Peter Dubovský, «Assyrian downfall through Isaiah’s eyes (2 Kings 15–23): the historiography of representation», Vol. 89 (2008) 1-16
In this article I compared Assyrian expansion as presented in the Bible with that presented in the Assyrian sources. Then I pointed out the problems of the historical events presented in the Bible. Combining these problems with the results of source-criticism I argued that the biblical 'distortion' of the historical events was intentional. The writers probably did it to offer their interpretation of the downfall of Assyria. This presentation and organization of the events can be explained in terms of the historiography of representation. By applying this concept it is possible to explain several textual and historical problems of these chapters.
8 Peter Dubovsk´
y
launched an attack against Jerusalem (21). This shift in Assyrian
international policy indicates that the stumbling block, which according
to the Bible ultimately caused the fall of Assyria, is hidden in 2 Kgs
18–19. Thus, the following literary analysis of these chapters will reveal
the core of the biblical interpretation of the Assyrian downfall.
IV. Same phenomena, different interpretations
The gradual crescendo of rhetoric in 2 Kgs 15–23 reaches its
climax in Isaiah’s taunt song (2 Kgs 19,21-28). This unique piece of
poetry in 2 Kgs is constructed in the form of a dialogue with
Sennacherib:
19,21-23a: 3. pers. sing./1. pers. sing. (22) ––– 2. pers. sing.
(subject: the daughter of Jerusalem) (Sennacherib)
19,23b-24: ––– 1. pers. sing. ––– 3. pers. sing.
(subject: Sennacherib) (nation)
19,25: 1. pers. sing. ––– 2. pers. sing.
(subject: God) (Sennacherib)
19,26: ––– 3. pers. pl.
(nation)
19,27-28: 1. pers. sing. ––– 2. pers. sing.
(subject: God) (Sennacherib)
This song conveys four interpretations of the territorial expansion
of Assyria: the interpretation given by the Assyrians, the affected
nations, the daughter of Jerusalem (Isaiah), and God.
The Assyrian interpretation: Sennacherib’s words (2 Kgs 19,23b-
24) convey the winner’s point of view. By means of 1. p. s. the author
focuses on Sennacherib’s reading of the events (internal foca-
lization) (23). The latter interprets the invasion of Judah in the context of
Assyrian victorious campaigns. His list of successes markedly reflects
the rhetoric of the Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions. The Assyrians
conquered inaccessible mountain regions (µyrh µwrm ytyl[ yna) (24),
(21) Such a procedure has not been attested in the Neo-Assyrian sources; see
DUBOVSKY, Hezekiah and the Assyrian Spies, 130.
´
(22) Verses 21-23 use 3. p. (extradiegetic and heterodiegetic form of narration)
except verse 23, which in the MT contains the suffix of 1. p . s. This might indicate
that the subject (3. p. s.) and suffix (1. p. s.) are identical.
(23) J.L. SKA, “Our Fathers Have Told Usâ€. Introduction to the Analysis of
Hebrew Narratives (SubBib 13; Roma 1990) 66.
(24) The conquest of mountainous regions represented an achievement that
FOLLOW US