Tiglat-Pileser I: On the road to re-unifying Am Yisrael?!

This post title is based on this post title because the subjects are similar.

I read a very interesting essay on Shabbat by Yitzchak Avishur. It's titled (in Hebrew) "Literary Inventions and Historiographical Descriptions in Chronicles 1:5 - Which Tiglath Pileser Exiled Be'erah the Reubenite Prince?"

As you can already guess from the post title, the answer to the essay's title's question is Tiglat Pileser I, who lived around the year 1100 BCE. Avishur examines the different events described in Chronicles 1:5 and points out that it would be illogical to think that the verse "his son Beerah—whom King Tillegath-pilneser of Assyria exiled—was chieftain of the Reubenites" (ibid. 6) refers to the same event described in the verse "So the God of Israel roused the spirit of King Pul of Assyria—the spirit of King Tillegath-pilneser of Assyria—and he carried them away, namely, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan, to this day" (ibid. 26), twenty verses later, when several other events and genealogies are described in-between. Avishur concluded that the first verse describes a time in which the Assyrians were displeased with how spread-out the Reubenites had become in terms of territory and fought them, defeated them, and exiled - not the entire tribe, which was a much-later Assyrian custom - but just the leader of the tribe, Be'erah. Now, I know the sages identify Be'erah with Be'eri, father of the prophet Hoshea (Pesikta Rabbati addition 1:3:5; Yalkut Shimoni on Nach 516; Pesikta D'Rav Kahanah 24:9; Rashi on Yesha'ayahu 8:19), but I think the idea is worth considering.

Think about it this way: Devorah in her song rebukes the Tribe of Reuven for their clans having spread out and only being worried about tending their flocks in the wilderness, and not coming to help the tribes of the Galilee. In other words, in the time of the judges, things were pretty lax for Reuven. Why would Reuven need to become part of a pan-tribal alliance that, though might have some benefits, also has costs? The plausible conclusion is that by the end of Judges, things were no longer lax for Reuvem; things were falling apart. The Assyrians attacked them, as well as there being evidently increasing tensions with nomadic tribes in the area, as is evident from the Reubenite-Hagarite War during the days of Shaul, also mentioned in the chapter.

It is conceivable, therefore, that the Tribe of Reuven decided to join the rest of Am Yisrael because of security issues. Evidently they thought that the other tribes would come to their assistance. Later, when Shmuel got old, the elders that led the alliance decided that a fitting replacement would be a king.

Avishur points out that besides for Be'erah, we don't find usage of the term "Nasi" (prince) from the end of Yehoshua (22:32) and until the time of Yechezkel, when the king is referred to as a Nasi (although there is a single instance of the term in Kings 1:8:1). According to Avishur, this reflects the breaking of the old tribal-leadership system. Instead of Nasi we find as tribal leaders the term "Rosh", such as the person who replaced Be'erah, Ye'i'el (Chronicles 1:5:7).

So, food for thought.