057
When scholars speak of a document’s having been fully and formally published, they usually mean that the publication includes a readable photograph, a complete transliteration of the text, perhaps a hand copy of the text, and possibly a commentary on the readings. By this definition, I am aware of only 14 Ebla texts that have been published.
If, however, we count transliterations without photographs, we can raise the number of Ebla tablets which have been published to 24.
To a scholar who knows the language, a transliteration (in which each cuneiform sign is represented in Roman letters) is nearly as useful as a photograph. True, he cannot check whether the cuneiform signs have been correctly transliterated; a photograph is especially important when the actual cuneiform signs are in dispute. But in the case of the 14 Ebla tablets which have been published with photographs, the transliterations contain few really significant errors, so we can probably have considerable confidence in the accuracy of the transliterations which have been published without photographs. Scholars can offer alternate readings based on the transliterations themselves.
A number of transliterations without photographs appears in Pettinato’s new book in Italian on the Ebla materials.1 Pettinato’s failure to publish more photos undoubtedly has to do with his falling out with Matthiae, Ebla’s chief excavator, who apparently has been successful in preventing Pettinato’s use of the photographs, presumably because the photographs, unlike the transliterations, belong to the Ebla mission rather than to Pettinato.
A number of partially transliterated tablets (sometimes only a few lines) and partial photographs (usually one side only) have also appeared.
This gives some idea of how far we have come in the six years since the first 42 Ebla tablets were discovered in 1974, followed the next year by archives of thousands.
The vast majority of the Ebla tablets are simple economic and administrative records. Line after line and column after column follows this general pattern:
692 sheep offered
2300 dead sheep
Month: Salul
Significant information for students of the Bible will be very sparse, if it comes at all, from this data. From such texts we may learn something about the vocabulary of early West Semitic, but little more.
However, the Ebla archives also contain more complicated texts, including literary texts, bilingual lists, syllabaries, agricultural lists, lists of birds, professions, and treaties and letters (or perhaps records of letters sent).
Published texts include an inscription on a statue of Ibbit-Lim (in the Akkadian language), an administrative text giving palace “expenditures” from the time of Ibbi-Sipish, four offering lists from the same period, two lists of birds, a list of professions, three sacrifice lists using the old Ebla calendar, three tablets dealing with geography, one of which may itself be a copy of an old lexical list, a document recording the sending of a letter from Irkab-Damu, king of Ebla, to Zizi, King of Hamazi,2 and an account of General Enna-Dagan’s military campaign to Mari. Perhaps of most direct interest to students of the Bible among the published Ebla texts are geographic lists.
In referring to these geographic lists, I shall use certain accepted scholarly abbreviations and conventions. For example, TM.75.G.2231 is a tablet identification number, indicating that this tablet was found at Tell Mardikh (TM) (the modern name of the tell where Ebla was discovered) in 1975 (75), in Area G on the mound.
058
The four-digit number is the inventory number of the item: the two thousand two hundred and thirty-first item catalogued of all items found in Area G.
When quoting from a tablet one must designate whether the quotation appears on the front or back of the tablet and in what column and on what line it is found. Consequently “r.III.4” means: recto (face or front of the tablet), column III, line 4; a v. replacing r. means verso or reverse side of the tablet. Columns are usually rendered with Roman numerals while lines are given in Arabic numerals.
The writing usually begins on the face of the tablet at the top left. Each related group of signs is followed by a horizontal line. The writing runs down each column, line for line, from left to right, until the far right side of the tablet is reached. At the bottom of the last column on the front the writing often goes over onto the bottom edge, the tablet is gradually up-ended and the column continues on the reverse right side. While the lines continue to be written downward, the columns now move from right to left—reverse of the direction taken on the face of the tablet.
In transliterating cuneiform signs, so-called determinative signs are raised a half space, like a footnote. Determinatives are non-phonetic signs which originated because a single sign could represent a number of different words; so scribes used determinatives preceding or following the main sign to indicate what word it was. Hence, GISH would indicate that the word which followed was an item of wood. DINGIR indicated that what followed was the name of a god. KI usually followed the name of a city, as in the cities referred to below. The determinative itself, however, was unpronounced.
Three Ebla tablets containing geographic lists were dug up in 1975. The were TM.75.G.1591, 2136, and 2231.3 These three tablets contain the names of 367 cities. Until definitive studies are completed (and these are now in progress), it is difficult to be sure whether any of these city names correlate with cities of the Bible. I have, however, picked 13 cities where the relationship appears more likely. It is important to remember, however, that in ancient times, more than one city frequently had the same name. Moreover, the Ebla texts may refer to cities not only in Syria and Palestine, but also in Anatolia and Southern Mesopotamia. Professor Garbini even adds “Afghanistan and perhaps beyond.”4
Within these caveats, I list 13 cities from two of these texts which may have Biblical connections.
