Establishment

The Assyrians refused to quit. Under Ashur-ubalit, perhaps a brother of Ashur­banipal, they regrouped at Haran. Nabopolassar was unwilling to attack Haran alone. He was finally joined by the Medes and Scythians once more. Egypt had come to Assyria’s side and joined with them outside the city of Haran. Haran was captured by Babylon and sacked. The Assyrians and Egyptians were defeated in 609, but the struggle against Egypt continued until 605 when Necho was defeated at Carchemish. Nebuchadnezzar probably set up his command post in Riblah to which Jehoiakim would have come to offer fealty. Daniel and others were taken hostage at that time. Jeremiah (46:1-2) mentions the defeat of Necho at Carchemish in 605.
Assyria was completely despoiled and enslaved. Very little evidence of Assyrian culture is left from that time on.¹⁶⁴


17. SMALL STATES SURROUNDING JUDAH
Philistia
“The name Philistia refers to the part of Palestine which was dominated by the Philistines in the period of the Israelite monarchy. This was the area of the coastal plain lying roughly between Jaffa in the north and the region some fifty miles to the south, beyond Gaza, where the desert which separates Palestine from Egypt begins. The eastern boundary may be most conve­nient­ly defined as the junction between the alluvial coast plain and the limestone plateau called the Shephelah, which formed a buffer zone to the hill country of Judah.”¹⁶⁵
Ashkelon, Ashdod and Gaza are well identified in archaeology. Gath is not. Recently, Trudy Dothan and Seymour Gitin have identified Tel Miqne as Ekron.¹⁶⁶
The earliest biblical references to Philistia are in Genesis 21:34; 26:1,8. These are usually considered anachronisms, but it is quite probable that earlier Mediterranean movements took place on which the later Philistines piggy-backed. Mitchell says, “This Philistines of this later period are known, however, to have been of Aegean origin, and it is possible that the name was used in Genesis to refer to earlier people with Aegean affiliations.”¹⁶⁷
There were movements of “Sea People” in the 14th. c. Ugaritic texts mention Ashdod and Ashkelon as trading centers. Mitchell argues for Indo-european names indicating earlier migra­tions.¹⁶⁸ The later “Sea People” bear such names as Shardana (mercenaries in Egypt from N. Syria), Shekelesh (Sicily), Teresh (western Anatolia [Lydia or Troad]), Ekwesh (Perhaps = Ahhiyawa [Hittite texts] = Achaeans, if so from western Anatolia), Denyen (Darwana), Tjeker, Pelest, Weshesh were farmers who attacked by land and sea.¹⁶⁹

These “Sea People” attacked Egypt and Ramases III was able to beat them off, but their onslaught left Egypt weak and gave breathing room in Palestine for the rise of the monarchy. “During the twelfth and eleventh centuries, the period of the Judges, the Philistines, having settled, and possibly been settled as garrison troops by the Egyptians, in the area of Philistia, expanded inland and threatened the Israelites in the hill country.”¹⁷⁰ The Sea People/Philistines, according to Noth, “may also have advanced into the Plain of Jezreel and the plain of the River Jalud (Isr., Harodh) and settled there. Clear finds from the twelfth century B.C. in the excavations at Beth-shan, as well as the historical role of Beth-shan in the final battle of the Philistines against Saul (I Sam. 31:10,12), speak for this fact.”¹⁷¹
The Philistine political and social situation surrounded the organization of five cities (penta­polis). Their principal god was Dagon (known from Ugarit as the Semitic grain god) at Ashdod. Most consider the ruler title, seren, to be equivalent to Greek tyrannos.
The books of Judges and 1 Samuel indicate the dominance held by the Philistines over the Israelites since they controlled the iron industry (the Iron Age begins in Palestine in the 12th century). A devastating blow was struck with the attack in 1 Samuel 4. The ark was captured and Jeremiah 7 indicates that Shiloh was destroyed as well.¹⁷²
Under Samuel, Saul and most of all, David, the Philistines were subdued, but never brought into Israelite control. David used Philistines in his personal army (2 Sam. 8:18; 20:23). 2 Samuel 8 is a synopsis of David’s wars and victories.
“The narratives in Samuel suggest that by the time of the struggle with Israel the culture of the Philistines had become very much assimilated to that of the Canaanites. Three of their gods are mentioned, Dagon, Baal-zebub, and Ashtaroth with a temple at Beth-shan. These all have Semitic names and may have been adopted by the Philistines as the equivalents of some of their own deities. It is probable that Ashtaroth was a well-established deity in pre-Philistine Beth-shan, where the Philistines are unlikely to have been in more than garrison occupation. Dagon was known, under the form Dagan, with weather and fertility aspects, from the third millennium in the Near East, and Baal-zebub, whether the name is taken as it stands as ‘Lord-Fly’ or as a corruption of Baal-zebul ‘Baal-Prince’, which has support in Ugaritic zbl.b’l, has nothing that is not Near Eastern about it.”¹⁷³

