263, 287, [7] So also Athas 2005, 193 (line A 13).
288, 297-302). Even Samaria was besieged, possibly
[8] Mazzoni, 1998, 9 and ¿g. 5. Most recently also Amadasi
twice. The domination of the northern part of the kingdom Guzzo 2014, 54-55.
of Israel by the Damascene kings is not only mentioned
in the Bible: it is con¿rmed by a stela discovered at Tel [9] Younger 2007, 139. If the name is to be reconstructed as
Dan, site of one of the northernmost cities of Israel.[5] Jehu, one would expect that the available waw was succeeded
by an aleph, which is possible, but this is uncertain as the
[3] For brief discussion of the historical context of this siege traces of the following letter on the left edge of the fragment
see Miller & Hayes 1986, 262-263. could equally well be those of another character. Amadasi
Guzzo (2014, 55) also considers the name [Jeho]’aতaz. The
[4] In the light of the reference to the Hittites, a number latter’s doubts, however, that an Israelite king would have
of scholars have argued that the reference to the kings of been mentioned on a stela from central Syria (as no such
Egypt in 2 Kings 7:6 must be taken as a mistake and must be confrontation is known in this region) are of course baseless.
undestood as Muৢri (i.e. from the land of Muৢur), a northern For it is understandable that Hazael – after defeating his
people related to the Hittites and Aramaeans in 1 Kings 10:28. southern neighbours – set up various stelae in Syria (evidently
For this view see e.g. Wiseman 1993, 211-212. But as Neo- also at Tell A¿s/Hazrak (biblical Hadrach) and one of the
Hittites and Egyptians fought side by side at the battle of towns belonging to Zakkur of Hamath as mentioned in his
Qarqar in 853 BC and as Egypt is nearer the territory of Israel, stela inscription, see Unger 1980, 85) commemorating his
we feel that the traditional reading has much to commend it. military accomplishments including the wars against Israel/
In a similar vein, some scholars have suggested that the 1000 Judah.
soldiers from Musri at the battle of Qarqar also came from
the northern land of Muৢur, but this view has been rightly [10] Centuries of Darkness (James et al. 1991, 256) suggested
criticised by Kitchen 1986, 325 & n. 454, arguing that it a provisional date for the beginning of the reign of Shoshenq I
should more simply be translated as ‘from Egypt’. c. 810 BC. The authors have long felt that this date is too low:
a date nearer c. 840-835 BC would be a reasonable estimate on
[5] For a detailed discussion on the reconstruction and present evidence. See Morkot & James and Thijs in this volume.
128
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
PETER JAMES & PETER VAN DER VEEN: WHEN DID SHOSHENQ I CAMPAIGN IN PALESTINE?
As noted above, it is likely that the enemies
faced by Shoshenq I in northern Palestine
were not Israelites, but the Aramaeans who
were occupying the region. In other words,
Shoshenq I would be continuing to support the
‘old alliance’ begun with the northern kingdom
under Jeroboam I in the 10th century BC. The
Bible (2 Kings 13:7) records the miserable
military state of Israel in the late 9th century,
under king Jehoahaz:
Nothing had been left of the army of
Jehoahaz except ¿fty horsemen, ten
chariots and ten thousand foot soldiers,
for the king of Aram had destroyed
the rest and made them like the dust at
threshing time.
The situation changed dramatically when
an unnamed deliverer or saviour helped the
Israelites against the Aramaeans (2 Kings
13:4-5):
Then Jehoahaz sought Yahweh’s favour,
and Yahweh listened to him, for he saw
how severely the king of Aram was
oppressing Israel. Yahweh provided a
deliverer for Israel, and they escaped from
the power of Aram. So the Israelites lived
in their own homes as they had before.
The clear inference is that the Israelites
were able to reoccupy towns that had been
conquered by the Aramaeans (under Hazael).
The usual understanding of this passage is that
the ‘deliverer’ was the Assyrian king Adad-
nirari III (see e.g. Miller & Hayes 1986, 298,
300-301). He subdued Damascus in 804 BC,
so it is assumed that as a ‘knock-on’ effect
this weakened the power of the Aramaeans,
enabling the Israelites to reoccupy some of their
towns. But this idea does not quite ring true
considering the poor state of the Israelite forces
)LJXUH6WHODIUDJPHQWIURP7HOO$¿VZLWKDSUREDEOH at the time, and there is certainly no suggestion from the
reference to Hazael of Damascus and to an Israelite or Assyrian records that Adad-nirari III moved further south
Judaean royal person, whose name contains the divine than Damascus in order to ‘liberate’ northern Israelite
-yhw element. (Photography courtesy of S. Mazzoni.) towns from Aramaean control or to assist the Israelites in
any way.
of c. 808 or (more likely) c. 818 BC for the last year of With these considerations in mind, it was suggested in
Shoshenq I (see Morkot & James in this volume). This Centuries of Darkness that Shoshenq I, rather than Adad-
would place his ¿rst year in 829 BC or (again more likely) nirari III, could have been the enigmatic ‘deliverer’ who
c. 839 BC. But, as stressed, these are notional ¿gures helped Israel against the Aramaeans during the reign of
as there is the likelihood of ‘hidden’ co-regencies (for Jehoahaz.[11] Gershon Galil’s chronology for the Hebrew
example between Takeloth I and Osorkon II). This would kings places the accession year of Jehoahaz in 820/819.
mean that Shoshenq’s Levantine campaign, which took Using his dates the campaign of the anonymous saviour
place in his year 21 (or possibly a few years earlier – see could well have been that of Shoshenq I.
