Queries & Comments
036
The Ebla Tablets
To the Editor:
I await each of your issues with added enthusiasm. On its arrival everything in my home comes to a screeching halt. It is like reading the best mystery with each clue unfolding.
Please keep up the great work!
I hope you have a great deal of information soon on the Syrian find by the two Italian archaeologists. The newspapers simply did not have enough information! Why??
Manhasset, New York
As The Biblical Archaeology Review’s report on the Ebla tablets stated (“Ancient Royal Library Found,” BAR 02:02), it will take years of study before scholars will be able to assess the impact of these tablets on Biblical studies. Scholars tend to be conservative—they don’t like to get their fingers burned, especially in public—so they hesitate to speak out before they have a solid basis for their claims—and this may be the reason we have not heard more from the excavators.
The sensational reports in the American press have emanated from Professor David Noel Freedman of the University of Michigan and editor of the Anchor Bible who was so excited by the discovery that he flew to Rome for four days just to talk to the Italian excavator Dr. Paolo Mattiae, Professor of Archaeology and History of the Ancient Near East at the University of Rome and his chief epigrapher, Dr. Giovanni Pettinato, Professor of Assyriology at the same university. Freedman returned even more excited than when he departed, and American press reports—in the Los Angeles Times, the New York Post and the Washington Post—are based not on talks with the excavators, but on Freedman’s report of his trip. Whether the excavators or even Freedman would approve the sensational nature of the stories is not known.
The articles have given many the impression that the Ebla tablets will in one fell swoop unlock the mysteries of the Bible. One story calls the Ebla tablets “one of the most spectacular finds of all time.” Another states that Ebla “may be the source for many of the figures and tales described in the Old Testament.” Freedman is quoted as having written in a privately circulated memorandum that “If the patriarchs and their descendants did not actually live in Ebla, they clearly belonged to the same cultural tradition and came from the area in which that tradition survived and exerted a powerful influence.” “Inscribed on the tablets” says another press report, “are names like Abraham (Ab-ra-mu), Esau (E-sa-um), David (Da-iv-dum), Saul (Sa-’u-lum), Michael (Mi-ka-ilu), Israel (Is-ra-iu), and Eber (Ibrum),” of the Bible. These journalistic reports are often appropriately qualified by “may be’s”, “ifs” and “appear’s”, but the impression which many readers came away with is that now archaeologists have found evidence of actual Biblical personages; in short, they lived, and we have original contemporaneous stories about them.
All such impressions are false and misleading. Abraham, if he was a single person rather than a composite conflation, lived about 1800 B.C. The Ebla tablets date from about 2300 B.C. In other words, the Ebla tablets ante-date the first patriarch by about 500 years. So the Ebla tablets can contain no references to actual historical Biblical characters from the period of the patriarchs forward. The patriarchs, if they lived as individuals, lived in the Middle Bronze Age. The Ebla tablets date from the Early Bronze Age. The two periods are marked, and indeed are defined, by substantial cultural discontinuities.
Also reported in the press is a reference in the tablets to Urusalima, presumed to be Jerusalem. This reference, according to press reports, ante-dates the earliest known reference to Jerusalem by at least 1000 years. Apparently, the newspaper refers to references to Jerusalem (Urusalim) in the Amarna letters (14th century B.C.) as the earliest known reference to Jerusalem. This 037ignores the reference to Jerusalem (Rushulimim) in Egyptian Execration Texts (c. 19th century B.C.). Moreover, archaeological remains at the site of Jerusalem indicate there was a settlement there as early as 3000 B.C. So the reference to Jerusalem in the Ebla tablets does not extend the history of Jerusalem back a thousand years, as an unsuspecting reader might suppose.