On Beth-shan, Wright says, “Philistines in 12th century Beth-shan were most probably there because they were or had been in the employ of Ramases III as mercenaries. Stratum VI of the city . . . was controlled, in all probability, by that pharaoh, just as his predecessors of the 19th Egyptian dynasty had been in control of the city represented by the preceding Stratum VII. An official of his left an inscription on a door lintel and a statue of the pharaoh in the city. Hence we can only conclude that after his defeat of the Sea Peoples early in his reign, he proceeded to hire them to protect his interests in Beth-shan. They were still in possession of the city at the time of the death of Saul . . .”¹⁷⁴
Some of the Philistine cities may have been taken by Sheshonq (Shishak) at the end of the tenth century. Philistia seemed to maintain a form of independence during Assyrian domination as did Judah. “They are, however, frequently mentioned as suffering from the campaigns of the As­syri­ans.”¹⁷⁵
Egypt moved back in with the decline of Assyria and Psammetichus I took Ashdod and Necho II took Gaza. Nebuchadnezzar pushed his control south after Carchemish in 605 and became master of all Syria-Palestine.
In 539 Cyrus took over the Babylonian territories. Babylon, “Syria, Phoenicia and Palestine became the province of Babylon and the “Cross River” satrap.

Edom
The territory of Edom extended for about 160 km. (100 mi.) from the Wadi Zered to the Gulf of Aqaba and encompassed the Wilderness of Edom. A rugged area with mountain peaks rising to 1616 m. (5,300 ft.) it nevertheless possessed good areas for cultivating crops (cf. Num 20:17,19). In the Middle Bronze Age the King’s Highway passed along the eastern plateau (Num 20:14-18).¹⁷⁶
Early Period. Historically, the Edomites are descendants of the brother of Jacob (Gen. 36:1-17). By the time the Israelites entered Canaan, the Edomites were well-established under tribal chiefs (Gen. 36:15-19). The pharaohs Mereneptah and Ramases III claimed to have subjugated Edom.¹⁷⁷ The Edomites refused passage to Israel when they came from Egypt (Num. 20:14-21) and ever after there was implacable hatred between the two countries. As a matter of fact, Edom becomes an archetypical enemy of God’s people (cf. Isaiah 34, 63). In the conquest of Canaan, the Israelites did not disturb the Edomite borders (Josh. 15:1,21).

Middle Period. Saul fought the Edomites (1 Sam. 14:47); David conquered them, stationing troops to control and govern (2 Sam. 8:13-14). Solomon built a port at Ezion-geber “which is near Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom” (1 Kings 9:26). “Edom was ruled by a deputy (1 King 22:47), who joined with Israel and Judah in a campaign against Moab (2 Kings 3:4-27).”¹⁷⁸ “Under Jehoram (848-841 B.C.), Edom remained independent for half a century, but Amaziah of Judah partially recaptured Edomite territory (2 Kings 14:7). For a brief time the Edomites gained revenge on Judah (2 Chron. 28:17) when Ahaz (732-716 B.C.) was ruling, but about 736 B.C. Tiglath-Pileser III made Edom a vassal.”¹⁷⁹
Later Period. Edom is the butt of aggressive oracles from both Obadiah and Jeremiah. Both these prophecies are probably adaptations of a previous prophecy. Obadiah as well as Jeremiah should probably be dated in the 586 vicinity. The Edomites took advantage of Judah’s vulnerability after the Babylonian debacle and began to move into the Negeb and take over Judean territory. Eventually they come under Arab control. The Arabs are Aramaic-speaking Naba­teans. In the third century B.C. the Nabateans overran Edom and begin to control the caravan trade through Petra. The Edomites will be subjugated by the Hasmoneans (John Hyrcanus in the second century) and forced to become Jewish proselytes. A certain Antipater was appointed governor by Alexander Jannaeus (102-76 B.C.). He was the grandfather of Herod the Great. Herod married the daughter of the Nabatean king Aretas.