Dodson in this volume) would have fallen between c. 818
and 808 BC. [11] Albeit in a short note – see James et al. 1991, 385, n. 134.
129
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
JAMES & VAN DER VEEN (EDS): SOLOMON AND SHISHAK (2015): BICANE COLLOQUIUM (CAMBRIDGE 2011)
‘Mitanni’ in the 9th century BC though the CoD chronology would place him roughly a
century later.[12]
Support for the idea that Shoshenq’s enemies were not
Israelites but Aramaeans comes from the (unfortunately) Thus, as Ritner (2009, 211) rightly notes: ‘Despite frequent
laconic account of his campaign inscribed at Karnak, remarks on the anachronism of this reference to the
accompanying his famous toponym list. In his address defunct political entity of Mitanni (e.g., Breasted 1906-7,
to Amun, Shoshenq refers to the enemy in general terms 4:349 §710), the term may well have survived as a general
geographic reference (for remote Asia)....’ Mitanni was
as Asiatics (cAmu) but also uses the more speci¿c term
used by the Egyptians synonymously with Naharin or
Mitanni:
Nahrima (‘land of the rivers’), a broad geographical term
for the region of the northern Euphrates. After the demise
I have struck for you those who rebelled against
of the Mitannian empire the region became the heartland
you, suppressing for you the Asiatics. The armies of the Aramaean expansion, as reÀected in the biblical
of Mitanni – I have slain those belonging to them name Aram Naharaim (‘Aram of the two rivers’).[13]
beneath your sandals... (tr. Ritner 2009, 204).
b) Mitanni and Hazael’s Aramaean confederacy
a) Shoshenq’s reference to Mitanni
If indeed the name Mitanni was still used (at least as a
Most scholars, including Henry Breasted (1906, 349, §710; geographical term) in the time of Shoshenq I, one wonders
cf. Kitchen 1986, 435, n. 55) have considered Shoshenq’s what political entity led the ‘Mitannian’ troops he claims
reference to the land of Mitanni as a simple anachronism to have defeated. Two possible candidates come into play.
or mere rhetoric – as the usual assumption is that Mitanni An alternative term for Mitanni in many cuneiform texts
as a political entity had disappeared at some point near the (for example El Amarna letters 20:17; 29:49) is Hanigalbat
end of the Late Bronze Age. So Breasted: ‘No towns so far which later became the name for the northeastern province
north can be found on the list. The reference to Mitanni of Assyria – so it is possible that Shoshenq I was referring
is unquestionably drawn from older inscriptions....’ to Assyria. But the second candidate is perhaps the more
Likewise, Simons (1937, 90): ‘The only distinct name probable one. As we have noted above, the old Mitannian
of a conquered enemy is Mitanni, which suf¿ces to show area of domination corresponds in strict terms to the area
the ahistorical and stereotyped character of these texts.’ to the west (northern Syria) and east of the Euphrates –
subsequently inhabited by the northern Aramaean tribes of
Such objections, while understandable, suffer from two
the alliance led by the king of Aram-Damascus during the
weaknesses. First, Shoshenq’s brief account only refers
ninth century BC.
to repulsing the armies of Mitanni, ‘those belonging to
them’, and not to an invasion of Mitanni per se. Second, While the tribes of the Hanigalbat region paid tribute to
they overlook the tendency of the Egyptians to use their Adad-nirari II, Ashurnasirpal II and Shalmaneser III, it
own traditional terminology rather than that in current use was King Hazael of Damascus who incorporated the
in the Levant: they continued to use terms such as Djahi, armies of the region into his own. Even his predecessor
Retenu, etc. for Palestine even at times when the kingdoms Ben-Hadad is said to have commanded an army that
of Israel, Judah, Moab, Aram (at Damascus), existed. included contingents of some thirty-two kings who came
with him to besiege Israel’s capital Samaria in the reign
Further, Görg has shown that the toponym Mitanni also of Ahab (1 Kings 20:1). If the context is correct and the
appears on a statue of Thutmose III (CG 42192) usurped episode relates to Ahab and Ben-Hadad II (and not later
and re-engraved by the early 22nd-dynasty ‘king’ and kings as often argued), then this huge coalition of Syrian
high priest Maakheperre Shoshenq (‘IIc’), who added a kings was already under Damascene control before 853
short topographical list (the Asiatic row on the left side BC.[14] The questions of textual criticism and biblical
containing only ¿ve names). While it is extremely unlikely micro-chronology on this matter are beyond the present
that the meagrely attested Shoshenq Maakheperre – it
is even a matter of dispute whether he was ‘of¿cally’ a [12] Likewise, the revised Mesopotamian chronology
king – led any campaigns, it is still signi¿cant that Mitanni of Pierce Furlong, which works along similar lines to that
appears at the top of his list of Asiatic names (Görg 2005, proposed in CoD, dates Tiglath-pileser I to 1030-992 BC. See
6), presumably echoing the fairly recent achievement of Furlong 2010, 230, Table A.
