Queries & Comments

Professor Baly’s Bias?

To the Editor:

In a letter to the editor (Queries & Comments, BAR 02:01), Prof. Denis Baly criticizes The Biblical Archaeology Review for publishing an article on whether Kathleen Kenyon’s anti-Zionist politics affects her work. Prof. Baly asks for a journal that is “without apparent bias, either for or against Zionism, the Arabs, or anything else.”

Your readers may be interested in the extent to which Prof. Baly goes to maintain his own neutrality. In his Atlas of the Biblical World (New York: World Publishing Company, 1971, p. xiii), Prof. Baly writes:

“Nomenclature is a matter on which unfortunately great offense may inadvertently be given … (A) number of geographical names have become in the Middle East a matter of acute political controversy … (T)he use of the name ‘Armenian’ as a province of the Persian Empire and later a kingdom cannot be avoided, nor, of course, can the name ‘Israel’ be avoided in any biblical atlas. Therefore, to prevent all possible misunderstanding on this matter, it is necessary to state clearly that this is a historical atlas, and that such politically ‘hot’ names are used only in a historical sense.”

Israel is a “hot” political name whose use unfortunately cannot be avoided?

Isn’t Prof. Baly’s own bias showing?

Archaeology and the Burning of Zimri’s Palace

To the Editor:

The Bible (1 Kings 16:15–20) describes the seven-day reign of Zimri, king of Israel. Having usurped the throne, Zimri set up camp at the Israelite capital, Tirzah, until the people revolted and Omri, an army general, besieged the city. Zimri, rather than be captured, burned the city around him and died.

I have read several books on archaeology in Israel and also many reports on excavations at Tirzah. So far I have found nothing to prove that the Biblical narrative of the burning of that city was really a historical event. Maybe you could find out—was Tirzah burned in the early 9th century B.C.?

Père Pierre Benoit of the École Biblique in Jerusalem replies:

I consulted one of the collaborators of the late Fr. de Vaux who excavated Tirzah. I was told that he and Fr. de Vaux discussed this problem, but they did not find any evidence of a burned palace. Note that 1 Kings 16:19 speaks of burning the “palace, house of the King”, not the “city” as Mr. Sorgman says. Since the whole tell was not excavated, but only a portion of it, the archaeologists cannot even say that they have discovered the “palace” of Zimri, a fortiori any evidence of its burning.

In Revue Biblique, Fr. de Vaux speaks of the burning of a great building (1951, p. 429), but this happened in 724/3 B.C. when the Assyrians took the city. In Revue Biblique 1955, p. 588, Fr. de Vaux speaks of the conquest of Tirzah by Omri, against Zimri, and he assigns to that event the destruction of “level III”. But he made no allusion to a burning.

In Defense of Woody

To the Editor:

Not a word in defense of Woody? Let me be the first. It was a marvelous touch. One of the many charms of the BAR is that it can be serious without being solemn.

040To the Editor:

I write to support your inclusion of “The Red Sea Scrolls,” BAR 01:04, in the December issue. Such a letter had not occurred to me until I read the attacks on your editorial policy in the last issue. And while I am about it, I also support your printing of the Kenyon controversy. If an academic subject cannot tolerate humor and the news, then whether or not the subject ought to be taught is merely an academic question.

To the Editor:

Why should “The Red Sea Scrolls,” BAR 01:04, receive such bad reviews. If one can’t laugh at one’s own field, then one should reappraise his interest. When a subject is taken so seriously as to object to another person’s sense of comedy, then we are all in trouble. The article was well written, and in view of today’s world, is only slightly beyond the realm of reality. A little laughter lightens; and never hurt anyone.

The Blind and the Confined

To the Editor:

We are writing to request permission to record on magnetic tape articles from your magazine.

We are a non-profit organization that serves the blind and physically handicapped in many scientific and educational fields through distribution of scientific material recorded on magnetic tape and cassettes. We serve subscribers all over the world as well as regional libraries. Our subscribers pay a small fee that covers only a small portion of our cost.

We are happy to grant this and similar requests. Biblical Archaeology Review readers may be interested in knowing that several of our articles have also been reprinted in other magazines.—Ed.

To the Editor:

I would like to obtain copies of The Biblical Archaeology Review, but I am a prisoner without funds. Can you send a few damaged or used copies? I am sure that when I’m released from this blatant confinement, I will order a subscription since I do study archaeology faithfully.

We entered a subscription for Mr. Hoffman.—Ed.

Professionals and Amateurs

To the Editor:

I thoroughly enjoy reading the BAR, partly out of curiosity, but most of all as a welcome respite from reading the established archaeological journals replete with their scientific jargon, tables and graphs. The BAR is a sheer delight sometimes, taking the drudgery out of a long day weeding through pages of professional archaeological material. Thank you for making the BAR so interesting that even a professional archaeologist can enjoy it.