This is not to say that the Ebla tablets aren’t important. On the contrary, they are highly significant and their discovery is extremely exciting. They are significant and exciting to Biblical scholars because these tablets will provide a new background to Israelite history. Scholars have looked to Mari in the 18th century for the origins of prophecy, and to Assyria, Babylonia, and even Sumer in the third millenium as the source of the Flood story. Now they have new evidence of a possibly great Canaanite civilization to add to those of Mesopotamia and Egypt. This new Canaanite civilization at Ebla is much closer to Israelite civilization than either Mesopotamia or Egypt. And this is dramatically shown by the Ebla tablets—geographically just north of Israel, speaking a language closely related to Hebrew, with an onomasticon (a list of names) which parallel the great names of the Bible. (Unfortunately, many readers of the sensational American press reports were under the impression that the names found at Ebla referred to actual Biblical personages.)
The culture reflected in the Ebla tablets may well have exerted a powerful influence on the culture reflected in the Bible. It will take scholars many years, if not decades, to trace this influence. If the past is any guide, it is likely to be a very complicated story, not without its own uncertainties and debates. In the end, Eblaite civilization may well shed important new light on the origin of Biblical customs, on the background for Biblical ideas, and even on the nature of Biblical theology. It will no doubt illuminate Biblical language and cast new light on particular Biblical passages.
So, while the Ebla tablets are unusually important, their importance must be placed in perspective. They are important for the student. They are important for readers of The Biblical Archaeology Review. But they are unlikely to be important to man in the street who simply wants to know if it’s all true.
Professors Mattiae and Pettinato have recently addressed the College of France and the Academy of Inscriptions and Bible-lettres on their discovery, and a report of this talk was published in Le Monde. While this article compares the Ebla tablets to the Ras-Shamra tablets found in Ugarit by Claude Schaeffer in 1929 and the Mari tablets found by André Parrot in 1933, the Le Monde article does not even mention the Bible or the possible effect of the Ebla tablets on Biblical studies. This contrast to the American press reports may help us place the tablets in perspective.
Professors Mattiae and Pettinato are scheduled to give several lectures in this country in October and November. Perhaps we will know more then. As the story unfolds, we will continue to report it to our readers.—Ed.
Jones and Yadin on Danaans and Danites
To the Editor:
I was quite surprised when I received my June issue of The Biblical Archaeology Review to find the article, or review, concerning my book Bronze Age Civilization: The Philistines and the Danites (“Danaans and Danites—Were the Hebrews Greek?” BAR 02:02).
I want to thank you for what I consider to be, for the great part, an unbiased account. Indeed, considering what you might have written, it was almost kind. Of course I was quite aware of the possibilties of harsh criticism if the book received any notice at all, and I have been prepared for it. But such criticism is a secondary concern now. I am retired and have long since stopped striving for academic recognition. The research which I did was done for the pure enjoyment involved, and I am continuing to do research for the same reason.
If you will allow me, I should like to make one or two comments on the article, at which I hope you will take no offense. First, I believe the title is misleading. It would seem to imply that the reasoning behind my thesis is that since Danaus was a Greek (presumably), then the Danites, whose name contains the same root, must also be Greek. That was hardly the case I was trying to make, but the explanation 038would be too lengthy for this letter. Suffice it to say here that all peoples on the Greek peninsula during the Bronze Age were not Indo-Europeans. On the contrary, many, especially in the southern part, were Mediterranean peoples, which included Semitic Phoenicians and Minoans. But the Philistines, if we accept my etymology of the name, were Indo-Europeans, and as part of the Sea Peoples, they were thrown together with other ethnic groups from the Aegeo-East Mediterranean area.
The other matter was your statement that “it (the book) is not scholarship.” Such a statement needs a clear definition as to what you consider scholarship. My study was, for the most part, a literary one. Scientists, such as archaeologists, have always tended to look down their noses at literary studies which lead to certain conclusions, maintaining that they are not “scholarly” or “scientific,” forgetting that often it is the study of literary tradition which determines what empirical data they should look for as well as the location. Moreover, scholarship demands the use of primary sources, and no literary sources of the areas involved go back into time further than the ones I used. And whenever I could I used archaeological evidence for support. Scholarship does not consist of “scholars” running around quoting each other until the emergence of any new idea becomes an impossibility.
