Jeremy Goldberg, «Two Assyrian Campaigns against Hezehiah and Later Eight Century Biblical Chronology», Vol. 80 (1999) 360-390
The massive Assyrian invasion of Judah in 701 (reflected in 2 Kgs 18,13b; 18,1719,37) has apparently been confused with an earlier, limited invasion in Hezekiahs 14th year (reflected in 2 Kgs 18,13a.14-16; 2 Kgs 20; 2 Chr 32; Isa 22). Historically, this earlier campaign can best be dated to 712, when Sargon II apparently led the Assyrian royal guard on a Palestinian campaign. Chronologically, this dating fits perfectly with e.g. recent dating of the definitive fall of Samaria (2 Kgs 18,9: in Hezekiahs 6th year) to 720. 2 Kgs 18,9s parallel dating to Hosheas 9th year agrees with his apparent accession in 731 or 729. Dating Menahems death to 743 (as required, following biblical data, to avoid a triple overlap among Uzziah, Jotham and Ahaz) agrees with Eponym Chronicle evidence for this dating of 2 Kgs 15,19-20s presumably already desperate fiasco, and is consistent with a plausibly composite 738 tribute-list naming Menahem. Combining these datings produces a workable later 8th century biblical chronology.
4. Dating the Reign of Hoshea to 729-720
A possible problem for dating the biblical fall of Samaria to 720 arises from its dating in Israelite terms to the 9th year of Hoshea (2 Kgs 17,6; 18,10)58. A dating of this regnal year to 720 is universally considered too late due to Assyrian evidence bearing on Hosheas accession-date. However this supposedly decisive argument59 appears to be a baseless relic of earlier views: Originally it seemed natural to date the overthrow of Hosheas predecessor, Pekah, to the later part of the highly successful Syro-Palestinian campaign carried out by Pekahs foe, Tiglath-Pileser III, between 734 and 732. This dating appeared to be confirmed by two annalistic texts of Tiglath-Pileser (Summ. 4; Summ. 13), which refer to this campaign just before the death of Pekah. Moreover one of these texts has tribute from Hoshea sent to Tiglath-Pileser on campaign (Summ. 4:17-19), which was naturally taken as a reference to the same campaign. However these texts are now both understood to be summary inscriptions60. And it is now generally accepted, on the basis of a collation published by Borger and Tadmor in 1982, that Summ. 9:r.11 (in a broken passage which this texts geographic sequence rather clearly refers to Hoshea) places reception of the above tribute at "Sarrabanu" in southern Babylonia61.
This roundabout sending of tribute to Assyria by way of Babylonia can best be explained (with most scholars)62 as a non-routine measure associated with Hosheas takeover. Since some connection between Tiglath-Pilesers Syro-Palestinian campaign and Hosheas takeover is still very widely thought desirable63, and Tiglath-Pileser personally