The image of Assyria in Isaiah 2:5-22: the campaign motif reversed.

• Author: Aster, Shawn Zelig

In 1983, Peter Machinist published an essay entitled "Assyria and its Image in the First Isaiah." (1) In it, he demonstrated that many passages in First Isaiah describe Assyria in language closely parallel to that of the Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions. These parallels are highly specific, and point strongly to the probability that the author of the First Isaiah was familiar with both the ideas found in Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions and the stereotypical phrases and characteristic language found in them.

Based on these parallels, Machinist concluded that "Isaiah's knowledge of Assyria was gained not merely from actual experience of the Assyrians in Palestine, but from official Assyrian literature, especially of the court." (2) Judeans would have been exposed to such literature, probably in its oral form, in one of three settings. The first, as suggested by Machinist, was the presence of Judeans in the Assyrian capitals. Judean embassies were sent to the Neo-Assyrian capitals to deliver tribute at least as early as 734 B.C.E. (3) They continued to make these journeys until at least 712 B.C.E. (4) When visiting the Assyrian capitals, the tribute-bearers were conducted through the palaces, in order to subject them to what art historians have called the "program" of Assyrian palaces. (5) The program was a series of artistic images, often accompanied by cuneiform captions, presented in a logical and predetermined sequence, designed to impress Assyrian imperial ideology upon foreign emissaries. The emissaries would thus be encouraged to convince the potentates they represented to maintain their allegiance to the empire. Assyrian escorts may have explained the texts and pictures to the visitors, ensuring the intended impact. (6) This type of exposure would apprise visitors of the central concepts in Assyrian imperial ideology, but it is doubtful whether it would have apprised them of specific motifs.

A second possibility is through the establishment of rock reliefs and royal stelae by the Neo-Assyrians in the lands adjacent to and surrounding Judah, several of which were cut or erected during the campaigns of Sargon II. (7) The Assyrian practice of establishing such stelae to commemorate specific victories is discussed by Morandi, who categorizes the stelae according to the occasion of their establishment. (8) The function of such stelae was to ground more firmly Assyrian sovereignty in newly conquered areas by inculcating the local population with Assyrian imperial ideology. The text they contained would have been explained to the local political leaders by Assyrian military or administrative personnel at the time of its inscription, probably in Aramaic. This exposure to the text of the stele would have created an awareness of the motifs and diction typical of Assyrian royal inscriptions. This awareness may have persisted in the collective memory of the local population, but without it being reinforced by Assyrian personnel, it would eventually have waned.

A third possibility, evidence for which has emerged since Machinist's article, is the extensive Assyrian administrative presence in territories bordering on Judah from 720 B.C.E. on. (9) Assyrian administrators would have ensured an ongoing exposure of Judeans to Assyrian imperial ideology and the language in which it was expressed. Assyrian administrative practice in the southern Levant involved the establishment of secondary administrative centers at locations astride major roads, outside of the provincial capitals. (10) Two of these administrative centers (Tel Hadid and Gezer) were within a day's journey of Jerusalem. (11) It seems unlikely that the Assyrian administrators in these locales would have eschewed contact with the Judean political leaders. The language in which this ideology was expressed is the language known to us from Assyrian royal inscriptions. (12) This third possibility most easily accounts for the familiarity of the author of Isaiah with the language familiar to us from Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions. (13)

But beyond the fact that the author of Isaiah was familiar with this language and alludes to it in his writing lies the question of his rhetorical goals in using such language. What are the biblical writer's aims in using language which his audience (at least its literati members) could identify as coming directly from the language used to express Assyrian imperial ideology? Machinist notes that the use of this language allows Isaiah to depict a vivid image of Assyrian power. But Isaiah does not simply echo this language. Rather, he "sought to deflect and rework the Assyrian propaganda he encountered." (14)