At any rate, let me thank you once more for including the article and for being as fair and unbiased as you were. From the beginning, I have had a high regard for the BAR.
Hilton Head Island, South Carolina
On the same subject, Yigael Yadin, director of Hebrew University’s Institute of Archaeology has called our attention to the following:
1. The Bible contains no genealogical lists of the tribe of Dan, which suggests the possibility of a non-Israelite heritage.
2. The Bible gives no details of the conquest of cities by the tribe of Dan in the area originally allotted to it. Indeed, Dan appears not to have been able to occupy the area allotted to it near modern Tel Aviv (see Joshua 19:47; Judges 18:1 ff.). Instead the tribe of Dan moved far to the north, captured the city of Laish, changed the city’s name to Dan, and there settled down far from the shore (Judges 18:2 ff., 28 ff.).
3. The outstanding hero of the tribe of Dan is Samson who has a special status among all the Judges: Samson’s vengeance against the Philistines is in response to a personal injury; he is not avenging his people. All of the previous contacts Samson and his family had with the Philistines indicate there were normal and family relations between the Danites and the Philistines. Samson’s first wife was a Philistine (Judges 14:1). Samson had ties with a harlot in Gaza, a Philistine city (Judges 14:1). Samson’s second wife, Delilah, was the confidant of the Philistine lords and lived in Philistine territory in the Valley of Sorek.
4. Egyptian reliefs and inscriptions at Medinet Habu in Egypt depict five Peoples of the Sea. Three of these Sea Peoples have an almost identical appearance and costumes which differ slightly from one another, but are clearly set apart from the costumes of the other two Sea Peoples. All of these three Sea Peoples have feather helmets and thickly plaited hair settled under their helmets. The group of three consists of the Philistines, the Tjeker and an unnamed third Sea People. The famous Wen-Amon Story, the Egyptian papyrus from which the popular novel The Egyptian by Mika Waltari was taken, describes the wanderings of its hero-priest. When Wen-Amon reaches Dor on the Mediterranean coast north of the Danite territory, his money is stolen from him. The area around Dor is ruled at the time by the Tjeker. Thus the southern Mediterranean coast is ruled by the Philistines and the northern Sharon coast by the Tjeker. This leads us to ask who ruled the area in between, roughly the area allotted to the tribe of Dan. Could the third Sea People depicted in the Egyptian reliefs wearing the same costume as the Philistines and the Tjeker have ruled this area adjacent to their Sea People brothers.
5. In an Egyptian battle document from the days of Pharaoh Ramses III, this third Sea People is identified as DNE or DENE. The name is also given in a third form which has led to their being referred to as DANUNA. It may well be that these people 039settled in the area between the Philistines and the Tjeker, the area allotted to the tribe of Dan.
6. A bilingual inscription from Karatepe has recently identified these Danuna with the Greek Danai.
7. According to Greek tradition, the Danai arrived in Greece from the east.
8. According to Greek tradition, the Danai are said to have brought the alphabet with them to Greece. The alphabet probably originated in Palestine; at least the earliest known letters have been found there.
9. Danaus, the forefather of the Danai comes from the east. His father is Belus (Ba’al or Bel, Ba’al being the Canaanite name); his brother is Aegyptus.
10. Stories about Danaus and other Danaian heroes contain details with peculiar similarities to the Samson story; for example, one Danaian hero, Mopsus, has a special capacity for using riddles. Samson, too, is a user of riddles (Judges 14:12–20).
11. In Greek sources, the Danai are associated with the coast of Palestine and Jaffa (at the site of modern Tel Aviv). Perseus, a Danaian hero closely connected with Danaus, had an adventure near Jaffa in which Andromeda is bound to a rock in the sea at Jaffa.
12. Although Dan’s most ancient heritage clearly had some connection with the Mediterranean coast between Philistia and Northern Sharon (“And Dan, why did he remain in ships”, asks the Song of Deborah, (Judges 5:17)), the Bible never indicates that this area was ever conquered by any of the tribes of Israel.
