H. A. WlliTK.
HOSHAMA ("T"?'^. abbrcv" or textual error lor j-sr n- i_jii ],^^\^ heard'). — A descendant of David,
1 Ch :;'*. See GKNICALOGY.
HOSHEA ("!?'■' ' (leUreraHce ' represented by .4hsi on the Assyrian monumeius, LX.X '(Iftie, Syr.
'^^-^=^) was the son of Elah. The accession of this king of Israel took place in tlie twelfth yetir of king Ahaz according to the biblical chroiiologj',
2 K 17'. But this .scheme it is impossible to maintain in its integrity [see art. CiiI!<>N<'LO(;y UK <IT], as it is inconsistent in .some details with itself (.see Slade, GVI 88 ff., r>'>S R. ; Wellhauseii, I'mlei/ij. :iir ({csrh. Isr.'- 28o (T. ). It is also incon- sistent with the date of the A.s.syrian inscrip- tions, mainlv cst.ablished by the Kponym Canon (Schrader, ('O'/'ii.pp. U!l-l!l.'i, ;!2tl (T.). ".\ccording to the annals of Tiglath-)>ileser III. (.'! Rawl. 10, Xo. 2, line 28), rekali. king of Israel {hll Jlionn), was slain, and Iloshea a.scendeil the throne as the nominee of the As.syrian conqueror in the same year. The original jia-s-sapes may be found in transcribed form in Sclinider, COT i. p. '247, Klli ii. p. :!2. The biblical narrative describes llo.shea, the son of Klah, as a conspirator against I'ekah, whom he slew. On the other baud, it seems fairly clear, from the annals of Tiglath-pileser, lhoui.'li the text is mutilated in many portions, that we should render ' I'ekah 1 slew, Iloshea I appointed . . . over them.' lUu there is no real contradic-
* tin the vorall/allon of this wonl, iC9 note In Kam|>hau.s«n'a
• Daniel ' In SBoT. ii<« l,ie.
426
HOSHEA
HOSHEA
^
tion between this statement and that of Scripture. Hosliea was the head of an Assyrian party in Samaria,* whereas Pel^aU represented a policy of resistance to the encroachments of Assyria. Tliis jiolicy nnderlies his attaclc on Ahaz in concert with Kczin ; see Cheyne's remarks {Comment, on Isniah), introductory to Is 7. There are significant passages in the oracles of the contemporary prophet Hosea in which Ephraira is compared to a silly dove hovering between liomage to Egypt anil homage to Assyria (Hos 5" 7"). This theory of Kpliraira's shifting foreign policy all'ords a very jirobable explanation of the course of events. Accordingly, Iloahea made liimself the facile instrument of Assyrian power, which in 733 was threatening the very gates of Samaria. It is also probable that from the commencement of his reign (F!.c. 732), down to the death of Tiglath-pilcser (7"27), he paid tribute to Assyria like Jehu and iMcnaheni before liim. This may be clearly inferred from the mutilated conclusion of the inscrijition already quoted, and it is in consonance with the statement in 2 K 17'. But we also learn from this verse that soon after the accession of Tiglath - pileser's successor, Shalmaneser (Shul- mdnu-asharidu) IV., the payment of the annual subsidy cea.sed. Probably, the Ephniimite king ex- lected that the death of Assyria's energetic ruler, iglath-pileser, the combatant king \Jnreh [?]) of Ho.sea's oracles, would bring the Palestinian states some respite. In our opinion, Isaiah's beautiful poem, 9'-10* 5-°"*', belongs to this timet (n.c. 72G). The language of the opening verses which describe ' E|ibiaiui and tlie inhabitants of Samaria .saying in pride and exaltation of heart " l)ricks have fallen, but with hewn stone will we build ; sycomores have been hewTi down, but with cedars we will repl.ace them," ' clearly suggests tli.at Ephraim at this period w.as beginning to recover in a material sense from the disastrous ell'ects of the invasion of 734-732.
The new political developments that arose in Samaria were doubtless anxiously watched from the banks of the Nile. Palestine was of great strategic importance to Egypt. For the posses- sion of S.amaria, Ashdod, .Jerusalem, or Lachish by the ever-encroaching Assyrian power would be a menace to security on the Nile. During the preceding decades Egypt had been weakened by intestine divisions, but now it had passed under the hands of an energetic Ethiopian ruler Slia- bakai (Meyer, Gesch. des alien ^Egyptens, pp.
•Comp. Winckler, Gftch. IsraeTs (Theil i.), p. 180, and Qeschichte Babyloniens u. Aeifyr. p. 230 ff.
T Chepie, l)illuiai]n, and Duhm would pl.ace it some nine years earlier, i.e. shortly before the Syro-Ephraimite war; but It is not easy to see what substantial grounds exist for placing it 80 early. If we take the Assyrian invasion of 734 as the historic backg-round, the refrain becomes doubly significant, and the graphic description of the advancing Assyrian hosts in Is .s^28 (forming, as Dillmann rightly conside'rs, a natural pendant or conclusion to the poem) seems to be based on a vi\id and not too remote historic e.\perience. 9n remains obscure, whether we accept the earlier or later date ; and even when we regard the Hebrew text as sound (certainly doiibtful in the opening part of the verse), the phrase ' enemies of Rezin ' would be thoroughly intelligible under the historic conditions which we have suggested.
; The ordinary identification of the KID (wrongly pronounced Si> by th'^ Massoretes) with this Ethiopian ruler can hardly be maintain »d. LXX Srv*? ; Lucian, ed. Lagarde, reads, *po( A^6«u.lAlv AiOiortx TSk xetToixi>u*Ta. ir A'ty-CvTa. In line 2^ of the Kborsabad inscr. of Sargon mention is made of Sibi, tartan or gen -Talissimo of the Egyptian forces who co-operated with Hanunu (llanno) of Gaza in resisting the arms of Assyria. In all probabihty. we ovight to identify this Sibi (properly Sii'<)with the Kig (as we should pronounce it) ot the Hebrew text. But this personage was not the supreme king of Egj-pt or Pharaoh. This is clear from the same passage in Sargon's inscription, for in line 27 this monarch is referred to under his usual title Pir'u as quite a distinct personage from Sibi. It is this Pharaoh whom we may identify with Shabaka or Sabaco. The Assyrians were quite able to pronounce this name, as the great Rassam cylinder (Km), ooL li. 22, testifies, where it occurs in the form