Maeir, A.M. 2015. Review of Ghantous, Elijah-Hazael Paradigm, RBL 2015

RBL 04/2015 Hadi Ghantous The Elijah-Hazael Paradigm and the Kingdom of Israel: The Politics of God in Ancient Syria-Palestine BibleWorld Durham: Acumen, 2013. Pp. vii + 213. Cloth. $99.95. ISBN 9781844657391.

Aren M. Maeir Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan, Israel The book under review seeks to review the biblical, historical, and archaeological evidence relating to Hazael, king of Aram Damascus, and through this to suggest the importance of the role and figure of Hazael in the biblical text as a figure who symbolized YHWH’s control of history and utilization of foreign leaders to execute his will. The book is divided into eleven chapters. Chapter 1 (2–9) surveys the discussion of Hazael and his “empire” in recent scholarship. While overall this chapter covers much of the relevant literature, some of the recent discussions are missed, such as Niehr’s (2011) overview of recent discussion on Hazael. Chapter 2 (10–19) outlines the author’s approach to the interface between the Bible and history; here Ghantous chooses as his model Halpern’s (2001) “Tiglath-pileser principle” for the assessment of ancient inscriptions. He also accepts the low chronology for the Iron Age, although his assumption that the debate on this issue has been decided in favor of the low chronology is hardly the case. Chapter 3 (20–36) attempts to survey the archaeological evidence relating to Hazael. This, unfortunately, is one of the weakest parts of the book. The survey of Syrian sites is limited to Mishrefeh/Qatna, despite the fact that archaeological work in Syria up until the last few

This review was published by RBL ©2015 by the Society of Biblical Literature. For more information on obtaining a subscription to RBL, please visit http://www.bookreviews.org/subscribe.asp.

years has produced important relevant evidence. This lacuna is particularly obvious with regard to the excavations at Tel Afis, where an inscription mentioning Hazael himself has been found. Ghantous’s lack of archaeological expertise is apparent in his discussion of sites in the southern Levant, as he does not delve into in any depth the question of the identification of bona fide Aramean material culture at the sites that he identifies as being Aramean. Thus, various suggestions to identify specific strata as representing a phase under Aramean control after Hazael’s conquests are never really substantiated (e.g., Dan, Hazor, Deir ‘Alla). In his discussion of Tell es-Safi/Gath, he misses some of the relevant, recent literature, such as Maeir 2012 and Maeir and Gur-Arieh 2011. Chapter 4 (37–80) is an overview of the evidence from West-Semitic epigraphic sources. While in general this survey is quite thorough, several points are worth mentioning. First of all, as noted above, the inscription from Tel Afis mentioning Hazael is not mentioned. In addition, in the discussions of the various inscriptions, the relatively up-to-date and judicious study of the many of these inscriptions by Ahituv (2008) would have assisted him in many of his discussions. Finally, in his discussion of the Deir ‘Alla plaster texts, while justifiably not accepting that these inscriptions are in Aramaic (80), Ghantous chooses to accept a suggestion by Knauf (one of many oral communications by Knauf mentioned in this volume) that the inscriptions are to be related to an earlier, ninth century BCE, occupation of Deir ‘Alla by the Omrides and that the inscriptions are Israelite. Needless to say, just as it is difficult to accept that the inscriptions are Aramaic, so is it difficult to accept that they are in Israelite Hebrew. Chapter 5 (81–86) briefly surveys the relevant inscriptions of Shalmaneser III, chapter 6 (87–88) even more briefly those of Adad-Nirari III, and chapter 7 (89–91) the relevant Assyrian eponyms. While the most up-to-date survey of Adad-Nirari III’s rule could not be included in this volume (Siddall 2013), those by Radner (2012) and Hasegawa (2010, 2012) should have been mentioned. Chapter 8 (92–110) is a general overview and commentary on the Assyrian sources relevant to the study of Hazael. The image of Hazael as reflected in the “extrabiblical” sources is summarized in chapter 9 (111–13). Several points are worth noting. Ghantous believes that Aram Damascus was a central power during Hadadezer’s reign (Hazael’s predecessor); during this period the kingdom of Israel flourished as well. Following Hazael’s ascension to power, the Assyrians conducted several campaigns against him but did not manage to dislodge him from his rule of Damascus. And after circa 830, with the last campaigns in the west for several decades, Hazael was able to extend his power throughout the Levant.