From all this and other details, Yadin concludes that “at a certain stage of its settlement the Tribe of Dan was very close indeed to the Peoples of the Sea.” It is also very likely, he says, that there is a link between the Tribe of Dan and the Tribe of the Danai, “and possibly even a certain measure of identity”. At the beginning of the 12th century B.C., it seems that certain sections of the Danai settled in Palestine. Later, he says, they were given the status of one of the tribes of Israel. At an early stage of their settlement, they dwelt on the coast between the Philistines and the Tjeker, and engaged in shipping. They were then forced inland by other Sea Peoples and they then wandered northward where they conquered Laish and renamed it Dan. (For further details, see Professor Yadin’s article entitled “‘And Dan, Why Did He Remain in Ships’”, published in the Australian Journal of Biblical Archaeology, Vol. I, p. 9 (1968)).
More on Woody
To the Editor:
Congratulations on publishing the brilliant and thought-provoking piece by Woody Allen. As to the various letters of protest, I happen to be fascinated by the remains of Hellenic culture and by Greek mythology, but I do not for one moment believe that Achilles’ armor was forged by the hands of a god (Hephaistos). Archaeology has nothing to do with belief in divine intervention from any quarter. I am sure your writers of protest letters have never read any of Woody Allen’s other satirical writings. He uses levity to put across some very serious and profound thoughts.
New York, New York
Sarna on the Patriarchal Oath and Multi-Varied Symbolism
To the Editor:
R. David Freedman’s new interpretation of the oath-taking ritual in the patriarchal narratives is highly attractive. [See “Put Your Hand Under My Thigh”—The Patriarchal Oath,” BAR 02:02]. This fresh approach to an old crux is most welcome. As a matter of fact, Donald M. C. Englert, in A Light Unto My Path, (H. N. Bream et al., edd. Philadelphia: Temple University Press 1974), p. 142, notes the similarity of the ritual to the present-day court procedure of placing the hand on the Bible when one is sworn in as a witness. He also points out that Latin testis means both “scrotum” and “witness.” However, Englert also connects the Biblical ritual to the idea of involving future generations in terms of the oath. It must be remembered that the real purpose in invoking the divine presence on such occasions is admonitory; the oath is meant to have a credible punitive function in the event of perjury. We also cannot escape the 040fact that the thigh, as a euphemism for the sex organs, is employed in a phrase like “those who issue from the thigh” (Genesis 46:27; Exodus 1:5; Judges 8:30) to mean “descendants.”
Moreover, we must also explain why the type of oath-taking ritual under discussion exclusively appears in a father-son context (Genesis 24:2; 47:29) and why both instances really constitute final testamentary instructions. No such divine symbolism is employed in any other oath-taking ceremonies to which the patriarchs are parties, such as that between Abraham and Abimelech (Genesis 21:22–32), and Jacob and Esau (Genesis 25:33), Isaac and Abimelech (Genesis 26:31) and Jacob and Laban (Genesis 31:53).
In short, Freedman has added another dimension to the understanding of the patriarchal oath-taking ritual, but this does not necessarily rule out the possibility of multi-valued symbolism.
Brandeis University
Waltham, Massachusetts
Two Fundamentalist Reactions
To the Editor:
Two weeks ago I sent a check for a year’s subscription to the Biblical Archaeology Review; today, the June issue arrived and after reading the article “A Futile Quest: The Search for Noah’s Ark,” I no longer want the publication, so please return my check. The article stated that the Genesis Flood Story is a legend and not history. With this I do not agree—and I do not want any publication that does not believe the Bible as all inspired and true. I have studied archaeology for years and spent time in the Holy Land.
Black Mountain, North Carolina
We refunded Mrs. Harrison’s money.—Ed.
