The Arameans: An Essay

The Kingdom of Aram-Damascus was in a state of constant
warfare with its southern neighbor Israel

The Arameans were a linguistically-related people who spoke the Western Semitic language of Aramaic. Though they lived in substantial portions of the Fertile Crescent during the first millennium BC – primarily in Mesopotamia and Syria – they were never a unified power like the Assyrians and Babylonians. Just as the Greeks were a collection of city-states vying for power and absent a federal head, so, too, were the Arameans. Unlike the Greeks, the Arameans had no distinct ‘Aramean culture’; Aramean art and architecture was heavily influenced first by the Hittites and then by the Assyrians. Likewise, there was no distinct ‘Aramean religion’: though Arameans generally placed the storm-god Hadad at the top tier of their mythology, they embraced many deities from their surrounding neighbors and placed them in secondary niches in their pantheon. 

This isn’t to say the Arameans didn’t leave us any treasures, for their Aramaic language became the dominant language of the Near East. Aramaic was widely spoken in Syria and Upper Mesopotamia during the first centuries of the first millennium BC, and the language’s script borrowed heavily from the Phoenicians. Interestingly, the Arameans were the first to begin using alphabetic letters to indicate long vowel sounds. The Aramaic script became common throughout Syria and Palestine, and the Hebrew square script used in Judea by the third century BC – the ancestor of the modern Hebrew script – actually descended from the Aramaic script. How, though, did Aramaic spread? From the beginning of the Assyrian Empire, Assyria fought tooth-and-nail against the Arameans in Mesopotamia and Syria; when Aramean communities were conquered, their people were deported to the Assyrian heartland; over time, the majority of the peoples living in Assyria spoke Aramaic. By the middle of the eighth century BC, Aramaic was used for official communication between Assyria and her western territories. During the Neo-Babylonian Empire, Aramaic was the most common language spoken in Babylon (Akkadian was considered a ‘literary language’). During the Persian Empire, Aramaic became the most widespread language in the Near East, and Persia adopted it as its ‘official language.’ During the Hellenistic Age, Aramaic replaced many of the local languages, including Hebrew. Aramaic became the primary language of Judea, and Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible – called the targumim – were written and read alongside original Hebrew texts in the Jewish synagogues. It’s highly probable that Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount in Aramaic.

The Bible has three ‘traditions’ relating to Aramean origins.  The first two are found in genealogies: Gen 22.21 tells us that Aram, the ancestor of the Arameans, was a grandson of Abraham’s brother Nahor; but Genesis 10.22 tells us that Aram was a son of Shem (his brother, it should be noted, was Ashur, whose descendants comprised Assyria). We must remember that genealogies are less interested in informing us who procreated with whom and more about establishing relationships, particularly Israel’s relationship with her Near Eastern neighbors. Amos 9.7 tells us that Yahweh brought the Arameans – particularly the Arameans of Damascus – to their present homeland from an unknown location called Qir or Kir. Only the third attestation of Aramean origins, from the prophet Amos, seems legitimate in an historical sense, and it’s supported by a 13th century BC document in which the ‘land of Qiri’ is mentioned. Scholars speculate that Qir was located somewhere along the Middle Euphrates River.

