342 angelika berlejung
aramaeans apparently settled in south(west) syria/north palestine in
the 10th and 9th centuries B.C. Ṣobah and Bit rehov in the Beqaʿ Valley15
(mid-9th century B.C.) and Geshur and Bit maacah on the eastern shore of
the sea of Galilee in the Bashan or Golan area (10th and 9th centuries B.C.)
mirror an aramaean presence in the area even if their precise localiza-
tion is still in doubt.16 it is also not known if these aramaean entities
entered the region from outside or (parallel to the developments in syria
sketched above) if they were indigenous rural-pastoral population groups
(or a combination of both), which used kinship as the pattern for their
collective organization and renewed urbanization. the names of Ṣobah,
(Bit) rehov, maacah, and tob are attested in 2 sam 10: 6.8, displaying
different entities, implying that four different allies of the ammonites
are mentioned. But according to 2 sam 8: 3.12, the king of Ṣobah (here
introduced as hadad-ezer)17 was the son of a certain rehov. furthermore,
Geshur and (Bit) maacah are often related or even paralleled in the Old
testament (dtn 3: 14; Josh 12: 5; 13: 11.13; 1 Chr 3: 2; but paralleled with
aram Naharayim and Ṣobah in 1 Chr 19: 6), while maacah is also men-
tioned as the name of a Geshurite princess in 2 sam 3: 3. the precise
mutual relationship of all these names is debated. it is possible that two
different biblical names do not refer to two different tribal and political
entities, but to the same chief-/kingdom; in this case one term would refer
to the tribal or dynastic name, the other to a toponym. this idea is sup-
ported by the attestations of the names of aramaean political entities in
other parts of syria. in general, the names of the new aramaean chief-/
kingdoms of the 1st millennium B.C. derive, especially in the cases when
the name contains the element “bit”, from an eponymous founder (thus,
a certain adinu has to be expected as the founder of Bit adini, Baḫian of
Bit Baḫiani, Gush of Bit agusi, rehov/ruhub of Bit rehov, and maacah
of Bit maacah) or from a geographical name (e.g., aram, arpad). some
scholars therefore argue that Geshur and Bit maacah18 as well as Ṣobah
15 Ba ʾasa, son of ruhub/rehov of the mountain amana (in the anti-lebanon)/the
ammonite (1. Ba-ʾa-sa dumu ru-hu-bi kur.a-ma-na-a-a), is attested as the enemy of
shalmaneser iii in the battle at Qarqar in the year 853 B.C. (rima 3, a.0.102.2 ii 95). the
patronymic shows that the founder of the kingdom was living in the early 9th century
B.C. the dynasty of ruhub/rehov was consequently called Beth-ruhub//rehov, see also
notes 29 and 57–58.
16 see the discussion in lipiński 2000a: 319–345.
17 the doubts referring to the historicity of a king hadad-ezer of Ṣobah are briefly
presented in lipiński 2000a: 340–342.
18 according to lipiński 2000a: 336 Geshur is the name of the capital, while Bit
maacah is the name of the dynasty. similarly, lipiński 2006: 208 refers to Geshur/Bit
maacah as a syro-hurrian kingdom. see also lipiński 2006: 238–243.