DIGGING UP THE BIBLE
Important Archeological Finds that help Us Understand Scripture
pdf
Linda Manuel—1996
Important Archeological Finds that help Us Understand Scripture
Linda Manuel—1996
 |
| Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III (c. 825 B.C.) |
Austen Henry Layard discovered the Black Obelisk at Nimrud (northern Iraq) in 1846, one of several Assyrian royal chronicles scattered throughout the Middle East. Several stela record information about the political relationship between Israel and Assyria during the 9th century, and they document the existence of some Israelite kings in the Bible.
This stele is one of the most important finds ever made relating to the Bible. Five registers of relief sculpture (horizontal sections of four panels each depicting a series of scenes) decorate the four-sided limestone monument and show the collection of tribute from vassal states by Shalmaneser III (ruled 858-824 B.C.). The second register from the top on one side shows the presentation of tribute by "Jehu," king of Israel (ruled 841-814 B.C.). The central figure on the first panel of the register is prostrate at the feet of the Assyrian monarch. Some scholars have suggested that the figure is Jehu's emissary but, if it is Jehu himself, this panel is the only extant picture of an Israelite ruler from the First Temple Period.
The Assyrian record differs from the biblical text in two ways. First, the Bible lacks any mention of Jehu's paying tribute to Shalmaneser. This difference does not mean the scriptural account is incorrect. The Bible does not record every event in the lives of the kings. Second, and perhaps more significant, the stele calls Jehu "son of Omri." According to the biblical text, Jehu was not a descendant of Omri. In fact, Jehu destroyed the Omride dynasty:
The Assyrian record differs from the biblical text in two ways. First, the Bible lacks any mention of Jehu's paying tribute to Shalmaneser. This difference does not mean the scriptural account is incorrect. The Bible does not record every event in the lives of the kings. Second, and perhaps more significant, the stele calls Jehu "son of Omri." According to the biblical text, Jehu was not a descendant of Omri. In fact, Jehu destroyed the Omride dynasty:
You are to destroy the house of Ahab your master, and I will avenge the blood of my servants the prophets and the blood of all the LORD's servants shed by Jezebel. (2 Kgs 9:7)
Murder and usurpation were common occurrences in the northern kingdom of Israel, unlike Judah, where Davidic kings ruled continuously for four hundred years. Omri, an Israelite general, became king by attacking his predecessor (882 B.C.). He was succeeded by his son Ahab (ruled 871-852 B.C.) who, in turn, was succeeded first by one son, Ahaziah (ruled 871-552 B.C.), then by another son, Joram (ruled 851-842 B.C.) whom Jehu murdered. The death of Joram, however, did not satisfy Jehu. He also killed Ahab's seventy descendants as well as all in Ahab's court "leaving him no survivor" (2 Kgs 10:11).
The grisly paradox of the cuneiform inscription on the Black Obelisk is that it identifies Jehu as the son of Omri. If that is true, then Jehu murdered his own family. Throughout the biblical Ahab/Jehu cycle, the destroyed house is the house of Ahab, while the text does not mention the house of Omri. It is possible that Jehu was indeed a "son" of Omri, that is, a descendant of Omri—but through a different line from that of Ahab.
Alternatively, the Assyrians may have misunderstood Israelite politics or, more likely, applied their own policy for designating vassal states. Assyrian kings often identified other kingdoms by the name of the first king they encountered. Hence, if Omri was in power when Assyria made its initial contact with Israel, Assyria would thereafter call that nation "the house of Omri." If this was the case with Shalmaneser III, then "Jehu, son of Omri" was a national designation not a lineal one, and Jehu did not kill his own family.
Significance for Biblical Studies: Discoveries like the Black Obelisk confirm that events in the Bible are about real people in real time and help to substantiate the Bible as an historical document, thereby giving us confidence in what we believe. The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, a ruler the Bible mentions, confirms the involvement of the Assyrian monarch with the Northern Kingdom of Israel and with Jehu, one of its kings.
The grisly paradox of the cuneiform inscription on the Black Obelisk is that it identifies Jehu as the son of Omri. If that is true, then Jehu murdered his own family. Throughout the biblical Ahab/Jehu cycle, the destroyed house is the house of Ahab, while the text does not mention the house of Omri. It is possible that Jehu was indeed a "son" of Omri, that is, a descendant of Omri—but through a different line from that of Ahab.
Alternatively, the Assyrians may have misunderstood Israelite politics or, more likely, applied their own policy for designating vassal states. Assyrian kings often identified other kingdoms by the name of the first king they encountered. Hence, if Omri was in power when Assyria made its initial contact with Israel, Assyria would thereafter call that nation "the house of Omri." If this was the case with Shalmaneser III, then "Jehu, son of Omri" was a national designation not a lineal one, and Jehu did not kill his own family.
Significance for Biblical Studies: Discoveries like the Black Obelisk confirm that events in the Bible are about real people in real time and help to substantiate the Bible as an historical document, thereby giving us confidence in what we believe. The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, a ruler the Bible mentions, confirms the involvement of the Assyrian monarch with the Northern Kingdom of Israel and with Jehu, one of its kings.
For a pdf go here.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Relevant and civil comments are welcome. Whether there will be any response depends on whether Dr. Manuel notices them and has the time and inclination to respond or, if not, whether I feel competent to do so.
Jim Skaggs