18. THE RISE OF THE NEO-BABYLONIAN (CHALDEAN) EMPIRE
The Rise of the Chaldeans
The Chaldeans (Kaldu to the Assyrians) are a sub-grouping of the Arameans who settled in the northwest (later capital at Damascus) and east (on the Assyrian border), southeast (Babylo­nia) and further southeast in the marshlands of the head of the Persian Gulf. (The Aramaic language of the Bible is somewhat different from Chaldean, but in earlier times, it was thought to be Chaldean. Now it is identified with the more broadly dispersed Aramaic dialect.)
Strictly speaking, the word Chaldean should be limited to the area called by the Assyrians “land of the sea,” the extent of which is unknown. “When these tribes migrated to Babylonia is uncertain, as is also their original home; but as they are closely related to the Aramaeans, it is possible that their first settlements lay in the neighborhood of the Aramean states bordering on the Holy Land.”¹⁸⁰ Pinches indicates that Sennacherib refers to 75 strong cities and fortresses of Chaldea, and 420 smaller towns which were around them. There were also Chaldeans (and Aramaeans) in Erech, Nippur (Calneh), Kis, Hursag-kalama, Cuthah, and probably Babylon.¹⁸¹ The Chaldeans in the Persian Gulf area were known as Bit Yakin (Merodach Baladan’s tribe), Bit Dakkuri and Bit Amukkani.¹⁸²
The Aramaic tribes were showing interest in settling in the rich lands of the middle Eu­phrates. Tiglath-Pileser I (beginning of the first millennium) was forced to confront the pressing hordes of Arameans. They controlled the caravan trade around the Habur and settled along the eastern, western borders of the Assyrian country. Ironically, David’s reduction of the Arameans of Damascus probably took pressure from the Assyrians and allowed the Neo-Assyrian empire to develop.

For three hundred years there was constant interaction between the Assyrians and surround­ing peoples, including the Arameans. In the eighth century, the mighty Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727) set out to establish Assyrian control. One of his major tasks was to establish order in Babylonia so as to secure his southern border. The Chaldeans around the marsh land of the Persian gulf recognized only their own authority. The Aramean tribes on the east bank of the Tigris were likewise not submitting to a central authority, the Arameans around Cuthah, Sippar

and Babylon were becoming restless.¹⁸³ He began by attacking the Arameans on the Assyrian border, then crossed the Tigris to the east, then attacked the Arameans around Nippur. The Babylonian king was presumably Nabu-nasir who was left on the throne and proved a faithful vassal until his death in 734.¹⁸⁴ When Nabu-nasir died, confusion reigned, culminat­ing in the usurpation of the throne by a Chaldean of the Bit-Amukkani tribe. Tiglath-Pileser violently suppressed the revolt, and the Chaldean areas were severely reduced. Merodach-baladan of Bit-Yakin paid homage and tribute to him. This is the same man who sent messengers to Hezekiah (Isaiah 39). Tiglath-Pileser took the throne himself (he took the hands of Marduk), and adopted the name Pul (as used in the Bible).

It became Merodach-Baladan’s task to unite the disparate and divided Chaldean tribes. He apparently was eventually able to do so. He also formed an alliance with the Elamites, the only people who might be able to stand against the Assyrians. In 721 he threw off the Assyrian yoke, entered Babylon and “took the hands of Bel.”
Sargon set out in 720 to confront the combined armies, but Merodach-Baladan failed to join up with the Elamites in time. The battle was indecisive, but apparently the Assyrians withdrew and Merodach-Baladan was left to rule in peace. However, after a decade, Sargon moved south and Merodach-Baladan was forced to flee. However, Sargon allowed him to remain chief of the Bit Yakin, perhaps as a conciliatory move.