Shoshenq I in defeating the ‘armies of Mitanni’. [13] For discussion of the nature and dating of the Aramaean
settlement in this region see Szuchman 2009.
Outside of Egypt the continued use of the term Mitanni,
after its alleged collapse as a political entity, is shown by [14] According to 1 Kings 20:34, Ben-Hadad the king of
Damascus made a peace treaty with Ahab, while Ahab with
an Assyrian inscription in which king Tiglath-pileser I
Jehoshaphat of Judah would ¿ght once more against the
boasts of hunting of wild bulls ‘in the country of Mitanni’ Aramaeans at Ramoth-Gilead in 1 Kings 22. According to
(Luckenbill 1926, 86, §247). On the conventional Galil (1996, 34) Ahab died in the winter of 853/2, i. e. soon
chronology this Assyrian king reigned c. 1115-1077, after the battle of Qarqar.
130
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
PETER JAMES & PETER VAN DER VEEN: WHEN DID SHOSHENQ I CAMPAIGN IN PALESTINE?
Figure 2. Ivory plaque from Arslan Tash dedicated to Hazael at the Musée du Louvre. (Photo R. Chipault,
courtesy Bildarchiv preussischer Kulturbesitz, No. 00109251.)
study. Fortunately, when it comes to assessing the scope of par excellence, i.e. the Euphrates, that is meant here (also
Hazael’s authority we have independent evidence. Several Na’aman 1995, 382-383).[17]
inscriptions which have been attributed to King Hazael of
Aram-Damascus refer to or come from the geographical This cUmqi[18] also appears in the Zakkur of Hamath
region of the erstwhile Mitannian empire which paid inscription as an ally of Hazael’s son and successor
tribute to him.
Bar-Hadad
An inscribed ivory plaque, from a bedstead found at
Arslan Tash near the Upper-Euphrates, bears an Aramaean Then Bar-Hadad, son of Hazael, king or Aram,
inscription which contains the dedication ‘to our Lord united against me s[even]teen kings: Bar-Hadad
Hazael’ (OPU¶Q ¶]ۊO). Mazar considers this Hazael to be and his army, Bar-Gush and his army, the king
‘in all probability ... Hazael, King of Aram’ (Mazar 1986: of Que and his army, the king of cAmuq and his
163f.). Röllig (1988, 39) translates the entire inscription army, the king of Gurgum and his army, the king
as follows: ‘This ... has son of ’Amma en[graved] for our of Sam’al and his army, the king of Melid and his
Lord Hazael in the year 5’[15] army [ ] seven[teen], they and their armies.
All these kings laid siege to Hadrach .... (Millard
An inscribed bronze ornament for a horse’s forehead
was found on the Greek island of Samos in an early 6th 1999, 139.)
century BC secondary archaeological layer of debris at
the Heraion. Its iconographic details suggest a North- According to Ahlström (1993, 610) the Zakkur inscription
Syrian origin, while its palaeography suits a date during indicates ‘that Damascus dominated Syria up to Que in
the second half of the 9th century BC. With the help of Cilicia’, a vast territory which included Northern Syria
an inscription on a pair of horse-blinkers found at the and parts of the ancient territory of Mitanni/Hanigalbat.
Apollo Daphnephoros temple at Eretria in Euboea (also Based on their translation of the Samos inscription, Ephal
apparently referring to Hazael), Ephal and Naveh were and Naveh (1989, 200) come to the same conclusion:
able to reconstruct the Samos inscription as follows: ‘That
which Hadad gave our Lord Hazael from cUmqi in the [17] For the importance of the Euphrates see e.g. Joshua 24:2-
year that our Lord crossed the river.’ (Ephal/Naveh 1989, 3; 2 Samuel 8:3; 10:16 or 1 Kings 14:15. For its signi¿cance
192ff.; Mykytiuk 2004, 119-121).[16] While the authors as a geographical boundary to the Egyptians see James in this
considered the possibility of the river being the Orontes, volume.
they prefer – correctly so – the view that it is the river
[18] Also Mykytiuk 2004, 119. Na’aman (1995, 384)
suggests that cUmqi on Hazael’s Samos inscription must
[15] Also Ephal & Naveh 1989, 197, n. 24. Another translation be understood as cemeq (valley) and refers to the Beqac of
was offered by Puech, who reads: ‘[The bed which] the troops Lebanon. Although this suggestion is surely ingenious, the
[offer]ed to our Master Hazael, the year of the [annexat]ion of reading cUmqi = Pattin makes perfect sense in the light of
Ha[uran].’ See Puech 1981: 544-562. the Zakkur inscription where it must mean the kingdom of
Pattin. Moreover, as the inscription refers to the year when
[16] The Aramaic inscription reads: ]\QWQKGGOPU¶Q¶]ۊOPQ Hazael crossed the river, most likely the Euphrates, the more
cmq bšnt cdh mr’n nhr. northern locality ¿ts the general geography better.
131
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
JAMES & VAN DER VEEN (EDS): SOLOMON AND SHISHAK (2015): BICANE COLLOQUIUM (CAMBRIDGE 2011)
Figure 3. One of the horse-blinkers referring to Hazael, cUmqi and the river, found at the temple of Apollo
Daphnephoros. (Photography D. Gialouris; (c) Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Sports/Archaeological Receipts
Fund, courtesy of Dr G. Kakavas at the National Archaeological Museum of Athens, No. 15070.)
