Queries & Comments

006

Our Summer 2021 issue generated an enthusiastic response, from touching tributes for our late founder, Hershel Shanks, to constructive feedback about the magazine. Here we share thoughts on early artistic depictions of Noah’s ark and questions about inscribed ossuaries mentioning figures from the New Testament. You can find more letters online, along with a few responses, at biblicalarchaeology.org/letters.

Remembering Hershel Shanks

The tributes published to Hershel Shanks (“Remembering Our Founder,” Summer 2021) are richly deserved. They also resonate with me as someone who had numerous dealings with him and contributed to his publications.

For me, one of his most notable but least acknowledged achievements was the conference he convened at Lehigh University in 1994, on archaeology’s publication problem.^a On this subject, Hershel was forthright and outspoken. In “Archaeology’s Dirty Secret” (BAR, September/October 1994), he argued that “archaeologists love to dig, but hate to write excavation reports. As a result, final reports are lacking for a number of archaeological digs, even for some major excavations … To the scholars at the [Lehigh] session, it was not a dirty secret. They all knew about it, only too well.”

Since then, the problem has only gotten worse. If he were aware of how dire the situation has become, he would certainly do something about it.

More Inclusive BAR

I have been subscribing to BAR for several decades and am delighted with the informative articles that appeared in the Summer 2021 issue. The new editor’s background and experience in Turkey and Jordan give me hope that BAR will finally become a more inclusive journal. Biblical history was not confined to certain countries or locations. Broaden the horizon, and you will find there is evidence for biblical history across the lands of the ancient Near East.

We couldn’t agree more. While BAR will always maintain its focus on the traditional lands of the Bible, we will also foster a more expansive view of the biblical world, to include sites, regions, peoples, and even periods that share a role in filling in our picture of the past.—G.J.C.

Make It Short!

I just finished reading your Summer issue. Unfortunately, it took much less time than usual. Most of the articles were much longer than was typical in the past. When an article takes up several pages, I skip over it, only reading the captions under the pictures. I don’t want a detailed history lesson for each topic; I can buy a book or go online for that. Give me archaeology articles with a minimum of narrative, as was customary under Hershel’s leadership.

We understand your preference for brevity, which is one reason we focus so much on the photo captions for our feature stories. These allow readers to skim through to get a sense of what the story is all about or to help them decide whether to read the whole thing. And, in any event, we hope our much shorter news pieces, columns, and quizzes still make for informative and enjoyable reading.—G.J.C.

Old Hebrew Script

I enjoyed the article “A Very Brief History of Old Hebrew Script,” by Matthieu Richelle (Summer 2021). However, the author does not reference the Talmud’s discussion of this topic (Sanhedrin 21b:22–22a:10) that claims that Ezra introduced the new square script (called ketav Ashuri, Assyrian script), while Old Hebrew was referred to as ketav Ivri, Hebrew script. This seems compatible with Richelle’s 008 statement that “Old Hebrew script disappeared and was then reactivated only for a few symbolic uses on coins and seals in the fourth century B.C.E.”

MATTHIEU RICHELLE RESPONDS:

There is much I could not reference in the article, including this fascinating discussion in the Talmud. Sanhedrin 21b does mention the abandonment of ketav Ivri, but its focus is on the writing of Torah scrolls. It neither defends nor excludes the notion of a reactivation of the Old Hebrew script. In my opinion, that script had been used continuously, notably for biblical texts. Consider the biblical Dead Sea Scrolls written in Old Hebrew long after Ezra. At any rate, the change referred to in Sanhedrin did happen at some point, and I find it impressive how the Talmud preserves the memory of it long after it happened.

Noah’s Box

I much appreciated the Summer issue of BAR, especially the evidence presented by Shelley Wachsmann in “The Curious Case of Noah’s … Box?” showing that in ancient times, people conceived of Noah’s ark as a box on legs. Because the ark merely needed to float, it didn’t need to be a ship; it needed to be a barge, which is a box. A barge would be much easier to build—without supporting timbers to allow access to the bottom. It also needed to be able to land on rugged ground as the waters subsided, so it needed to have legs. The ancient depictions of the ark as a box on short legs thus seem perfectly reasonable.

SHELLEY WACHSMANN RESPONDS:

You raise an interesting hypothesis. Unfortunately, all we have to go on regarding Noah’s ark are a few sentences in the Hebrew Bible (Genesis 6:14-16; Genesis 8:6, Genesis 8:13). This is thin gruel, indeed, on which to build any reconstruction. Adding anything beyond this basic description—including legs—is an interpolation and, therefore, to be avoided in my view. Additionally, the appearance of the ark as portrayed during the period under discussion is clearly not that of a barge but rather of an actual box, which fits the term used for the ark in the Septuagint (Greek: kibotos).

On the more abundant details of the ark of Utnapishtim, in the parallel Mesopotamian flood story recorded in the Epic of Gilgamesh, see Ralph K. Pedersen “Was Noah’s Ark a Sewn Boat?” BAR, May/June 2005.

A couple of years ago I suggested from the pulpit that Noah’s ark, contra the Ark Encounter theme park in Kentucky, was actually a box—somewhat in the shape of a shoebox. I encountered much grief from the congregation. Why would Noah have needed a pointed bow if he were not going anywhere in particular? If I were to give any architect the specifications God gave Noah, they would draw a rectangular box. Thank you for your educational and enjoyable read.