041To the Editor:
If it were possible, I think I could do nothing but read from your magazine for the rest of my life. It is the type of publication I have been waiting for since my fascination for the ancient past arose in my early school days. While I disagree with some of the anti-fundamentalist opinions found in your periodical (I have an unshakable, yet not blind, faith in the literal interpretation of the Bible), I greatly enjoy the rich abundance of fresh ideas, new revelations and illuminating information. You’ve made those thousands of miles between the Middle East and myself seem no greater than the distance to the corner market.
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
From Albright’s Biographer
To the Editor:
As a charter subscriber to BAR I am enjoying the helpful, useful contents of each issue.
In the June issue which reached me yesterday I was pleased to see your review of my biography of Professor Albright (“A Life of Albright,” BAR 02:02). I appreciate your thorough comments, and would like to respond with a brief explanation.
The first, working draft contained more than 2,200 typewritten pages. You can imagine the problems of condensing this record of a long, full life down through several stages until it was a publishable manuscript of less than 600 pages. It is doubtless impossible to reach two quite different audiences with the same work. I thought that his inspiring life story ought to be available to a wider group than his scholarly circle—to the general, educated public, people interested in reading biography. Hence I felt it should be written in a nontechnical way that would not put them off but would give them some understanding of this esoteric field and how scholars work in it, what their work consists of and its value, and that as far as possible Albright should be allowed to tell his own story. It would indeed be good to incorporate all that you pointed out as lacks, but the technically qualified reader already knows or can read and understand the technical details, found in Albright’s works and elsewhere; the general, nonspecialist reader would only be turned off or mystified by them. The technicalities of this field are much more esoteric than those in Freud’s field, for they involve use of dead languages in which a person must be competent in order even to follow a summary discussion. To go into more details often would mean to lose the ordinary reader. One’s publisher’s editor also makes cuts and changes.
Naturally this biography is not the last word, but only a first biography of this great man whose contributions must not be allowed to sink into oblivion. Others will write in more technical ways, evaluating his work and putting it into perspective as time goes on and progress is made. At least one such work is projected at present, to the author’s knowledge, beside the 1965 dissertation by Stanley Eugene Hardwick, cited on pages 355–356, which deserves to be published.
The material for this biography was gathered while cousins, classmates and others in their seventies and eighties were still available for interviews (several have since died). Hopefully, while it is not as complete or technical as specialists could wish, it will provide them with the life-story framework that they will not need (or now be able) to redo, and which they can use as the basis for their more technical discussions.
Professor Of Biblical Languages
Andrews University
Berrien Springs, Michigan
High School Students, Bible Students, Archaeology Clubs, Librarians, Ministers, Professors and Just Plain People
To the Editor:
What I particularly appreciate about BAR is that it keeps the layman in mind and 042even the high school student can learn with interest in perusing your pages.
President
The Baycroft School
Greenwich, Connecticut
To the Editor:
I am receiving BAR as a gift subscription for graduation from United Wesleyan College, a Bible college in Allentown, Pennsylvania. As a Bible student, I find BAR both interesting and helpful.
“Clothes Maketh the Man—An Insight from Ancient Ugarit” was really well presented. I believe that BAR should concentrate on such Biblical application of archaeology, giving at the same time background information for the less informed.
I would like to suggest a periodic index of scripture references and subjects for BAR readers. Since the binders hold three years of BAR, it would be a small book if the index appeared at the end of each third year.
I am delighted to be able to be part of BAR.
Franklinville, North Carolina
To the Editor:
As one who is closely involved with the study of archaeology, I am both pleased and impressed with the clarity and honesty of the BAR.
Lafayette College Archaeological Club
Lafayette College
Easton, Pennsylvania
To the Editor:
Your magazine is marvelous. As a church librarian, I can certainly recommend it to our members.
Tahlequah, Oklahoma
To the Editor:
The article about Queen Esther’s cosmetic aids (“Albright The Beautician Reveals Secrets of Queen Esther’s Cosmetic Aids,” BAR 02:01) was just the last item I needed for one of my sermons. So I am really in your debt, as well as Prof. W. F. Albright’s, for helping in this regard. Many, many thanks!