When Sennacherib became king in 705, Merodach-Baladan resumed his intrigue against Assyria. He could entice the Arameans to the north and east to join him, but he had trouble with the Babylonians who had a lingering resentment of his previous rule. He enlisted the aid of Elam again and sent messen­gers west to induce the rulers of that area to rise up against Assyria, probably to be timed with his invasion of Babylon. Hezekiah gladly received the messengers and was soundly rebuked by Isaiah.
The plans of Merodach-Baladan were frustrated when the Babylonians appointed their own king, forcing him to march on the city earlier than he had planned and take the throne once more. This was in 703 B.C. Sennacherib put his troops in the field and soundly defeated the Elamites and their allies. Only the Elamites proved a worthy fighting force. Merodach-Baladan fled, and Senna­cherib marched on Babylon, where he was gladly received by the inhabitants. Sennacherib dealt a severe blow to the entire Chaldean district. He placed a certain Bel-Ibni on the throne in Babylon. Sennacherib made another punitive raid against the Chaldeans in 700 and deported many from Bit Yakin, while Merodach-Baladan fled once more to the Elamites. (N.B. It would appear to me that Merodach-Baladan appealed to Hezekiah prior to the 701 invasion by Sen­nacherib. If so, Isaiah 38-39 took place before 36-37. Their placement in that order by Isaiah wold indicate the Babylonian emphasis of 40-66.)
Merodach-Baladan died, and after a period of time, a certain Chaldean by the name of Mushezib-Marduk proclaimed himself king of Babylon. Sennacherib, after an arduous battle, laid siege to Babylon and defeated it in 689. “The sack of Babylon marks a turning point in Sen­nacherib’s policy. For some sixteen years he had endeavoured to refound a separate kingdom in Babylonia, and his endeavours had ended in complete failure. The capital city itself, always previously well disposed to Assyria, had finally become a stronghold of the Chaldaean party. The force of circumstances alone was sufficient to cause any man of ability to take severe meas­ures . . . The damage to the city during the siege and the sack was reparable, and it is known that Sennacherib himself commenced the work of rebuilding the city.”¹⁸⁵
Sennacherib placed his son, Esarhaddon, on the throne in Babylon. When Esarhaddon became king, there was a decade of relative peace in Babylonia. His two sons, Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shum-ukin, ruled after him in Nineveh and Babylon. The Chaldeans were so well ensconced in Babylonia that no one could rule without their cooperation. The result was an anti-Assyrian feeling that forced Shamash-shum-ukin to rebel against his brother, the king of Assyria in 652. Ashurbanipal, after a bloody war, defeated his brother, who committed suicide.
Southern Babylonia broke away from Assyria after Ashurbanipal’s death under Nabopo­lassar, the chosen leader of the Chaldeans in 626 and began hostilities in 625 B.C.

The Neo-Babylonian Empire
This political entity is called Neo-Babylonian to contrast it with the Old Babylonian empire lasting from about 1800 to 1500 B.C. As indicated above, the rulers of this new empire are interlop­ers from the point of view of the native population. Though the Chaldeans have been making their presence felt for generations and no doubt have intermarried and intermixed, there apparently is still a distinction to be made between them and the “Babylonians.”
The biblical material needs to be discussed before the Neo-Babylonian empire is taken up. The most remarkable Judean monarch of the century was Manas­seh’s grandson, Josiah, who reigned from about 640-609 B.C. Recent studies of Assyrian chronology make it possible to correlate Judah’s movement toward indepen­dence rather precisely with events in Assyria.
In 2 Chronicles 34:3 we are told that Josiah began to seek the God of David his father in the 8th year of his reign. This would be 633-632 or about the time of the death of Ashur­bani­pal. The death of Ashur­banipal’s successor, Asshuretelilani, about 629 was immediately followed by disorders in Assyria and Babylonia.
In the twelfth year (629/628 B.C.) of Josiah’s reign there was a thoroughgoing religious re­form. Such a purge assumes mili­tary control over the Assyrian provinces of Samaria and Megid­do.
In 628-627 B.C., during Josiah’s thirteenth year, Jere­miah received his call as God’s prophet (Jer. 1:2).
The finding of the old lawbook in the temple during the eigh­teenth year of Josiah’s reign (623-622 B.C.) resulted in a still more thoroughgoing religious reform, in which all sacri­ficial wor­ship was confined to the Jerusalem temple (2 Kings 22-23). On Josiah’s part, the reform probably signaled the final break with Assyria. We know that by 623 B.C., Assyrian control over Babylonia had ceased entirely, and that a Babylon­ian king, Nabopolas­sar, had consolida­ted his position and was preparing to attack Assyria itself.¹⁸⁶
Josiah was killed trying to protect Babylon from Egypt. In 2 Kings 23:29, the Hebrew ‘al, must mean “in behalf of,” since we know from the Babylonian Chronicle that Egypt was support­ing Assyria. Josiah wanted no assistance to go to Assyria. Later the Babylonians defeated Necho at Carchemish. Apparently Egypt wanted a weak Assyria as a buffer state against Babylon and so went to Assyria’s assistance (so in the Babylonian Chronicle). Josiah did not want Egypt to reassert control over Syria and so went against Necho at the cost of his own life.¹⁸⁷