The signi¿cance of the Samos inscription lies in the fact Following that, Hazael’s army (perhaps as early as the
that it explicitly indicates that Damascus’ power was reign of Jehu) proceeded to ‘ravage the very heartland of
manifested in northern Syria already during the reign of Israelite territory west of the Jordan’ (Miller & Hayes 1986,
Hazael. The practical signi¿cance of Hazael’s policy, as 297), as his army then marched towards the Philistine city
well as the military inÀuence of his son Barhadad in this of Gath and conquered it (2 Kings 12:17).[19] According
region, are reÀected in the Zakur inscription. to one Septuagint version of 2 Kings 13:22 (LXXL),
the Aramaeans also conquered the town of Aphek, near
The extensive scope of the Damascene mini-empire is also modern Tel Aviv, including its immediate vicinity. It is
implied in Amos 1:3-5 where it even includes Beth-Eden understandable why Hazael secured this area for himself, as
(i.e. Bit-Adina), an Aramaean state located to the east of
Gath and Aphek are situated on the strategically signi¿cant
the Euphrates river in the very heartland of Mitanni.
Via Maris (van der Veen 2013, 167). Subsequently, Hazael
moved eastward towards Jerusalem (2 Kings 12:18),
From the epigraphic and other evidence reviewed above
it is clear that the army of Hazael and his son Ben-Hadad possibly by sending one of his task forces to prepare for
III comprised contingents from various parts of their the siege.[20] In order to avoid a devastating clash with the
mini-empire, including areas in northern Syria to the west Aramaeans, Joash of Judah paid him off with heavy tribute
and east of the Euphrates river – the region of the old from the temple and palace treasuries; consequently
Mitannian empire. Hazael ‘withdrew from Jerusalem.’ The Chronicler adds
[19] Evidence of destruction and an impressive siege moat
Hazael’s army invades Cis- and Transjordan have been unearthed at Tell es-Sa¿/Gath in Stratum A3,
which the excavators have assigned to Hazael (Maeir 2008;
territory also Maeir and Gur-Arieh 2011). For the date of this stratum
also see Maeir 2012, Vol. 1, 354-355. This attribution has
2 Kings 10:32-33 describes Hazael’s extensive conquests not uniformly been accepted (Ussishkin 2009; Zwickel, pers.
in the Transjordanian region. These included territory comm. Spring 2012), however, and in the CoD chronology
previously claimed by the kingdom of Israel at least as far this evidence would need to be dated later. As the moat and
south as the Arnon river, south-east of the Dead Sea: the city’s destruction belong to Stratum A3 at the end of the
Iron Age IIA period, it might be appropriate to date it to the
Yahweh began to cut off parts of Israel. Hazael reign of king Uzziah of Judah (c. 760/750 BC), who is said
defeated them throughout the territory of Israel: to have taken down the walls of Gath, Jabneh and Ashdod (2
from the Jordan eastward, all the land of Gilead, the Chronicles 26:6), or later.
Gadites, and the Reubenites, and the Manassites, [20] This suggestion was also made long ago by Noordtzij
from Aroer, which is by the valley of Arnon, that is, 1957, 286. 2 Chronicles 24:24 underlines that despite their
Gilead and Bashan. success the Aramaeans had come with a small number of men
to confront Joash.
132
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
PETER JAMES & PETER VAN DER VEEN: WHEN DID SHOSHENQ I CAMPAIGN IN PALESTINE?
that the war had been ¿erce and that the Aramaeans seals would have originated during this archaeological
had destroyed all the princes of the Judaean people (2 period (1995, § 141, 65; 1997: 192:269; 656:27; 2012,
Chronicles 24:23). As mentioned earlier Jehoahaz of Israel 337, ¿g. 290; 2013, 54, ¿g. 122). He considers them
was severely oppressed by Hazael and his army reduced as additional support for the conventional equation of
almost to the status of a bodyguard, but Yahweh sent him Shoshenq with Shishak. Even so, most specimens stem
the anonymous saviour (2 Kings 13:5), which – at least from Iron Age IIB-C strata.[21] While most scholars today
temporarily – brought relief for Israel. date the end of the Iron Age IIA period to the latter half
of the 9th century BC, the Centuries of Darkness model
Zwickel (2013, 155) has outlined a plausible campaign would date it to c. 740-720,[22] together with a lowering
route of Hazael, which we have reproduced here in Figure of Iron IIB-C. This would place the manufacture of most
4. It shows his advance from Ramoth-Gilead (2 Kings of these seals in the late 8th-early 7th centuries BC. There
9:14), crossing the Jordan near Beth-Shean and through may exist additional ‘stratigraphical’ evidence in support
the Jezreel Valley to the Philistine coastal region down to of the mainly 8th-century BC date of these bone seals. For
Aphek and Gath and then inland towards Jerusalem. The both bullae and bone seals with a variety of Egyptianising