More recently, Baruch Levine has argued that much of the universalist theology we find in the First Isaiah is motivated by the influence of Assyrian imperial and religious ideology. Levine argues for a socio-political approach to theological developments, and posits that the cult of Assur, which formed an integral part of Assyrian claims to empire, served as a catalyst for Isaiah's formulation of "a God-idea broad enough to measure up to empire." (15) Assur served as the hypostasis of the Assyrian kingship, whose ideology demanded that its kings expand the boundaries and reach of the kingdom. (16) The universal dominion of the king and of Assur is a basic element of Assyrian ideology, of which the standard title sar kibrat erbetti (ruler of the four corners of the world) is but the most common expression. (17)

The position of Assur as head of the pantheon, and his identity with the kingship created a system of relationships in which there existed no human force superior to the king. The king, who acted through the "power of Assur" (a ubiquitous phrase in Assyrian royal annals), is described as invincible, in accordance with the "heroic principle of royal omnipotence." (18) His invincible power is repeatedly emphasized and is indicated by the royal melammu, a mythic sheen which he received from the gods. (19) When attributed to divinities, the melammu expresses divine sovereignty, (20) but when used of a human king, it is a way of legitimating his kingship and a way of expressing his overwhelming power. (21) As Levine has argued, the invincible power of Assur and his king, which was broadcast to Judah through extensive contacts with Assyria in the last third of the eighth century, caused partisans of the "YHWH-alone" party to formulate new theological expressions. These portrayed YHWH as equal to and stronger than the Assyrian king.

These new formulations were required by the new challenge posed by Assyrian imperial ideology to the theology of this party. This challenge differed substantially from those faced by Israelite theologians before the Assyrian advances into the Levant. Earlier circumstances required Israelite writers to grapple with the perceived weakness of YHWH. As Levine notes, evidence for this earlier type of theological inquiry can be found in Judg. 6:13, which portrays Gideon as reacting to the Midianite ascendaqncy by asking: "If YHWH is with us, why has all this befallen us?" And where are all His miracles, about which our ancestors told us? The questioner sees past events as evidence for the power of YHWH, and questions why this power is not currently evident. One possible explanation for this limit, as Levine notes, is implicit in the concept of henotheism: If Israelite writers recognized other gods as potent, (22) then the temporary eclipse of the power of YHWH by these gods would not be surprising.

The theological challenge posed by the Assyrian ascendancy of the late eighth century, according to Levine, derives from its global horizon: Assur is portrayed as a universal sovereign, whose power knows no geographic bounds. Instead of being challenged by other national gods, in the eighth century YHWH's sovereignty and power were challenged by a universal sovereign.

But there was also another new element to the theological challenge posed by Assyrian imperial ideology. Assyria sought to portray its empire as a lasting and fixed political arrangement, in keeping with the tendency of empires to perceive themselves as culminations of historical processes. (23)

This differs from the reality of earlier episodes of Israelite weakness vis-a-vis neighboring nations, which provoked theological inquiry of the type found in Judg. 6:13. In these earlier episodes, it was clear that the ascendant nation would eventually become weak again (as happened to all of the various enemies of the Israelites portrayed in the Deuteronomistic history), and the power of YHWH would cease to be eclipsed by that particular nation's deity. But the ideology of empire seeks to portray the empire's sources of power as enduring, and this ideology therefore poses an additional challenge to believers in the supremacy and sovereignty of YHWH. (24) This challenge can be formulated as follows: Did the rise of Assyria demonstrate the truth of its ideology of a universal and invincible sovereign, whose power had permanently eclipsed those of other sovereigns, including other nations' gods?

One of Isaiah's early responses to Assyrian imperial ideology appears in Isa. 10:5ff., a passage on which both Machinist and Levine have commented. (25) Here, Assyria is portrayed as an instrument of YHWH, a response which can also be found in Isa. 14:24-27. YHWH is using Assyria for His own purposes, and will eventually wreak havoc on Assyria. This response recognizes Assyrian power, but sees it as a temporary state of affairs, ordained by YHWH, and leading to the defeat of Assyria at some later, unnamed but imminent time. It is in many ways similar to the approach of Judg. 6:13 which sees Midianite ascendancy as a temporary phenomenon. (26) But this response fails to engage the Assyrian claim that their imperial dominion is a permanent state of affairs. If flatly denies this Assyrian claim, but does not engage this essential element in the Assyrian...