TM.75.G.1591
1. ha-ra-[anki]: no. 12 (TM 75.G.1591, r. VI 14). This is almost certainly the Haran of Genesis 11.3f. where Abraham and his father Terah lived for a time. Abraham’s ancestors are associated with the territory of Haran and, as Albright noted long ago, a number of city mounds in the vicinity of Haran were perhaps named for such forebears.5
2 gub-luki: no. 19 (TM.75.G.1591, r. IX 12). This may well be Byblos referred to in Psalm 83.7 along with Amon, Amalek, the Philistines, and Tyre. The same city probably also appears at TM.75.G.2231, v. I 4 as gub-lumki.
3. edenki: no. 54 (TM.75.G.1591, v. VIII 13). Readers will immediately compare this with the Biblical Garden of Eden. In his commentary to Genesis, E. A. Speiser6 suggested, as did W. F. Albright earlier,7 that the name Eden probably derived from the Akkadian edinu8 which in turn was based on a Sumerian loanword eden meaning “plain, steppe.”9 The Eblaite eden may be another geographical source from which the Biblical name was derived.
Ancient records in Mesopotamia offer still another point of comparison. At Fara certain texts have been found which contain the name of a divinity deden10 Sometimes cities were named for divinities, as, for example, dra-sa-apki, who is Resheph, the Canaanite god of plagues, in TM.75.G.2231, r. II.10. Perhaps Eden was a city named for a divinity named Eden. However, this is not certain at Ebla, since the d sign is not used in front of Eden.
Another city name sometimes found in cuneiform records is “Bit-Adini.”. One city by this name was found near Syria, another in Babylonia.11 Ezekiel 27:23 mentions a city named Eden and 2 Kings 19:12 mentions a city named Beth-eden.
Since the city of Eden is found in a commercial text at Ebla, it is interesting to note that Haran, Byblos, and Eden are brought together in a commercial setting in the “Lamentation over the Fall of Tyre” in Ezekiel 27.
4.i-iaµ-puki: no. 6 (TM.75.G.1591, r. III 10) closely correlates to the Hebrew spelling of Joppa, an important commercial city on the Mediterranean coast.
5. Eb-alki: 22 (TM. 75.G.1591, r. X 11). It is uncertain whether this is to be equated with Biblical Mount Ebal in later Samaritan territory.
6. e-ma-tuki: no. 63 (TM.75.G.1591, v. XI 6). This may well be the Biblical city Hamath. In 2 Kings 19:12f. both Eden (Beth-Eden = Bit Adini) and Hamath are mentioned together.
059
TM.75.G.2231
Clay tablets are often found broken into many fragments. Tablet TM.75.G.2231, however, was perfectly preserved in one piece. It is especially important because it is a duplicate of a list which was found at Tell Abu Salabikh (where several copies were found). Making lists is part of a scribal tradition which goes back into early Sumerian history. To discover the same list at Ebla and Abu Salabikh (some 460 miles east/southeast of Ebla) indicates some kind of scribal contact between the two. However, since there are internal indications that the Abu Salabikh lists are older than that found at Ebla we may suspect that the Ebla finds indicate a contact going back many years earlier. This being the case, we may expect to find a wide distribution for the cities mentioned in TM.75.G.2231. This is partly why we cannot be certain that names in this text which remind us of cities known to be in the Syrian area are in fact to be located there.
7. paµ-la-agki: (TM.75.G.2231, r. I 21). We can compare this with Peleg, the name of one of Abraham’s ancestors, in Genesis 10:25. Albright once suggested that the name Peleg reminded him of the city “Paliga at the mouth of the Khabur” River.12
8. urki4: (TM.75.G.2231, r. II 21). This may not be the famous Ur of Southern Mesopotamia since that city is written with an entirely different set of cuneiform signs.13 Pettinato has said that the Ebla texts point to an Ur in the Harran area.14 C. H. Gordon has long suggested that Biblical Ur actually refers to a “northern Ur.”15 Whether or not the Ebla Ur relates to the Biblical Ur is uncertain.
9. ra-ma-atki: (TM.75.G.2231, r. V 21). This reminds one of Biblical Ramath (e.g., Joshua 19:8).
10. sa-damki: (TM.G.2231, r. X 4). The resemblance to Sodom is obvious—and disputed!
11. za-ra-ba-adki: (TM.75.G.2231, v. I 11). Compare this with Zarephath (1 Kings 17:9) where Elijah brought the widow’s son back to life.
12. da-purki: (TM.75.G.2231, v. I 9). This city may be compared with Mount Tabor where Barak gathered with his soldiers before the battle with Sisera in Judges 4.
13. a-guki4: (TM.75.G.2231, v. II 2). This brings to mind Accho of Judges 1:31.
Some of these identifications may never be proven, while others may fall in the light of better understanding. In any event, this gives the reader some idea of the raw material that scholars must begin to work with.