areas covered by Hazael’s campaigns closely resemble motifs including versions of the Shoshenq-type name (Keel
those of Shoshenq’s military expedition (see Figure 4). 2013, 54) were found in an archaeological ¿ll within the
This would support our suggestion that Shoshenq I might so-called rock-cut pool near the Gihon spring at the City
have been the anonymous ‘saviour’ who supported king of David.[23] The pottery evidence (which is similar to that
Jehoahaz as he sought to liberate Israel by expelling its of Lachish Stratum IV) within the ¿ll suggests a date for
Aramaean foes. the ¿nds around 800 BC 30 years in the conventional
chronology, i.e. late Iron Age IIA or early Iron Age IIB
(Reich et al. 2007, 154, 156; Reich 2011, 217) and c. 740-
Shoshenq I as ‘saviour’ on Judahite amulets? 700 BC in the Centuries of Darkness model.[24] Such a
date is also supported by the discovery of bullae in the
There may be further evidence that the Israelites and same context, which depict Neo-Assyrian sun-disks in
Judaeans regarded the Libyan Pharaoh Shoshenq I as an linear design (Keel 2012, 331, ¿gs. 93*-94*; Keel 2011a,
ally or saviour rather than as an oppressor. 304, ¿g. 191, 537, ¿g. 389).[25] Finally, the occurrence of
some similar Shoshenq-like names on 8th-century ivory
As brieÀy discussed elsewhere in this volume (van der carvings from Nimrud (e.g. š-[.. ]-n-q-q – Herrmann et
Veen, ‘The Name Shishaq ...’) several locally manufactured al. 2004, esp. 89, ¿g. S1144) also seem to support the 8th-
bone seals or amulets (lucky charms) inscribed with what century date for at least most of the relevant bone seals.[26]
appear to be versions of the name Shoshenq have been
discovered in Palestine. The clearest example comes from [21] Pers. comm. with C. Herrmann, June 2014.
Tel Dan (see van der Veen, ‘The Name Shishaq ...’ Figure
3), which may be signi¿cant given that we know it was [22] An approximate correlation between the end date for
under Aramaean occupation in the late 9th century BC. Iron IIA and the Assyrian conquests was mooted in James
Others have been uncovered mainly within the territory of 2008, 173, n. 150.
Judah (e.g. at Lachish, Tell el-Far‘ah South and Jerusalem), [23] One Shoshenq-type seal was also found – albeit out of
the southern coastal plain (e.g. at Ashdod, Tell Jemmeh) context – by K. Kenyon on the Eastern slope of the City of
and in southern Judah/the northern Negev border region, David; see Steiner 2003, 88, ¿g. 13.
e.g. at Tell Beit Mirsim and Tel Arad (Keel & Uehlinger
[24] Some seals in the ¿ll, however, contain imagery, which
1998a, 265; Keel & Uehlinger 1998b, 536; Keel 2012, is known from the early phase of Iron Age IIA (see Keel 2011b,
320). 63). It can therefore be surmised that in terms of the Centuries
of Darkness model the ¿ll also included material from the
If Shoshenq had been seen as an aggressor (like Shishak), latter half of the 9th century BC, the time of Shoshenq I as is
why would the Judaeans (and their neighbours) have suggested in this article.
produced seals with his name as lucky charms? Would
[25] Cf. Herbordt 1992, Plates 12:1-2; Keel-Leu & Teissier
these seals not rather suggest that Shoshenq was
2004, Plates 235 Z and 36 Z; Keel 2013, 11:8. Also the bulla
considered to be a hero, a model of military prowess? from the City of David ¿ll with the ‘empty throne’ and what
While tentative, it seems reasonable to suggest from these appears to be a winged solar disk placed on a cultic standard
amulets that Shoshenq was envisaged as an ally rather (see Keel 2011a, 304), most closely resembles a winged solar
than an oppressor, a situation which is compatible with the disk depicted on the late 8th-7th century BC Moabite seal of
circumstances described above concerning the liberation Amos the scribe; cf. Parayre 1993, 43:11. An in-depth study
of Israel from the Aramaeans by an unnamed ‘saviour’ in of this evidence is in preparation by van der Veen for his
the reign of Jehoahaz. postdoctoral dissertation for the University of Mainz on the
reign of king Manasseh during the 7th century BC.
Despite the fact that many bone seals with Shoshenq-like [26] NB the undisputed reading of the name of the Nubian
names come from secondary strata, the earliest related Pharaoh Taharqo (Herrmann et al. 2004, 20, ¿g. S0185). It
Egyptianised bone seals surface in Iron Age IIA layers. must be emphasised however that the pseudo-hieroglyphs
Consequently, Othmar Keel surmises that also the Shoshenq found on most of the ivories did not yield any intelligible
133
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
JAMES & VAN DER VEEN (EDS): SOLOMON AND SHISHAK (2015): BICANE COLLOQUIUM (CAMBRIDGE 2011)
While virtually all the Judaean bone seals
with Egyptianising symbols (including the
Shoshenq ‘cartouches’) would postdate
the events described in this article (which
we have dated to c. 820-810 BC), their
apparent amuletic role in the late 8th-early
7th centuries is nevertheless explicable.