Nabopolassar (626-605 B.C.)
Properly speaking, the Neo-Babylonian Empire begins with Nabopolassar who became king of Babylon in 626 B.C. and began hostilities against his overlord Assyria in 625 B.C. With his allies, the Medes and Scythians, he defeated Assyria, driving her to the west. He defeated the Assyrians and Egyptians in Haran in 609 B.C. and the Egyptians again in 605 B.C., giving him undisputed control of Syria and Palestine.
Nebuchadnezzar (Nebuchadrezzar) (605-562 B.C.)
The officer who led these campaigns was the oldest son of Nabopolassar and crown prince Nebuchad­nezzar. Nebuchadnezzar, becoming king at his father’s death in 605, was the most illustrious of the rulers of this era. The name is more properly Nebuchadrezzar (Nabu-kudurri-usur). The name, according to Wiseman, means “O Nabu, protect my offspring” rather than “O Nabu, protect my bound­ary.”¹⁸⁸ The name was used by a middle kingdom Babylonian (1124-1103) and thus has ancient connec­tions. The spelling with an “n” may be merely an inaccuracy, though some would argue it represents an Aramaic spelling. Jeremiah and Ezekiel use the more correct form.
Nabopolassar is generally identified as a Chaldean from the Sea Lands of the Bit Yakin group.¹⁸⁹ However, Wiseman argues that the evidence for this identification is not clear and that all that Nabopolassar says is that he was not a member of the royal house.¹⁹⁰ Nebuchadnezzar has for a wife, Amyitis, the daughter of Astyages, the Mede. This would accord with the practice of the Chaldeans to ally with the Medes. For the family tree see figure 2.
Thompson argues that the priesthood at Babylon was so strong that Nabopolassar was virtually under their control. At least he shows considerable deference to them in his building projects and constant self-abnegation. He says that the same policy of deference was carried on by Nebuchadnez­zar.¹⁹¹
Nebuchadnezzar was in sole control of the army at Carchemish. There, having routed the

Egyptians and taken over the area of “Hatti land” or Syro-Palestine, he heard of his father’s death

in Babylon. He made the five hundred mile plus journey back in twelve to fifteen days and was crowned king.¹⁹²

Egypt apparently exercised temporary control of Palestine. Jehoahaz succeeded his father but was deposed by Necho within three months. Necho put up Eliakim (Jehoiakim) who paid tribute to Necho but later was forced to sub­mit to Babylon (2 Kings 24:1). Jeremiah was busy at this time. Jehoiakim burned his scroll (Jer. 36).

The Chronicle says, “In the first year of Nebuchadrezzar in the month of Sivan he mustered his army and went to the Hatti-territory, he marched about unopposed in the Hatti-territory until the month of Kislev. All the kings of the Hatti-land came before him and he received their heavy tribute. He marched to the city of Askelon and captured it in the month of Kislev. He captured its king and plundered it and carried off [spoil from it . . . . ] He turned the city into a mound and heaps of ruins and then in the month of Sebat he marched back to Babylon.”¹⁹³ Note that the Chronicle does not mention any city but Ashkelon. Jerusalem is not mentioned. Daniel 1:1 says that Nebuchadnezzar besieged it, but this phrase can mean “treated it as an enemy.” 2 Kings 25:1 says, “In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant for three years; then he turned and rebelled against him.” 2 Chron. 36:6 says, “Nebuchad­nezzar king of Babylon came up against him and bound him with bronze chains to take him to Babylon.” Wiseman believes the removal of Jehoiakim would have been within the first year of Nebuchadnez­zar’s rule.¹⁹⁴
There is some debate about the time, but Nebuchadnezzar at some point besieged Tyre. Thompson says: “Tyre, safeguarded by the sea, ap­pears always to have clung to her independence, both against Egyptian and Babylonian. Josephus says that a few years after the battle of Carche­mish Tyre led a Phoenician revolt; according to Menander, Nebuchadrezzar besieged the city for thirteen years in the reign of Ithobalus (Ethbaal), and Ezekiel (ch. xxix) refers to the great difficulty of the operations: ‘Nebuchadrez­zar, king of Babylon, caused his army to serve a great service against Tyre: every head was made bald and every shoulder was peeled: yet he had no wages, nor his army, from Tyre, for the service that he had served against.’ Presumably Nebu­chadrezzar was compelled to recognize that he must ‘contain’ it only, which he could do with a small force.”¹⁹⁵