Historians have advocated two ‘Aramean Origins’ theories. The first is the traditional theory: around 1250 BC, the Near East entered a period of collapse and chaos. The Arameans took advantage of this tumult to spread through northern Syria and upper Mesopotamia. In this scenario, the Arameans were likely nomadic hordes from the Syrian desert who swept northwards and invaded chaos-riddled lands. They took root and flourished in the twelfth and eleventh centuries. From their new toehold in the Middle Euphrates, they began to spread southwest into Syria and southeast into Babylon. The second theory, which is more recent, questions the ‘nomadic barbarian’ origins. Traditionalists put a lot of stock in the idea that urban cultures tend to fall prey to marauding nomadic barbarians; these barbarians, after desecrating and pillaging the urban centers, settled in the post-apocalyptic wasteland. In time they became the new civilization that was ripe for barbarian pillage. This theme has been used to explain numerous events in the ancient world: the collapse of the early Bronze Age in Palestine around 2300 BC and the renewal of Palestinian urbanization three hundred years later, the collapse of Neo-Sumerian culture in southern Mesopotamia around 2000, and the collapse of Mycenaean civilization in Greece to the Dorian invaders around 1200. Recent historians, however, have shed doubt on the titanic role that ‘nomadic invaders’ have played in these collapses, insisting that the more likely causes of societal collapse were economic, climatic, or social factors rather than barbarian incursions. If the traditional theory is dismissed, it seems likely that the Arameans were simply large, tribally-oriented groups with pastoral elements and large populations centered in towns and villages. Some speculate that the Arameans were simply the descendants of the earlier Amorites. The Arameans may have flown ‘under the radar’ because of Hittite overshadowing, but when the Hittite Empire collapsed, the Arameans were able to become politically dominant to the point that they began appearing in historical sources around the twelfth century as if they were newcomers on the ancient Near Eastern stage. 

Our understanding of Aramean history is dependent upon primary ancient sources, principally Assyrian annals and Hebrew records. Archaeology has unearthed no written documents to shed light on Aramean history; our knowledge of their history, then, is full of sleuthing and – dare we say it – guesswork. Because our primary sources for the Arameans are Assyrian and Hebrew in nature, the history covered below necessarily revolves around these two nations. By 1150 BC the Arameans had spread throughout much of Mesopotamia and Syria. They weren’t a political kingdom with a centralized monarchy; as mentioned above, they were much more like city-states vying for power and territory, often at war with one another but also entangling themselves in loose alliances and confederacies. Each state appears to have been ruled by a member of the dominant tribe in the area, and several states came to be called after the founder of the dynasty (i.e. ‘The House of [Founder]’). Their primary enemy was the rising star of Assyria. The Assyrian rulers, beginning with Tiglath-pileser I, longed to build an empire of their own, and to do this they needed to conquer the scattered and discombobulated Aramean city-states to their west. 

Assyria around 1000 BC

Tiglath-pileser I of Assyria (r. 1114-1076) launched campaigns to the southwest of Assyria, fighting Arameans on the Babylonian border and as far northward as Carchemish on the Euphrates. He defeated the Arameans there, forcing them to withdraw south; he pursued them, putting six Aramean towns to the torch, and returned home laden down with booty. Much of Tiglath-pileser’s reign was scarred by warfare with the Arameans. He wanted to control the major trade routes from the Mediterranean and Anatolia to Babylonian, and the pastoral nomadic Arameans were a problem, as they often raided trade caravans. In order to secure the trade routes, Tiglath-pileser needed to subdue the Arameans in the area. To this end he launched countless campaigns against them; he records in one inscription that he crossed the Euphrates twenty-eight times to fight the Arameans. During a period of drought and famine, the Arameans were able to get their licks in by temporarily seizing the Assyrian city of Nineveh and putting the Assyrian army to flight. The Arameans were unable to hold the city, however, and their modest victory wasn’t enough to quell Assyrian troubles. Things only got worse.

Ashur-bel-kala (r. 1073-1056) was Tiglath-pileser’s son and second successor. He launched campaigns against Aramean groups as far west as northwest Syria. Assyria went into decline after his reign, but during the reign of Shalmaneser III (r. 858-824), Assyrian dominance resurged. Shalmaneser pushed Assyrian expansion westward and established control all the way to the Euphrates. He made vassals of many Aramean and Neo-Hittite city-states in northwest Syria, and he intended to continue Assyrian expansion into southern Syria and Palestine. In 853 his expansionist efforts were thwarted by an anti-Assyrian coalition spearheaded by Ben-hadad II of Aram-Damascus and Ahab of Israel. Despite this setback, Shalmaneser retained control of northern Syria and upper Mesopotamia. His successors struggled to keep a lid on his conquests, but by 744 Tiglath-pileser III had subdued the lands conquered by his predecessors and was powerful enough to turn his attention back on southern Syria and the lands bordering the Mediterranean.

