Queries & Comments

BAR Summer 2024

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and comments about our Summer 2024 issue. We appreciate your feedback. Here are a few of the letters and responses we received. Find more online at biblicalarchaeology.org/letters.

Rising from the Ashes

Eric Cline, in his article “Rising from the Ashes,” does a good job of outlining the possible scenarios for the emergence of Israelite culture in Canaan. Regarding the Canaanites, who were the dominant people in the land, he asks whether their eventual disappearance was a case of adaptation into new, stronger polities or a sign of weakness and lack of resilience. However, these interpretations seem to be two sides of the same coin.

If Iron Age Canaanite settlements no longer contain pig bones, then Canaanite pig eaters either stayed but gave up this one vestige of their culture in order to stay put, or they left and may have been able to preserve such aspects of their culture in surrounding kingdoms. On the other hand, we have textual and archaeological evidence of the worship of the Canaanites’ principal god, Baal, by the emergent Israelites (whatever their origin). It seems, then, that despite the Sea Peoples, natural calamities, and the emergence of Israel, apparently not all of the Canaanites’ cultural footprint was eradicated, even if the people themselves can no longer be identified archaeologically.

DOUG MARTIN
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

Bedwarmer, Bureaucrat, or Both?

The article on Abishag, by Daniel Bodi (“Abishag—Bedwarmer or Bureaucrat?”), was strange. It asserts that commentaries that view Abishag as merely a bedwarmer are motivated by blatant sexism. It seems more likely that they are basing themselves on the text of 1 Kings 1, which says clearly that Abishag was a beautiful maiden who lay with King David to keep him warm. Bodi gives compelling reasons to translate sokenet as “administrator,” but his ignoring the clear role assigned Abishag by the text makes his article unhelpful. I’d be interested in his understanding of the relationship between the biblical text’s bedwarming role and the administrative role his philological argument supports. Can they be combined in one person and one role?

JEREMY SCHWARTZ
WILLIMANTIC, CONNECTICUT

The Text of 1 Kings does not square with the Bodi’s assertions. He plays down (even belittles) contextual matters, which have given rise to translations such as “bedwarmer.” But the text makes the point that, even with additional clothing, David (at his age) was unable to be warm. So what is the solution in the text? It would seem that Bodi would like us to read 1 Kings 1:2 thus: “Let them seek a ‘household administrator’ … and let her lie in your bosom, that my lord the king may keep warm.”

The Hebrew word at issue has the root meaning of “one who helps.” There would be a whole host of helpers for a king. In this context, however, the help David requires has been clearly stated: to keep warm. In keeping with the metabolism of youth (male or female), a young body would have been ideal to generate a constant source of heat. A female body would have been easy to find, given David’s vast harem. However, for some reason, the text precludes that source, unless she were a fresh recruit, which the text affirms (1 Kings 1:3–4).

Bodi’s research is not to be totally rejected. It is just not appropriate in this context.

GEORGE BLANKENBAKER
SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA

DANIEL BODI RESPONDS:
Several arguments allow us to see Abishag as David’s administrator. First, there is the ancient Near Eastern story of “The Old Man and the Young Girl,” in which a virgin cannot rejuvenate or sexually “warm up” an old impotent man. In the story, both the girlfriend of the bride and the wise woman at the king’s court advise against the marriage of a virgin to an old man. The king first authorizes it but then orders the marriage dissolved and punishes the bride. The biblical story and “The Old Man and the Young Girl” share the negative outcome: A virgin cannot warm up an old man.

Second, the word for “clothes” (begadim) sounds a lot like “treachery” (bogedim) and recalls the earlier story of David’s first wife, Michal (1 Samuel 19:13), who fooled her father. This link may suggest that David needing clothes and a virgin in his lap is a trumped-up excuse of the pro-Solomon party to have direct access to the king’s chamber and ear, while it squares with David’s reputation as an inveterate womanizer.

Finally, there is the politics and retributive justice we see under David. Solomon’s appointment as David’s successor results from a palace putsch, when Adonijah proclaimed himself king (1 Kings 1:11). The name Abishag means “my father errs/wanders.” The appointment of Abishag as David’s household administrator seems like a skillful deception by the pro-Solomon party, as she would screen people asking for an audience with the king and, thereby, provide them with privileged access to carry out an “oath hoax” on the failing king. The question is whether David made the vow or was made to believe in a fictional oath. I conclude the oath was a hoax, and David the deceiver becomes a dupe.

For Daniel Bodi’s extended response, see biblicalarchaeology.org/letters.—ED.