The BAR has established its niche among the few journals devoted to Biblical archaeology.

041To the Editor:

I never know what I will find when I open a new issue of the Biblical Archaeology Review. I am sure to find choice surprises, as in the most recent number. For example, on the cover is Albright revealing how Esther prepared cosmetically for her role as queen. How appropriate for this week of Purim! Other surprises include evidence of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, and, not least, a reply from Kathleen Kenyon to an earlier critique. The accompanying illustrations are remarkably clear and colorful. Altogether, an enjoyable issue, certainly for an amateur like myself.

To the Editor:

I have just seen your first issues and am impressed by the quality of the articles and their readability for the non-specialist. Your journal will definitely fill a need by those who are interested in archaeology, but lack the knowledge and experience to usefully assimilate the Biblical Archaeologist—let alone BASOR (Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research) or IEJ (Israel Exploration Journal)!

To the Editor:

As a charter subscriber, I enjoy each one of your publications very much. My only criticism is that the booklet does not come often enough.

To the Editor:

As a new subscriber, I don’t want to miss any issues of your excellent magazine. I’m enclosing my check for $6.00 for Volume I so I will have a complete set of the BAR.

To the Editor:

We have been to Israel four times and just long to return again. The BAR gives me a “quick trip” each time I read it. It brings the Holy Land nearer to me and helps me understand more of the place and people. Thanks for doing such a good job.

To the Editor:

The BAR certainly helps me to understand the life and customs of ancient times. Thank you very much.

To the Editor:

I just received my first copy of BAR. A mere glance impels me to write my hearty congratulations to your entire staff.

Jabin King of Hazor

To the Editor:

I enjoy your magazine very much. One of the enjoyable aspects of it is that it publishes readable articles from the most famous archaeologists of the American, British, and Israeli schools of archaeology.

It was very interesting to read the healthy debate between the two great Israeli scholars, Aharoni and Yadin, about the battles against Jabin, king of Hazor. A 042small aspect to this problem is the name itself, Jabin.

Dr. Yadin wrote in his popular book, Hazor (p. 16):

“We see that the king of Hazor received three successive tin shipments from Mari, totalling 70 minas, that is, about 35 kilograms. The most valuable piece of information, however, is the name of the ruler of Hazor, Ibni-Adad, designated as ‘king of Hazor.’ His name is given in the Accadian form of the West Semitic name Yabni-Hadad, ‘the god Hadad has created’. Scholars have suggested that the form of the name of the king of Hazor mentioned in the Bible—Yabin (Jabin being the Anglicized version)—is indeed short for the full theophoric formula. If this is true, then Yabin may have been a royal dynastic name of the kings of Hazor for quite a time.”

Just how long was it from the time of Ibni-Adad of the Mari letters to the time of Jabin and Joshua. The lowest possible date for the date of Mari letters according to a chart supplied by Yadin on page 144 is 1662 B.C. and Yadin dates the destruction of Jabin’s Hazor c. 1230 B.C. A simple computation indicates that the name Jabin endured for at least 432 years.

I have not ended the problem, but only added another dimension to the problem. Now there is not only a problem of a Jabin at the time of Joshua and a Jabin at the time of Deborah, but also there is a king of Hazor named Jabin at the time of Mari Letters and Hammura(a)bi.

Searching for the Golden Calf

To the Editor:

Recently I was told of a group actively seeking the whereabouts of the Golden Calf of Israel (by the Smithsonian). Do you have information on this?

The Smithsonian replies:

There is no one at the Smithsonian searching for the whereabouts of the Golden Calf of Israel.

Maps, Please

To the Editor:

Let me add my congratulations for your very fine magazine.

It would be helpful to an amateur like me to have outline maps accompany each article to show the location of each area which is the subject of the article.

We’ll try to do better in this respect.—Ed.

041

No More Free Muse

In last December’s issue of The Biblical Archaeology Review we advised our readers that Muse, the annual magazine of the University of Missouri’s Museum of Art and Archaeology, was available free of charge. After sending hundreds of free copies of Muse to BAR readers, Gladys Weinberg, the editor of Muse, has advised us that requests continue to come in, but Muse can no longer afford to send them to our readers free of charge. Accordingly, the offer is no longer open. In addition, Muse has now instituted a charge of $2.50 per copy, both for back issues and for future issues.

Professor Baly’s Bias?
To the Editor:
In a letter to the editor (Queries & Comments, BAR 02:01), Prof. Denis Baly criticizes The Biblical Archaeology Review for publishing an article on whether Kathleen Kenyon’s anti-Zionist politics affects her work. Prof. Baly asks for a journal that is “without apparent bias, either for or against Zionism, the Arabs, or anything else.”