|
Israel's "Aramaean" Origins (The Iron IA Archaeological Evidence For)
Walter
Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Torre, M.A. Ed.
Please
click here
for this website's most important article:
Why the Bible Cannot be the Word of God.
For
Christians
visiting this website _my most important article_ is
The Reception of God's Holy Spirit: How the Hebrew Prophets
_contradict_ Christianity's Teachings.
Please click here.
Revisions:
19 July 2003; 28 July 2003; 05 August 2003; 15 August 2003; 06 September
2003; 25 March 2004
01
September 2004
update at end of article:
Professor Baruch Halpern (1992) suggests that Arameans fleeing northern
Syria in Iron Age I are settling in Transjordan and from there invading
Canaan where they assimilate with resident Canaanites possessing an
"Exodus from Egypt" tradition.
His views are remarkably similar to mine (expressed in the below
article).
15
May 2005
UPDATE: Please be advised that I _now_ understand that a
"conflation and fusion" exists of events appearing in the Bible's Exodus
narratives: first, the Hyksos expulsion of 1540-1530 BCE, secondly,
Ramesside Era events in the Sinai and Arabah, and thirdly, of places
existing only in Late Iron II, 640-562 BCE. Mainstream scholarship
understands Israel's settling of the Hill Country is Iron I, ca.
1200-1000 BCE based on archaeological findings. Why then does the
Bible's chronology have an Exodus "hundreds of years" earlier ?
The
answer is very surprising and has been preserved for almost 2000 years
in the writings of an Egyptian priest/historian called Manetho. He wrote
a history of Egypt in the 3rd century BCE for his Hellenistic Greek
overlord Ptolemy II. He noted that TWO EXPULSIONS occurred in Egypt's
history, of Asiatics. The first was of the Hyksos of the mid 16th
century and then another in the Ramesside era. He understood that the
Hyksos fled to and settled at Jerusalem, but that 500 years later
(Josephus' reckoning) "their descendants" reinvaded Egypt, resettling at
the town they had been expelled from earlier called Avaris. After 13
years of "lording it" over the eastern delta, the Ramessides expelled
the Hyksos' descendants a SECOND TIME, and they eventually again settled
at Jerusalem. The Jewish historian Josephus (1st century CE) was adamant
that the 16th century expulsion was the Exodus based on _his
calculations_ of the Bible's chronology and furious that Manetho had
said the Exodus was preserved in a Ramesside expulsion! Modern
archaeology has established the Israelite settlement of the Canaanite
Hill Country from Galilee to the Negev as portrayed in the Bible, was in
Ramesside times.
Please click here
for my article on Manetho vs. Josephus on the dating of the Exodus.
If Manetho is correct, that Avaris was resettled by Canaanites in
Ramesside times, and expelled again in that era, perhaps this answers
the "great mystery" as to why the pottery of the IRON IA settlements is
_Canaanite_ in appearance and _not_ Egyptian ? The answer: 13 years was
apparently too short a period of time for the "reinvading" Canaanite
descendants of the Hyksos to adopt Egyptian potting techniques. They
probably cast their Canaanite pots in Egypt and still were casting them
in the "Canaanite manner" when they settled AGAIN near Jerusalem in the
Hill Country. Not until Egypt abandoned Canaan circa 1130 BCE under
Ramesses VI was the land wide-open for conquest, by Philistines and
Israelites. The "original" article on Israel's Aramean Origins,
below, will remain intact, but is _superceded_ by the above observations
of Josephus and Manetho.
18 August 2006 Update:
Professor Anson Rainey has an article arguing for Israel's Iron Age I
Transjordanian and Aramean origins titled "The Consensus Theory is
Dead."
Please click here
for the article.
Rainey:
"Most significant of all, the Aramean tribes in the east flooded North
Syria and surged into Mesopotamia (today's el-Jezira) and forced even
the Assyrians to fight for their lives. The sudden appearance of so many
small camps and village sites in the hills of Western Palestine (Judea,
Samaria, Lower and Upper Galilee and the Beth-Shean Valley) from which
the Israelites emerged represents the southern extension of this Aramean
movement...To summarize, every cultural trait evinced by the new
settlers in the hill country of Palestine in the Early Iron Age points
to the origin of these people in the steppes of Transjordan and possibly
the Syrian desert (and perhaps some via the Lebanese Beqa' Valley; and
settlers in Upper Galilee). Nothing supports the Mendenhall/Gottwald/Callaway/Dever
theory of an alleged revolt or migration of peasants from the coastal
cities of the Late Bronze Age. Inscriptions, language and archaeology
all flatly contradict this theory."
