Tiglath-pileser III’s Campaigns in 734-732 B.C. 163 Egyptians could come to the aid of the rebels. Furthermore, accepting the submission of Ahaz (2 Kgs 16,7-9) (32), conquering Transjordan and Jordanian desert and receiving tribute from Edom, Moab, and Amon, Tiglath-pileser III expanded the block of his southern allies further east and blocked off remaining access routes along which the coalition could get help from Egypt. The result of this military strategy was quite impressive. The coalition became completely disrupted. Tyre was captured and any possible assistance coming from Egypt was blocked off by the wedge of allies Gaza-Judah-Edom-Moab-Amon. The Assyrian allies and kingdoms conquered by the Assyrians (Philistia, Judah, and Transjordan) encompassed Israel on three sides. The conquest of Gilead and the victory in the field battle in the environs of Damascus meant that both epicenters of the rebellious coalition — Samaria and Damascus — were separated from each other. As a result, Damascus not only lost its food supply, but also remained isolated in the middle of the conquered territory. Only then did Tiglath-pileser III venture to bring his victory to a successful end: Galilee was conquered, in Samaria Hoshea succeeded Pekah, Damascus fell, and Rezin was executed. This strategy was not brand new. Tiglath-pileser III already employed a similar strategy in his victory over the North-syrian coalition backed up by Urartu (33). In Tiglath-pileser III’s 3rd palû (743 B.C.) Mati’il of Arpad rebelled and was able to gain the support of the northern states such as Urartu, Gurgum and Melid. Tiglath-pileser III instead of directly attacking the center of the rebellion — Arpad — he first eliminated its northern support (Urartu) on which Mati’il, king of Arpad, relied. Thus, attacking the territory between Kiπtan and Halpi, probably the weakest point of the coalition (34), Tiglath-pileser III inflicted a great defeat to the rebellious states: he captured 100 cities of Gurgum and Sarduri II, king of Urartu, fled on a mare. The result of this strategy was the separation of the center of the rebellion — Arpad (32) It remains an open question when Ahaz asked Tiglath-pileser III for help. 2 Kgs 16,5-9 favors the view that it happened before the Assyrian intervention, whereas 2 Chr 28,20 favors the view that it took place while the Assyrians were already operating in the Levant, see T.R. HOBBS, 2 Kings. (Waco, TX 1985) 215. (33) Reconstructed on the base of Ann 17 and Summ. I B:21’-43’ (34) It is possible that the battle was fought in the vicinity of Til-Barsip and Kummuhi and thus besides separating Arpad from its northern support it guaranteed access to the fords of Bit-Adini.