Shelley Wachsmann has shown artists drew Noah’s ark as a box in the early centuries of our era because the Hebrew word in Genesis was translated “box” in the Greek Bible. Clearly absent from Genesis 6, however, is any Hebrew or Greek word for “boat” or “ship.” Biblical Hebrew has three words for ship: the common term, ’oniyyâ (1 Kings 9, 1 Kings 10; Isaiah 33:21), tsî (Numbers 24:24; Ezekiel 30:9; Daniel 11:30), and much more rarely sefînâ (Jonah 1:5). Furthermore, the Hebrew word for Noah’s ark (tievah) is far more likely to be borrowed from Egyptian than the obscure Babylonian ṭubbû.

SHELLEY WACHSMANN RESPONDS:

Because the Hebrew Bible uses the word tievah in its only two appearances (the flood and the basket of the baby Moses) to refer to containers that float—in other words, watercraft—this Hebrew term must also be included in the list of terms for watercraft cited by Professor Millard. In addition, there are two reasons why I see merit in the identification of Hebrew tievah with the Babylonian term ṭubbû: (1) the biblical deluge’s close affinities to the Mesopotamian tradition of flood stories (e.g., the tale of Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh), and (2) the narrative parallels between the “basket-in-the-water” stories of Sargon of Akkad and Moses.

Biblical Figures Confirmed

Lawrence Mykytiuk’s article “New Testament Religious Figures Confirmed” (Summer 2021) is illustrated with a photograph of the inscribed ossuary debatably associated with the high priest Caiaphas. Whatever we make of the inscription, my question is cultural and art historical: Why would the ossuary’s owners scrawl such an ugly and amateurish inscription on an otherwise beautifully designed and executed (and presumably expensive) object? This is like spray-painting one’s name on a Maserati.

LAWRENCE MYKYTIUK RESPONDS:

Yes, our cultural expectations make the scrawl seem incongruous. The intricately carved ossuary expressed the wish to honor the deceased, but the person writing on it was not a scribe but an amateur. The name was not written for public viewing but rather in a private tomb, for grieving family members and friends, who might have expected such casual writing to express personal connection and grief. The text was also perhaps written inside the tomb, with a makeshift tool in dim light.

Lawrence Mykytiuk makes one assertion I cannot make sense of. In speaking of the high priest Caiaphas, he states that he is confirmed by his presence in Josephus, who, he tells us, “referred to him as Joseph Caiaphas” though his “name was actually Joseph, son of Caiaphas.” Since in the 010 New Testament he is referred to as Caiaphas, and in Josephus as Joseph Caiaphas, and Dr. Mykytiuk dismisses the only other historical source he cites—the archaeological find of an ossuary containing the possible reading “Yhwsf br Qyf”—as uncertain, on what basis does he assure us that his name was actually Joseph son of Caiaphas?

LAWRENCE MYKYTIUK RESPONDS:

First-century Judeans usually had only one personal name, no surname. If two people had the same name, Judeans normally added their father’s name to avoid confusion. Those who had personal seals, which they used to sign documents, would often omit the word for “son of” or “daughter of” between their name and the father’s name. Josephus, a native of Judea, used this pattern in our example of Joseph Caiaphas.

Lions Liquidated

The Biblical Bestiary about the lion (Epistles, Summer 2021) nearly made me weep. As evidenced by depictions in art and literature, lions used to be common in the Middle East and around the Mediterranean. But they were completely eradicated by humans, not for food or even for self-defense, but for elite entertainment and royal bragging rights. Homo sapiens has a lot to answer for.

Sons of God

Jaap Doedens (“The Birth of Noah,” Summer 2021) indicates that one of the Dead Sea Scrolls uses the Aramaic expressions “irrin” and “kaddishin” to refer to the “Watchers” and the “Holy Ones” who are possibly meant to be the Nephilim mentioned in Genesis. Interestingly, at traditional Sabbath meals, one of the songs that is sung (“Yoh Ribon Olom”) contains the same mysterious reference:

JAAP DOEDENS RESPONDS:

This is an interesting reference; a song of praise that mentions heavenly beings as part of creation next to the earthly ones. It is, however, only in Second Temple period literature that the “Watchers” and the “Holy Ones”—mentioned in Daniel 4:10, Daniel 4:14 (English translation Daniel 4:13, Daniel 4:17)—are identified with the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:1-4. It is disputed whether the Nephilim (Genesis 6:4)—often translated as “giants”—are identical with the “sons of God.” It appears they are rather the offspring of the marriages between the “sons of God” and the “daughters of man.”

Our Summer 2021 issue generated an enthusiastic response, from touching tributes for our late founder, Hershel Shanks, to constructive feedback about the magazine. Here we share thoughts on early artistic depictions of Noah’s ark and questions about inscribed ossuaries mentioning figures from the New Testament. You can find more letters online, along with a few responses, at biblicalarchaeology.org/letters. Remembering Hershel Shanks The tributes published to Hershel Shanks (“Remembering Our Founder,” Summer 2021) are richly deserved. They also resonate with me as someone who had numerous dealings with him and contributed to his publications. For me, one of his most […]