Special Advisory:
Websites "come and go" constantly on the World-Wide-Web (WWW),
eventually this website will one day 'disappear' as well. If there are
any articles or illustrations here that have been "of any use" to you
dear reader, I would advise that you make a hard printout copy for your
files.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The biblical narrator is adamant that Israel's ancestors are Arameans,
from Aramean lands, northern Syria as well as southern and northern
Mesopotamia.
Deut
26:5
"And you shall make response before the Lord your God, 'A wandering
Aramean was my father; and he went down into Egypt and sojourned there,
few in number; and there he became a nation great, mighty and populous."
How
to account for these notions ? Are there any "historical kernels" which
archaeology can illuminate ? I suspect there are.
One
of the major problems facing scholars is, that to date, a scholarly,
comprehensive coverage of Syria's Late Bronze- Iron Age has not been
undertaken. Bits and pieces of archaeological reports and findings
exist, and to a degree, I have used these in this article.
Lehmann
on the "void" in Syrian archaeological studies, 700-300 BCE, but the
same can be said for 1200-1000 BCE as well (Emphasis mine) :
"Until
recently the material culture of Syria and Lebanon in the years between
700 and 300 BC was one of the most obscure topics in Near Eastern
archaeology. While the general outline of the history of events over
these centuries is known to some extent, there have been only a few
studies on the local material culture, the pottery, and small finds.
Although a number of studies on isolated groups of finds, such as
metalwork, seals, or coins, have been published, there is still no
comprehensive archaeological study of this period like Ephraim Stern's
Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period,
538-33 BCE (1982). As a step toward provding such a study, this
article outlines the local pottery development of Late Iron Age and
Persian period Syria and Lebanon as well as its distribution patterns
and the historical and economic implications that result from these
observations." (Gunnar Lehmann. Trends in the Local Pottery
Development of the Iron Age and Persian Period in Syria and Lebanon, ca.
700 to 300 BC. [Department of Bible and Ancient Near Eastern
Studies, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beersheba, Israel])
Lemche
"echos" Lehmann's observation on the absence of a comprehensive study of
the Syrian Late Bronze and Iron Ages :
"No
comprehensive description of the archaeology of Syria exists. For
Palestine, see Amihai Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible,
10,000-586 BCE (1990)..." (p.1218 Vol. 2. Niels Peter Lemche.
"The History of Ancient Syria and Palestine: An Overview." pp.
1195-1218. Jack M. Sasson, editor. Civilizations of the Ancient
Near East. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers.
[1995], 2000. 4 volumes in 2 books)
**************************************************************************************************************
Special Alert of 13 March 2004 :
Readers
are advised that a book covering in a comprehensive manner, the
Archaeology of Syria, has recently been released :
Peter M. M. G. Akkermans & Glenn M. Schwartz. The Archaeology of
Syria, From Complex Hunter-Gatherers to Early Urban Societies (ca.
16,000 to 300 BC). University of Cambridge Press. Hard
Cover and Paperback. 552 pages. 79 Half-tones. 13 Maps. 112 line
diagrams. ISBN 0521796660. Projected release date of December 2003.
Paperback is Priced at 30 British Pounds. The Paperback, at USA $40, is
available at Barnes and Noble Book Stores on the Internet.
From the press release :
"This is THE FIRST BOOK to present a comprehensive review of the
archaeology of Syria from the end of the Paleolithic period to 300
BC...All competing interpretations are set out and considered, alongside
the author's own perspectives and conclusions"
***************************************************************************************************************
Mainstream
scholarship sees the sudden appearance of villages in Iron IA as the
'historical kernel' underlying the biblical portrayal of Israel's
settling the land under Joshua.
Many
different theories exist to explain where these settlers were coming
from. Like Professors Saggs and Aharoni, I prefer to see Israel as
famine driven Aramaeans from northern Syria, and Mesopotamia.
Rudimentary villages exist in these areas, the people practice a
seasonal migration with their herds for fodder, rather like Israel.