It seems evident that Abishag came to help the beloved counselor Nathan confront the greatest crisis of King David’s monarchy: the coup d’etat of the rebellious son Adonijah. Abishag would lend her voice, and presumably her experience, to assist the now-desperate David, who may have faced not only usurpation but perhaps even murder. As such, “counselor” or “advisor” is a more accurate translation of the Hebrew sokenet. More derogatory translations, such as “bedfellow,” reveal what can only be described as the misogynist bias of later commentators.

JOHN F. MURPHY
YEADON, PENNSYLVANIA

Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh

The article “Finding Paul’s Weakness” by Ben Witherington III presents a compelling theory on what most people refer to as Paul’s “thorn in the flesh.” There are frequent references in scripture where a person does not escape unscathed from contact with God. Although it is unclear whether it was a permanent condition, we read in Genesis 32:30–31 that Jacob had a limp after he saw “God face to face.” Paul was blinded as a result of his contact with Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:8). Although he later regained his sight (Acts 9:18), there is no explicit reference as to whether there may have been lasting physical side effects from this experience.

RICHARD STEPHENS
RICHARDSON, TEXAS

I appreciate the case Witherington presents to suggest that Paul’s weakness pertains to his eyes. He lets the Bible speak for itself, and although he offers his own conclusion, I didn’t feel bullied into agreeing with him. Consequently, I accept his conclusion as being the most likely explanation. Could this eye trouble be lingering effects from Paul’s blindness incurred by meeting Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:8)?

STEVEN D. SMITH
ANDERSON, INDIANA

I enjoyed Witherington’s article, though I take exception to his statement that Paul signed Galatians with “large letters” as an indication of his eye troubles. John Hancock’s signature is the biggest on the Declaration of Independence. Hancock, however, didn’t suffer eye problems. Instead, he signed his name with large letters to show his total support of the declaration and its stated ideals. I believe that is analogous to Paul, who signed his name in large letters so that the Galatians would have no doubt who wrote Paul’s letter.

THOMAS RAY
BARNHART, MISSOURI

The Jews of Zoar

Konstantinos Politis has undertaken numerous archaeological projects and studies on Ghor al-Safi, biblical Zoar. In his Site Seeing column, “The Land of Lot,” he understandably mentions the biblical material related to the Lot traditions as well as some relevant Christian traditions and structures. In a passing comment related to Roman and Byzantine documents, he mentions the archive of Babatha, “a first-century Judean woman who owned property in the area.” Regarding the Jewish presence of Zoar, he might have provided additional information from his own research. Over 500 inscriptions from the Byzantine period have been discovered at Zoar, mostly in graves, but some in settlements. Those in Greek mostly belonged to Christians, but about 10 percent, written in Palestinian Aramaic, belonged to Jews who apparently peacefully lived together with the region’s Christians.

JOSHUA SCHWARTZ
RAMAT-GAN, ISRAEL

Indeed, Konstantinos Politis has written extensively on the multicultural makeup of Byzantine Zoar, including in the pages of BAR. See especially his article “Death at the Dead Sea,” March/April 2012.—ED.

Numbering Bible Verses

In the quiz “Who Did It?” you ask, “Who developed the system of chapter numbering used in modern Bibles?” The answer you give is Cardinal Archbishop Stephen Langton. However, if I am not mistaken, the chapter divisions came much earlier and were the result of the labors of Felix Pratensis. He indicated the chapter numbers with Hebrew letters in the margin. See Christian D. Ginsburg, Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1969), p. 26.

JIM R. SIBLEY
RESEARCH PROFESSOR
ISRAEL COLLEGE OF THE BIBLE
NETANYA, ISRAEL

There are two things to consider with the quiz question. First, Cardinal Langton (d. 1228) predated Felix Pratensis by some 300 years. Second, Langton’s system of chapter divisions was adopted rather quickly in copies of the Latin Vulgate, whereas the first to apply it to the Hebrew text was R. Solomon ben Ishmael, in 1330. Following the advent of printing in the 15th century, Pratensis’s innovation was that his Rabbinic Bible (Venice, 1517) was the first printed Hebrew edition to implement Langton’s system consistently throughout, with the divisions marked in Hebrew letters in the margins.—ED.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and comments about our Summer 2024 issue. We appreciate your feedback. Here are a few of the letters and responses we received. Find more online at biblicalarchaeology.org/letters. Rising from the Ashes Eric Cline, in his article “Rising from the Ashes,” does a good job of outlining the possible scenarios for the emergence of Israelite culture in Canaan. Regarding the Canaanites, who were the dominant people in the land, he asks whether their eventual disappearance was a case of adaptation into new, stronger polities or a sign of weakness and lack of resilience. However, these […]