Many biblical texts emphasise that Egypt
was still considered to be a great military
power, from which both Judaeans and
Israelites sought help during the second
half of the 8th century (Hoshea 7:11; 2
Kings 17:4; Isaiah 31:1). When the northern
kingdom of Israel was under pressure from
the Assyrians c. 723 (according to Galil 1996,
90), King Hoshea sent gifts to ‘Pharaoh So’,
almost certainly Osorkon III, a descendant
of Shoshenq I (see Morkot & James 2009
and Morkot & James in this volume).
Likewise when Sennacherib famously
approached Jerusalem in 701 BC, it was
not only ‘Tirhaqah’ of Kush (according to
the Bible in 2 Kgs. 19:9; Isaiah 37:9)[27]
who came to aid Hezekiah, but according
to the more detailed Assyrian accounts, an
Egyptian force as well. Sennacherib wrote
that Hezekiah called for help to ‘the kings
of Egypt (0X ܈X UL) (and) the bowmen, the
chariot(-corps) and the cavalry of the king
of Ethiopia (0HOXېېD), an army beyond
counting’ (trans. Oppenheim 1969, 287)
and he claims to have trounced this mighty Figure 4. Map showing the areas involved in the military
force on the plain of Eltekeh (in Philistia). campaigns of Hazael and Shoshenq I. (Map by U. Zerbst.)
The kings of Egypt who attempted to defend
Hezekiah would have been a coalition of
Lower and Middle Egyptian kings, many of whom could been frequently demonstrated (see above and in particular
claim descent from their more powerful and illustrious Bimson, ‘Shishak and Shoshenq...’ in this volume for
ancestor Shoshenq I. In both cases (Samaria and Jerusalem) references), the toponym list of Shoshenq I accompanying
the Egyptian pharaohs would not prove adequate to the his brief campaign account bears no resemblance to the
task of repelling the Assyrian threat. biblical account of Shishak’s campaign: aside from the
Negev, most of the towns are in the northern kingdom of
Israel. Placing Shoshenq I’s campaign in the last quarter
Concluding remarks of the 9th century BC raises the possibility that he was
actually an ally rather than an enemy of the northern
The conventional dating for Shoshenq I places his main kingdom of Israel. The suggestion remains tentative until
campaign in the Levant c. 925 BC, equating it with the discovery of further documentation. Yet the idea that
the biblical account of Shishak and his conquest of Shoshenq (as well as re-establishing Egyptian inÀuence/
Rehoboam’s forti¿ed cities in Judah (with Jerusalem authority in the region) was providing military support for
being spared by buying off the aggressor). Yet, as has Israel, helping it to recover towns that had been conquered
by the Damascene king Hazael, is more in keeping with
Egyptian words or names. The 8th-century date for some of the biblical account and provides a reasonable explanation
the ivories is clearly supported by the palaeographic date of of the identity of the anonymous ‘saviour’ who rescued
the West Semitic inscriptions sometimes found on the back of the northern kingdom from Aramaean domination during
the ivories (especially Herrmann et al. 2004, 161, ¿gs. S2224- the reign of Jehoahaz (820/819-803 BC). It is certainly as
5; Barnett 1975, 161-162 and plate CXXXII). plausible as (if not preferable to) the idea that Shoshenq I
[27] This is not the place (nor is there any need here) to subdued Judah c. 925 BC.
discuss the knotty problem of the presence of Tirhakah
(Taharqo) as Kushite commander in Palestine as early as 701
BC; but see Morkot & James in prep.
134
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
PETER JAMES & PETER VAN DER VEEN: WHEN DID SHOSHENQ I CAMPAIGN IN PALESTINE?
Bibliography the Biblical Writers Know and When Did they Know
It? (2001), Palestine Exploration Quarterly 134:2,
Adrom, F., Schlüter, K. & Schlüter, A. (eds), 2008. 176-178.
Altägyptische Weltsichten. (Ägypten und Altes –––– 2008. ‘The Alleged ‘Anchor Point’ of 732 BC for the
Testament 68.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Destruction of Hazor V’, Antiguo Oriente 6, 133-180.
Ahlström, G. W., 1993. The History of Ancient Palestine James, P. J., Thorpe, I. J., Kokkinos, N., Morkot, R.,
from the Palaeolthic Period to Alexander’s Conquest. Frankish, J., 1991. Centuries of Darkness: A Challenge
(Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement to the Conventional Chronology of Old World
Series 146.) Shef¿eld: Shef¿eld Academic Press. Archaeology. London: Jonathan Cape.
Amadasi Guzzo, M. G., 2014. ‘Tell A¿s in the Iron Age: Keel, O., 1995. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette
The Aramaic Inscriptions’, Near Eastern Archaeology aus Palästina/Israel: Von den Anfängen bis zur
77:1, 54- 57. Perserzeit, Einleitung. (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis
Athas, G., 2005. The Tel Dan Inscription - A Reappraisal Series Archaeologica 10.) Fribourg: Universitätsverlag
and a New Interpretation. London: T. & T. Clark. Freiburg Schweiz.
Barnett, R. D., 1975. A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories. –––– 1997. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus
London: British Museum. Palästina/Israel. Von den Anfängen bis zur Perserzeit,
.DWDORJ%DQG YRQ7HOO$EX)DUDЂELV cAtlit. (Orbis
Breasted, J. H., 1906. Ancient Records of Egypt, Vol. IV.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Biblicus et Orientalis Series Archaeologica 13.)
