014
“Dust” and “ashes” are referred to frequently in the same Biblical contexts, so much so that some scholars have suggested that the two words are synonymous and interchangeable.
For example, the Bible describes the mourner as throwing dust on his head (Joshua 7:6; Job 2:12; Lamentations 2:10), or using ashes for the same purpose (2 Samuel 13:19; see also Jeremiah 6:26).
Sometimes the two words are used together, as in Ezekiel 27:30:
They throw dust on their heads
And sprinkle themselves with ashes.
Or when Abraham confesses to the Lord that he is but “dust and ashes” (Genesis 18:27), and when Job complains that God has cast him down like “dust and ashes” (Job 30:19). Mourners are also described as sitting on ashes (Jonah 3:6), or in the dust (Isaiah 47:1), but obviously, in both cases, sitting on the ground.
To eat ashes is a sign of humiliation and subjection (Psalm 102:9, 10), as is eating dust (Genesis 3:14; Isaiah 65:25).
In addition to their usage, the Hebrew words are pronounced the same (efer), although their initial letters are different (“dust” begins with an ayin, “ashes” with an aleph).
However, Professor Anson F. Rainey of Tel Aviv University has recently argued that the two Hebrew words are really quite distinct. He cites philological, semantic and archaeological evidence to support his views. The archaeological evidence is based on his current work at ancient Beer-Sheva, and has become available only with modern techniques of excavation and analysis.
At Tell Beer-Sheva, the excavators noticed that the material comprising the streets in the Iron Age (Israelite) city was a different color from the material that composed the walking surfaces within buildings. The streets were paved with a layer of gray material containing some black striations. The gray material, mixed with black, was also found at the base of some storehouses. However, the courtyards in both public and private buildings were a light tan color.
The materials were sent out for chemical and botanical analysis to determine their content. The light tan substance was simply the fine loess soil characteristic of the Negev. The gray material, however, was a combination of dirt and an organic material. On further analysis, it turned out that the organic material had been reduced to ash by burning.
Yehoshua Ithaki, the scientist who analyzed the material identified what had been burnt to form the ash—tamarisk wood and broom-tree roots. Both are mentioned in the Bible. The Psalmist even refers to the “coals of broom-tree” (Psalm 120:4). Indeed, the large tap root of the broom tree (retama roetam) is well known in the Middle East as a source of fuel, because it burns so slowly. According to popular legend, the broom-tree retains its heat for a whole year. In modern times, the broom-tree was used so often by young Negev wanderers looking for campfire fuel that the Government of Israel placed the broom-tree on the list of protected plants to prevent its extermination.
The ash left from ancient fires was not simply tossed to the desert wind. It was mixed with dirt to pave the streets.
The importance of this layer of street construction—literally dust and ashes—lies in its resistance to the effects of the harsh desert wind and the infrequent, but torrential rains. (Last winter, readers may recall, sudden Sinai floods killed a number of Bedouin and their flocks.) Over the centuries, the streets of ancient Beer-Sheva have suffered remarkably little from the effects of this sporadic water or the regular afternoon gusts. Because of this stabilizing mixture, these streets show almost no evidence of warping, swelling or sinking. The ancient engineers were obviously well acquainted with the useful properties of ash in combination with dust or dirt.
All of this provides an illuminating background to the Biblical use of dust and 016ashes. When Abraham speaks of being but dust and ashes, this was a combination he—or the writer—knew well. It was a common material for paving. When Job speaks of being cast down like dust and ashes, the image is one of being trampled upon by man and beast like the dust and ashes that covered the street. When the mourner speaks of pouring dust and ashes on himself, he could do so by the handful whenever he sat in the street. The frequent pairing and interchange of the two words in the Bible simply reflects a common combination in real life.
When the words are used alone, there is no reason to believe that the writer intended anything other than the word he used, since both substances were readily available. The passage concerning the mourner who sits on ashes no longer presents a philological problem, with scholars attempting to change the text from ashes to dust; the mourner has simply seated himself in the street (or on a floor) paved with ashes in combination with dirt; he is literally sitting on ashes.
Will this same combination of dust and ashes be found in other excavations now that modern scientific methods are available to detect it? The answer must await future excavations.
“Dust” and “ashes” are referred to frequently in the same Biblical contexts, so much so that some scholars have suggested that the two words are synonymous and interchangeable.
