Ran Zadok

Phoenicians, Philistines, and Moabites in Mesopotamia

This article is a survey of all the written sources concerning Phoenicians, Philistines, and Moabites in Ist-millennium Mesopotamia (Phoenician inscriptions from upper Mesopotamia are listed in Benz 1972: 19; for Phoenicians on Assyrian reliefs and sculptures, see Waifler 1976: 77-117). The decision to devote a special study to these three ethnic groups was made because no such comprehensive survey has been written yet, although much of the onomastic material has been analyzed already. There are two reasons why these three West Semitic groups (the Philistines were semiticized thoroughly before the period under consideration) are discussed together in one article: (1) they all spoke Canaanite dialects, and (2) they seem to be the least-represented in our current documentation among the West Semites in Ist-millennium Mesopotamia.

The Account of Nabû-šuma-iškun Revisited

Abstract Nabû-šuma-iškun is described as the emblematic malevolent king in the polemical pamphlet, authored in all probability by an anonymous member of the Urukean priestly establishment. However, certain measures taken by him are within the norms of ancient Near Eastern politics. In addition, accusations made against him by the author of the polemical pamphlet may be relativized. Nabû-šuma-iškun’s actions in the international sphere prove that he was a far-sighted statesman. It is demonstrated that important religious and political objectives of this king were not fundamentally different from those of later Babylonian rulers, including kings of the Neo-Babylonian Empire.

Israelites and Judaeans in the Neo-Assyrian Documentation (732–602 b.c.e. ): An Overview of the Sources and a Socio-Historical Assessment

The core of the meager documentation of Israelite and Judaean exiles and their descendants in Assyria consists almost entirely of individuals bearing Yahwistic names and their blood relatives. The statistical sample of 72 individuals obtained from this documentation, with bearers of Yahwistic names constituting no fewer than 54%, is probably not optimally representative. On the other hand, bearers of Yahwistic names in a sizable comparative sample from Israel and Judah (from ca. 800 to 701 b.c.e.) before and during the deportations (i.e., 732–701 b.c.e.) constitute only 43%. This article closes this gap by extending the pool of Israelites-Judaeans in Assyria by 29 additional individuals. The expanded sample of 101 individuals has only about 43% bearers of Yahwistic names. Admittedly, most of these new members are characterized by lower degreees of plausibility than those of the original core documention. Nevertheless, very few have doubtful relevance. On the whole, the addition of these individuals does not significantly alter the socioeconomic profile of the entire sample. This article attempts to shed light on the survival of the Israelites-Judaeans as a distinct group in Mesopotamia. There is some evidence that members of the Israelites-Judaeans residing in Assyria and upper Mesopotamia were among the Assyrians who emigrated or were forcibly brought to Babylonia after the breakdown of the Assyrian Empire.

On Population Groups in the Documents from the Time of the First Sealand Dynasty

Abstract This paper deals with the various ethno-linguistic groups which are recorded in the recently published documents from the time of the first Sealand dynasty. This dynasty ruled the Sealand and adjacent regions in southern Babylonia in the middle of the second millennium BCE, i.e., at the end of the Old Babylonian and the beginning of the Middle Babylonian period. Non-indigenous population groups are Elamites, practically from neighbouring Susiana, Kassites from northern Babylonia as well as very few Hurrians and Tilmunites. Some Babylonians apparently originated in northern and eastern Babylonia. The evidence for the presence of these groups is mostly implicit, practically onomastic. The Tetragrammaton is not recorded in these early documents: the final component -ya’u (with variants) in names of the documentation from the time of the first Sealand dynasty is a hypocoristic suffix.

Onomastic-Epigraphic Notes

Abstract After interpreting two biblical anthroponyms with their cognates, I analyse forty other West Semitic (mostly Aramaic) anthroponyms in Neo-Assyrian transcription from Dūr-Katlimmu on the lower Habur. Thereafter, I identify an Akkadian term in Aramaic script from the same site. Interestingly enough, this common Akkadian term renders an equivalent in the Neo-Assyrian dialect of Akkadian. The last section offers new readings and interpretations of a recently published ostracon from Jerusalem datable to the end of the Second Temple period.