Alderwood Manor, Washington
To the Editor:
Today I received my first copy of The Biblical Archaeology Review, and I am very favorably impressed with this fine journal.
Professor of History
The University of Alabama
University, Alabama
To the Editor:
We would like to tell you of our great satisfaction with your magazine. The excitement that is connected with modern-day Biblical archaeology springs out at the reader from the overall format of the magazine with its many and varied articles, as well as from the individual articles themselves. In short, the BAR both informs and stimulates, doing both exceptionally well. May you maintain your youthful enthusiasm for that which is old and venerable.
Albany, New York
To the Editor:
Have just received my first issue of BAR as a new subscriber. I find it utterly fascinating. I am enclosing a check for Volume I and look forward with great pleasure to receiving it.
Belleair, Florida
To the Editor:
Each edition of your informative publication is more interesting than the previous one. Keep up the good work!
Winona Lake, Indiana
043
An Arabic Slip
To the Editor:
Lest your Arabic scholar readers get annoyed, it should be pointed out that Prof. Trude Dothan’s Arabic is not as good as I hope her archaeological knowledge is. “Inshallah” (“Excavating Anthropoid Coffins in the Gaza Strip,” BAR 02:01) does not mean “in the name of Allah”. It means “if Allah wills”. She meant to say “Bismilla”.
But enough of that. I have been an armchair archaeologist for many years and I have taken a good deal of pleasure from reading your magazine.
Brooklyn, New York
BAR’s Bias
To the Editor:
I must admit I was rather amused with the article, “Two Cases of Discrimination,” BAR 01:04, where the Near East Archaeological Society is castigated for requiring its members to sign a statement of faith. Apparently that is considered inappropriate for a scholarly organization. Does the author consider a theological commitment to be unscholarly? Or does the author naively think that there is really such a thing as total scientific objectivity, untouched by prejudices and preconceptions? All interpretation of fact is done within frameworks formed by presuppositions. Why is it wrong for individuals with the same presuppositions to get together in a scholarly society? At least that way the reader knows what the writer’s presuppositions are, and can evaluate the conclusions in that light! Perhaps we need more ways in which authors will state what their starting presuppositions are.
I was amused, because in the previous issue the question was raised by the editor in “Kathleen Kenyon’s Anti-Zionist Politics—Does It affect Her Work?” BAR 01:03. Here the editor complains about the difficulty in pinning down the preconceptions that affect Kenyon’s interpretations! Look, you’ve got to have it one way or the other! It is hardly fair to complain about a writer’s bias, and then castigate a society that publishes its bias so others know! I am beginning to suspect that the BAR is letting its own biases show!
Other than that, I like BAR.
Nipawin
Saskatchewan, Canada
A Mis-Citation in BAR
To the Editor:
Your excellent article on “How the Septuagint Differs,” BAR 02:02, contains a reference to the prophecy of the virgin birth of Christ in the first chapter of the Gospel according to Saint Mark (1:22–23). This should have referred to the Gospel according to Saint Matthew as Mark never commented on this matter.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Reader Coghill is right. A number of sharp-eyed readers caught our error. It keeps us on our toes.—Ed.
Hope for the Middle-Aged
To the Editor:
Mrs. Lofgreen’s article gives me hope. If a “middle aged” woman can go on a “dig”, perhaps a middle aged man can, too. It is one of the desires of my life that I may soon participate in one. So I very much appreciate the information you give of opportunities that are available. Thanks much for a fine magazine.
Broadway United Methodist Church
New Philadelphia, Ohio
The Ebla Tablets
To the Editor:
I await each of your issues with added enthusiasm. On its arrival everything in my home comes to a screeching halt. It is like reading the best mystery with each clue unfolding.
Please keep up the great work!
I hope you have a great deal of information soon on the Syrian find by the two Italian archaeologists. The newspapers simply did not have enough information! Why??
You have already read your free article for this month. Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.