Ashdod (Hastings' Dictionary)

One of the five great Philistine cities. Jos 11" 13» IS"-", 1 S 5'-', 2 Ch 26«, Neh 4' 13", Jer 25»' 47», Am !», Zeph 2, Zee 9«. Azotus, 1 Mac 5" 10», Ac S". It is now the mud village Esdud, on the edge of the plain, close to a large hillock of red sand, backed by dunes of drifted sand which extend to the shore cliffs. A few palms grow near, and water is supplied by a pond. The sand probably covers the site of the ancient city. The inhabitants, in type and dress, resemble the Egyp.

rather than the Pal. peasantry. A small gem was found here in 1875, representing Dagon as a fish-man ; but this may be comparatively recent, resembling Gnostic gems of the 2nd cent. A.D. A. was not taken by the Hebrews, and was the refuge of the Anakim (Jos ll, ). The villages near it belonged to Judah (Jos 15"-). The inhabitants were still independ- ent in the time of Samuel (1 S 5'), but A. was attacked by Uzziah (2 Ch 26').

Its inhabitants were enemies or the Jews after the Captivity (Neh 4'), and it is mentioned as a reproach that the children of the mixed marriages spoke ' half in the speech of A.' (Neh 13=*). The city is said in the 7th cent. B.C. to have sustained a 29 years' siege by Psammitichus (Herod, ii. 157). In B.C. 711 A. was besieged by Sargon after the capture of Samaria.

Its king, Yavan or Yamanu, had been set up in place of the Assyrian nominee Akhimiti, whom Sargon placed on the throne instead of a certain Azuri who had refused tribute. The Philistines, Jews (Ja'udu), Edomites, and Moabit«s were allied, and had sent for aid to Pir'u (Pharaoh?) ; yet A. was obliged to submit to the Assj^ians. In B.C.

702 Sennacherib, according to his own record, freed Mitinti (who seems to have been also king of Ashkelon about thirty, four years later) from Hezekiah, and ha became tributary for a time to Assyria. In B.C. 668 the name of the kinjj of A., tributary to Assurbanipal, was Ahimilhi or Aliiinelech. The city was taken by Judas Mac- cab;eus (c. 165), and again (c. 148) by Jonathan (1 Mac 5" 10**). It became a bishopric in the 4th cent. A.D.

, but its importance gradually decreased, and the site was not generally known in the Middle Ages. See SWP vol. iii. sheet xvi. C. R. Conder.