Fribourg: Universitätsverlag Freiburg Schweiz.
Chapman, R. L., 2009. ‘Putting Sheshonq I in his Place’,
Palestine Exploration Quarterly 141:1, 4-17. –––– 2011a. Die Geschichte Jerusalems und die
Entstehung des Monotheismus, Part 1. Göttingen:
Edel, E. & Görg, M., 2005. Die Ortsnamenlisten im Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
nördlichen Säulenhof des Totentempels Amenophis’
III. (Ägypten und Altes Testament 50.) Wiesbaden: –––– 2011b. Jerusalem und der eine Gott: Eine
Harrassowitz Verlag. Religionsgeschichte. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht.
Ephal, I. & Naveh, J., 1989. ‘Hazael’s Booty Inscriptions’,
Israel Exploration Journal 39, 192-200. –––– 2012. ‘Paraphernalia of Jerusalem Sanctuaries and
Their Relation to Deities Worshiped Therein during the
Furlong, P., 2010. Aspects of Ancient Near Eastern
Iron Age IIA-C’. In J. Kamlah (ed.), Temple Building and
Chronology (c. 1600-700 BC). (Gorgias Dissertations:
Temple Cult - Architecture and Cultic Paraphernalia
Near Eastern Studies 46.) Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias
of Temples in the Levant (2.-1. Millennium BCE), 317-
Press.
342. (Abhandlungen des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins
Grimal, N., 2008. ‘La preuve par neuf’. In F. Adrom, K. Band 41.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Schlüter & A. Schlüter (eds), Altägyptische Weltsichten,
–––– 2013. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus
56-64. (Ägypten und Altes Testament 68.) Wiesbaden:
Palästina / Israel: von den Anfängen bis zur Perserzeit
Harrassowitz Verlag.
- Katalog Band IV: Von Tel Gamma bis Chirbet Husche.
Galil, G., 1996. The Chronology of the Kings of Israel & Mit Beiträgen von Baruch Brandl, Daphne Ben-Tor
Judah. Leiden: E. J. Brill. und Leonardo Pajarola. (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalia
Görg, M., 1979. ‘Mitanni in Gruppenschreibungen’, Series Archaeologica 33.) Freiburg: Academic Press
Göttinger Miszellen 32, 17-18. Fribourg.
–––– 2005. ‘Schoschenq I. und Mitanni’, Göttinger Keel, O. and Uehlinger, C., 1998a. Gods, Goddesses, and
Miszellen 207, 5-6. Images of God In Ancient Israel. Edinburgh: T & T
Hawkins, J. D., 2009. ‘Cilicia, the Amuq, and Aleppo: Clark.
New Light in a Dark Age’, Near Eastern Archaeology –––– 1998b. Götter, Göttinnen und Gottessymbole.
72:4, 164-173. Freiburg i. Br.: Herder.
Herbordt, S., 1992. Neuassyrische Glyptik des 8.-7. Jh. v. Keel-Leu, H. and Teissier, B., 2004. Die vorderasiatischen
Chr. (State Archives of Assyria Studies 1.) Helsinki: Rollsiegel der Sammlungen <<Bible + Orient>> der
University of Helsinki. Universität Freiburg Schweiz. Freiburg: Academic
Herrmann, G., et al., 2004. The Published Ivories from Press Fribourg.
Fort Shalmaneser, Nimrud - a scanned archive of Kitchen, K. A., 1986. The Third Intermediate Period in
archaeology in Iraq. London: Institute of Archaeology, Egypt (1100-650 B.C.). 2nd ed. Warminster: Aris &
University College London/British School of Phillips.
Archaeology in Iraq.
–––– 2009. ‘Egyptian New Kingdom Topographical Lists:
Hoffmeier, J. K., 1989. ‘Reconsidering Egypt’s Part in the An Historical Resource with “Literary” Histories’. In B.
Termination of the Middle Bronze Age in Palestine’, Brand & L. Cooper (eds), Causing His Name to Live:
Levant 21, 181-193. Studies in Egyptian Epigraphy and History in Memory
James, P., 2002. Review of William Dever: What Did of Wiliam J. Murnane, 129-135. E. J. Brill: Leiden.
135
Copyright material: no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
JAMES & VAN DER VEEN (EDS): SOLOMON AND SHISHAK (2015): BICANE COLLOQUIUM (CAMBRIDGE 2011)
Luckenbill, D. D., 1926. Ancient Records of Assyrian and Puech, E., 1981. ‘L’ivoire inscrit d’Arslan-Tash et les rois
Babylonia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. de Damas’, Revue Biblique 88, 544-562.
Maeir, A. M., 2008, ‘Hazael, Birhadad and the ۊU’܈. In D. Reich, R. et al., 2007. ‘Recent Discoveries in the City
Schloen (ed.), Exploring the Longue Durée: Essays in of David, Jerusalem’, Israel Exploration Journal 57,
Honor of Larence E. Stager, 273-277. Winona Lake 153-169.