This review was published by RBL ©2015 by the Society of Biblical Literature. For more information on obtaining a subscription to RBL, please visit http://www.bookreviews.org/subscribe.asp.

In chapter 10 (114–69) Ghantous develops his understanding of the “Elisha-Hazael paradigm” as reflected in the book of Kings, and in chapter 11 (170–82) he discusses the relevant evidence for this in the Book of the Twelve. As Hazael is one the most oftmentioned non-Israelite kings (i.e., who is mentioned by his name Hazael), Ghantous believes that Hazael played an important role in the biblical ideology and theology. He suggests that Hazael portrays a figure of a powerful foreign king whose actions are used by YHWH to fulfill his wishes. In Hazael’s case, it is primarily to punish the sinful kingdom of Israel. This model is then later used for other figures, whether Assyrian, Babylonian, or otherwise. Pages 183–86 conclude the book, as Ghantous recaps the main points of the book. This is followed by an appendix (187–89) with suggested translations of relevant passages of the Mesha Stela and the Zakkur Stela. All in all this is a very readable and relatively well-researched book that both summarizes the research and attempts to raise some new suggestions and interpretations. While some of the author’s views may not be accepted by all, and some may even seem a bit unconventional, the book should be read by anyone dealing with the reign of Hazael and its wide-ranging effects on the ancient Levant. References Ahituv, S. Echoes from the Past: Hebrew and Cognate Inscriptions from the Biblical World. Translated by A. Rainey. Jerusalem: Carta, 2008. Hasegawa, S. 2010. Adad-nērārī III’s Fifth Year in the Saba’a Stela: Historiographical Background. Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale 102.1:89–98. ———. 2012. Aram and Israel during the Jehuite Dynasty. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 434. Berlin: de Gruyter. Maeir, A. M., ed. 2012. Tell es-Safi/Gath I: Report on the 1996–2005 Seasons. Ägypten und Altes Testament 69. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Maeir, A. M., and Gur-Arieh, S. 2011. Comparative Aspects of the Aramean Siege System at Tell eṣ-Ṣāfi/Gath. Pages 227–44 in The Fire Signals of Lachish: Studies in the Archaeology and History of Israel in the Late Bronze Age, Iron Age and Persian Period in Honor of David Ussishkin, ed. I. Finkelstein and N. Na’aman. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

This review was published by RBL ©2015 by the Society of Biblical Literature. For more information on obtaining a subscription to RBL, please visit http://www.bookreviews.org/subscribe.asp.

Niehr, H. 2011. König Hazael von Damaskus im Licht neuer Funde und Interpretationen. Pages 339–56 in “Ich Werde Meinen Bund mit Euch Niemals Brechen!” (Ri 2,1): Festschrift Für Walter Groß Zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. E. Gass and H.-J. Stipp. Herders biblische Studien 62. Freiburg: Herder. Radner, K. 2012. The Stele of Adad-Nērārī III and Nergal-Ēreś from Dūr-Katlimmu (Tell Saiḫ Ḥamad). Altorientalische Forschungen 39:265–77. Siddall, L. R. 2013. The Reign of Adad-Nīrārī III: An Historical and Ideological Analysis of an Assyrian King and His Times. Cuneiform Monographs 45. Leiden: Brill.

This review was published by RBL ©2015 by the Society of Biblical Literature. For more information on obtaining a subscription to RBL, please visit http://www.bookreviews.org/subscribe.asp.