Assyrian Expansion in the upper half of the first millennium BC

These southern lands in southern Syria were some of the last Aramean holdouts, and they included two main city-states, both of which are mentioned in the Bible: Aram-Zobah (located south of Hamath) and Aram-Damascus (which would in time succeed Zobah politically to become one of the most important – not to mention last! – Aramean city-states). Though the Bible also mentions smaller Aramean city-states such as Aram-Beth-rehob, Aram-Maacah, and Geshur, it is Zobah and then Damascus that play the largest roles. Zobah takes center-stage first in 2 Samuel 8 and 10. In these texts we read about three battles fought between the Aramaean city-state of Zobah under its ruler Hadadezer and the nation of Israel under King David. At this point Zobah was the dominant political power in southern Syria; Zobah’s territory reached north from its neighbor Damascus toward Riblah, and it had a considerable economy based on copper mining. Following an outbreak of war between Israel and Ammon, Zobah threw in with Ammon and fought to a stalemate against Israel. Hadadezer rushed back to Zobah to gather more troops, but David launched a counter-campaign that caught Hadadezer’s fresh forces unprepared. The Arameans were defeated at the Battle of Helem. Many of Zobah’s vassals and allies sued for peace and became allies with Israel. In 2 Samuel 8 (which takes place thematically before the events just described but likely after them chronologically), David and Hadadezer went to war once again. Hadadezer was defeated again at the Battle of Hamath in central Syria. His army had been supplemented with contingents of Aramean troops from the neighboring city-state of Damascus, just north of Israel’s border, and after crushing them, David seized Damascus and installed a garrison behind the city walls. During the reign of David’s son Solomon, Rezon – a former officer of Hadadezer of Zobah – gathered an army, seized Damascus from the Israelite garrison, and proclaimed himself king (the Bible records Rezon’s campaign as orchestrated by God to punish Solomon for his sins). Solomon was unable to retake Damascus, and it became an independent Aramean city-state once more.

‘Aram-Damascus’ – called ‘Aram’, ‘Damascus,’ and ‘Syria’ in English translations of the Bible – became the dominant Aramean city-state in southern Syria after Zobah’s fall from glory after being twice humiliated by King David. Aram-Damascus – henceforth abbreviated as ‘Aram,’ since it was one of the last Aramean hold-outs against Assyrian dominance – exercised power over numerous minor Aramean tribes and towns in the region. The city of Damascus was located on a thirty-by-ten-mile plain that was watered by the Abana River. The Abana River divided into seven branches which further subdivided, turning the Damascene plain into a fertile and luxurious green land. Aram’s territory was, generally speaking, bounded on the west by the Mediterranean, on the south by the Sea of Galilee and the region of Bashan, and on the east by the Arabian Desert. Its territory was watered by many rivers – including the Orontes, the Pharpar and Abana, and the Upper Euphrates – and was thus fertile. 

