344 angelika berlejung
the focus on the name of the dynastic founder indicates that genealogies
played a major role, though they may not always represent real (i.e., bio-
logical) lineage, but instead may refer to the hierarchy of the clans or the
tribes with respect to each other. this way to organize and hierarchize the
social and ethnic context remains quite stable even after the early non-
urban tribes transformed into urban societies and territorial kingdoms
(with urban capitals). this is clearly visible in the genealogies of the Old
testament, which—even if they are constructions of the exilic and post-
exilic periods only and are therefore written down considerably later than
the narrated time—express the close kinship between the sons/tribes
deriving from sem (herein also aram; Gen 10: 22–23) and the arch-fathers
abra(ha)m (with his father terach, and his brothers Nahor and harran),
isaac, and Jacob (via their wives) to aramaean and transjordanian rela-
tives (Gen 11: 27–29; Gen 22: 20–24).26 the book of Genesis presents the
origins, earlier developments, kin- and relationships between syrian, i.e.,
aramaean, trans- and Cisjordanian tribes and kingdoms in the shape of
a family history. scholarly (re)construction of the rise and development
of the syrian and trans- and Cisjordanian non-urban tribes to territorial
mini-states with urban residences and fortified cities is quite different. it
is widely accepted that these developments in syria and palestine (areas
without clear borders between each other) have to be linked with the
phenomenon of de-urbanization in the transition from the late Bronze to
the iron age i and re-urbanization in the iron age iia, opening a window
of opportunity to the different tribes to settle or re-settle an area and to
found their early chiefdoms. in the beginning of the 1st millennium B.C.
these early south syrian, i.e., aramaean, Cis-, and transjordanian tribal
(and tribal confederation) chief-/kingdoms of the 10th and 9th centuries
were involved in mutual and local conflicts. in south(west) syria/palestine
the rising local sheikh-/chief-/kingdoms concurred with each other. Our
knowledge about their relationships in the 10th and 9th centuries is mini-
mal. it is probable that in addition to their local struggles, with the rise and
expansion of aram-damascus they all had to face the same enemy, who
surely threatened their independence or even existence. it is unknown
how long the early aramaean political entities of south syria and north
palestine remained independent or continued to exist under these new
circumstances. if “Ba ʾasa, son of ruhub/rehov of the mountain amana”
indeed refers to a king of the dynasty of Bit rehov in the Beqaʿ Valley, then
26 see hieke 2003: 42, 124–143.