IN: Eisenbrauns. Reich, R., 2011. Excavating the City of David - Where
–––– 2012 (ed.). 7HOO HV6D¿*DWK , 7KH Jerusalem’s History Began. Jerusalem: Israel
Seasons, Volume 1: Text, Volume 2: Plates. (Ägypten Exploration Society/Biblical Archaeology Society.
und Altes Testament 69.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Reinhold, G. G. G., 2003. ‘Zu den Stelenbruchstücken der
Verlag. altaramäischen Inschrift von Tel Dan, Israel’. In G. G.
Maeir, A. M. & Gur-Arieh, S., 2011. ‘Comparative Aspects G. Reinhold (ed.), Bei Sonnenaufgang auf dem Tell,
of the Aramean Siege System at Tell eৢ- ৡa¿/Gath’. In 121-155. Remshalden: Verlag Bernhard Albert Greiner.
I. Finkelstein & N. Na’aman (eds), The Fire Signals Ritner, R. K., 2009. The Libyan Anarchy: Inscriptions
of Lachish: Studies in the Archaeology of Israel in from Egypt’s Third Intermediate Period. Atlanta, GA:
the Late Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Persian Period in Society of Biblical Literature.
Honor of David Ussishkin, 227-244. Winona Lake IN:
Röllig, W., 1988. ‘Die aramäische Inschrift für Haza’el
Eisenbrauns.
und ihr Duplikat’. In H. Kyrieleis & W. Röllig (eds),
Mazar, B., 1986. ‘The Aramean Empire and Its Relations Ein altorientalischer Pferdeschmuck aus dem Heraion
with Israel’. In S. Ahituv & B. A. Levine (eds), The von Samos, 62-75. (Mitteilungen des Deutschen
Early Biblical Period - Historical Studies, 151-172. Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung 103.)
Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Athens: Deutsch-archäologisches Institut.
Mazzoni, S., 1998. 7KH ,WDOLDQ ([FDYDWLRQV RI 7HOO $¿V Rollston, C. A., 2010. Writing and Literacy in the World of
(Syria): From Chiefdom to an Aramaean State. Pisa: Ancient Israel - Epigraphic Evidence from the Iron Age.
Edizione ETS/University of Pisa. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature.
Millard, A. R., 1999. ‘Israelite and Aramaean History in Steiner, M. L., 2003. Excavations by Kathleen Kenyon in
the Light of Inscriptions’. In V. Philips Long (ed.), Jerusalem 1961-1967, Volume III - The Settlement in
Israel’s Past in Present Research: Essays on Ancient the Bronze and Iron Ages. (Copenhagen International
Israelite Historiography, 129-141. Winona Lake IN: Series 9.) London/New York: Shef¿eld Academic
Eisenbrauns. Press/Continuum.
Miller, J. M. & Hayes, J. H., 1986. A History of Ancient Simons, J., 1937. Handbook for the Study of Egyptian
Israel and Judah. London: SCM Press. Topographical Lists Relating to Western Asia. Leiden:
Morkot, R. & James, P., 2009. ‘Peftjauawybast, King of E. J. Brill.
Nen-nesut: Genealogy, Art History, and the Chronology Szuchman, J., 2009. ‘Revisiting Hanigalbat: Settlement
of Late Libyan Egypt’, Antiguo Oriente 7, 13-55. in the Western Provinces of the Middle Assyrian
–––– in prep. ‘Shebitqo’. Kingdom’, Studies in the Civilization of Nuzi and the
Hurrians 18, 531-544.
Mykytiuk, L. J., 2004. Identifying Biblical Persons in
Northwest Semitic Inscriptions of 1200-539 B.C.E. Unger, M. F., 1980. Israel and the Aramaeans of Damascus.
Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Book House.
Na’aman, N., 1995. ‘Hazael of cAmqi and Hadadezer of Ussishkin, D., 2009. ‘On the So-called Aramaean
Beth-Rehob’, Ugarit-Forschungen 27, 381-394. ெSiege Trench” in Tell eৢ-ৡa¿, Ancient Gath’, Israel
Exploration Journal 59:2, 137-157.
Noordtzij, A., 1957. Kronieken. Vol, II. Kampen:
Uitgeverij J. H. Kok. van der Veen, P. G., 2013. ‘Zeit der getrennten Reiche
– Juda’. In W. Zwickel et al. (eds), Herders Neuer
Oppenheim, A. L., 1969. ‘Babylonian and Assyrian
Bibelatlas, 164-189. Freiburg i. Br.: Herder.
Historical Texts’. In J. B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near
Eastern Documents Relating to the Old Testament, Wiseman, D. J., 1993. 1 & 2 Kings - An Introduction &
265-317. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Commentary. (Tyndale Old Testament Commentary
Series 9.) Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press.
Parayre, D., 1993. ‘À propos des sceaux ouest-sémitiques:
le r۾le de l`iconographie dans l’attribution d’ un Younger, K. L., 2007. ‘Some of What’s New in Old Aramaic
sceau à une aire culturelle à un atelier’. In B. Sass Epigraphy’, Near Eastern Archaeology 70:3, 139-146.
& C. Uehlinger (eds), Studies in the Iconography of Zwickel, W., 2013. ‘Zeit Jehus und seine Nachfolger’. In
Northwest Semitic Inscribed Seals, 27-51. Freiburg: W. Zwickel et al. (eds), Herders Neuer Bibelatlas, 154-
University Press Fribourg Switzerland. 156. Freiburg i. Br.: Herder Verlag.
136