After the split of the United Kingdom of Israel and the dissolution of the Solomonic Empire, Aram was powerful enough to ally with Judah and attack northern Israel. Ben-hadad I captured numerous important Israelite towns. Aram’s power reached its peak during the middle and final years of the 9th century. As the Assyrian threat loomed bigger than ever under Shalmaneser III, twelve states – including Ben-hadad II of Aram and Ahab of Israel – put aside their differences and repelled the Assyrian tide at Qarqar in 853 BC. That Israel and Aram were united against Assyria isn’t to mean they were friends; both before and after this incident, they were repeatedly at war. Prior to Qarqar, Ben-hadad II led an unsuccessful siege of Samaria around 860 and was defeated by Ahab at the Battle of Aphek in 859. Ahab’s generous treatment of the defeated Aramean king and his army likely reflects a shared knowledge of the Assyrian threat; Ahab knew that if Aram fell to Assyria, Israel was next on Shalmaneser’s queue. After the repulsion of the Assyrians in 853, Israel and Aram were again at war, and in 852 Ahab was slain outside the walls of the Aramean fortress at Ramoth-gilead. Ben-hadad II repelled further Assyrian campaigns in 848 and 843, but his second attempt at besieging Samaria failed like the first. Ben-hadad II (known as Hadadezer in Assyrian annals) was slain by his servant, the usurper Hazael, in 842. Hazael’s seizure of the throne so fragmented Aramean politics that the anti-Assyrian coalition that had successfully held back Assyrian advances for over a decade collapsed. The city-state of Hamath to the north sued for peace with Assyria while Hazael foolishly looked south to Israel rather than northward against Assyria. While Hazael and King Jehoram of Israel were fighting, a conspiracy was hatched and the Israelite king was assassinated; his usurper, King Jehu, put an end to Israel’s long-running Omride Dynasty. Jehu dropped out of the anti-Assyrian alliance as well, leaving Hazael on his own. When Shalmaneser III returned to the area in 841, he found only Hazael of Damascus determined to oppose him. The Aramean upstart was defeated in battle at Mount Senir (a.k.a. Mount Hermon), and he fled behind Damascus’ sturdy walls. Shalmaneser laid siege to the city, and though he was unable to break through, the Assyrian army laid waste to the city-state’s fertile fields. Shalmaneser abandoned the siege and marched west to the Mediterranean coast where several tribes and kings – including Jehu of Israel – submitted to him. Shalmaneser tried to force Aram to its knees again in 838 and 837; failing that, he turned his attention north, and southern Syria and the area of Palestine weren’t troubled by Assyria for three decades. With Shalmaneser campaigning to the north, Hazael again set his teeth against Israel. He annexed Israel’s Transjordan territories and forced Israel into vassalage; he also conquered Philistia before turning eastward toward Judah. King Jehoash of Judah sent Hazael a hefty tribute – which may indicate his acceptance of vassalage – after which Hazael returned to Damascus. His exploits enabled Aram to become a quasi-empire of its own. 

the end of Aram: Assyria Captures Damascus

Aram began to decline during the reign of Hazael’s son and successor Ben-hadad III, who became king in 800. Assyria – now under King Adad-nirari III – besieged Damascus. Ben-hadad III opened the gates and submitted to Assyria as a vassal. The territory that his father had won was retaken by Assyria, and Aram was winnowed down to her former size – and without independence to boot. During the first half of the eighth century, Damascus and Assyria were again at odds; in 773 King Hadianu of Damascus was forced to pay another large tribute to Assyria. Israel, having been forced into a short-lived vassalage to Aram by Hazael, tasted revenge during the reign of Jeroboam II when he forced Aram to become Israel’s vassal. Around 740 King Rezin of Damascus – known as King Radyan in Aramaic – took the throne; he was determined to bring Aram back to its former glory. This involved, of course, throwing off all yokes of vassalage and standing strong against Assyria. He made good with Israel and wiggled free of vassalage, and he formed another anti-Assyrian coalition that included Philistia, Israel, and the city-states of Tyre and Ashkelon. Judah refused to join, so Rezin and Pekah of Israel attacked Judah and besieged Jerusalem. They planned on deposing the young King Ahaz and replacing him with an anti-Assyrian puppet ruler. Ahaz, who was not a vassal of Assyria, appealed to Assyria for help; ‘This is your war, now come in and a put a stop to it!’ The Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser III marched into southern Syria in 734 and captured the coastal regions that belonged to Tyre and Philistia. For the next two years, Tiglath-pileser III focused on the coalition’s ringleader seated at Damascus. The city was captured in 732, King Rezin was executed, the country was devastated, and the city-state and its environs was annexed as an Assyrian province. This was the end of Damascus. All of Syria would break under Assyrian might by the end of the reign of Sargon II of Assyria (r. 721-705 BC). Assyria kept a tight lid on its newly-acquired Aramean provinces, and by the time of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, virtually all traces of the Aramean state structure were gone.