Aramaeans are documented as west of Assyria and present in Babylonia in
Assyrian and Babylonian annals of the late 2d millennium BCE. Famine
drives them south from their "marginal" steppe grazing lands of
Trans-Euphrates to the relatively empty lands of Transjordan and the
Hill Country of Canaan in the Late 13th-12th century BCE. With Egypt no
longer present to resist their incursions, they arrive enmasse after
1140/1130 BCE.
akhai
noted that shortly after Egypt withdrew from Canaan in the days of
Rameses VI (ca. 1141-1133 BCE), Megiddo was soon attacked and destroyed
ca. 1130 BCE, and occupied by the Iron IA settlers.
Nakhai
:
"Once
again, a statue of an Egyptian monarch (in this case, the mid-twelfth
century king Rameses VI) stood in the Megiddo sanctuary...When Megiddo's
traditional configuration of royal, sacred and secular architecture was
destroyed ca. 1130 BCE, ending centuries of Egyptian domination at
Megiddo and in Canaan (Ussishkin 1997b: 464) it was soon replaced by the
poorly constructed houses of the Israelite Iron Age." (p.135. "The Late
Bronze Age." Beth Alpert Nakhai. Archaeology and the Religions of
Canaan and Israel. Boston. American Schools of Oriental
Research. 2001)
Saggs
(Emphasis mine) :
"The
usual view is that both Amorites and Aramaeans had earlier been
semi-nomads -the term used to distinguish them from peoples such as the
Bedouin Arabs, who practice nomadism deep into the desert after the
camel came into widespread use as riding animal in the late second
millennium. On this view, both peoples lived primarily by sheep-rearing
in the steppes centered on the highlands between Palmyra and the
Euphrates. In recent decades some scholars have challenged this, and
PREFER TO SEE THEM AS _IN ORIGIN_SETTLED PEOPLES_ who had been set in
motion by adverse circumstances." (p.128. "Aramaean and Other
Migrations." H.W.F. Saggs. Babylonians. [Peoples of the
Past Series]. Berkely & Los Angeles. University of California Press.
Trustees of the British Museum Press, London. 2000)
"There
must have been some particular factor or combination of factors which
led the Aramaeans, who had long practised their pastoralism and trading
from bases in the Jebel Bishri, to move out permanently into Mesopotamia
and urban Syria. This movement began at about the same time as several
other migrations in the ancient Near East; one may think of the Sea
Peoples, of whom the Philistines were part, moving out of Anatolia into
Palestine, AND THE HEBREWS INTO CANAAN, the 'land of milk and honey.' It
seems likely that a major factor in setting the Aramean and other
migrations under way was climatic change. Textual, climatological and
archaeological lines of evidence all lead to this conclusion. Ancient
documents allude to crop failures and famines from about 1200 BC, which
point to the onset of a drier period in the Near East. Climatological
studies show that between about 1500 and 1200 BC there was a relatively
cool period in Europe, and that this was followed by a warmer and drier
period from 1200 to 900 BC. A corresponding sequence in the Near East is
proved by evidence of changes in the volume of water carried by the
Tigris and Euphrates, which reached a maximum between 1350 and 1250 BC,
and then began to drop, indicating reduced rainfall. The river flow rose
sharply again from about 950 BC. These changes seem to have affected
Assyria as well as areas further to the west, for Ashur-dan II (934-912
BC) refers to his bringing back people of Assyria who had earlier left
their homes because of famine.
Archaeology
tells the same story of a period of drought. Excavation at Ras Shamra
(ancient Ugarit) on the Syrian coast found in the twelfth-century
stratum a yellowish-white powdery layer, distinct from normal soil,
suggesting exceptionally dry conditions at the time. Since rainfall in
the steppe lands of Syria, the original homeland of the Aramaeans, was,
at best only marginal, a prolonged decrease in precipitation would have
brought aridity so severe that the population would need to migrate to
find grazing grounds for their flocks.
The
Aramean migration was certainly under way before 1200 BC and may have
started a century or more earlier. The migrants were by no means a
homogeneous group. Although their basic way of life was pastoralism, the
fact that some of them lived in towns in the Jebel Bishri region before
they entered Mesopotamia, and that some quickly settled in Mesopotamian
towns, shows that they included groups who were familiar with urbanism
and the specialized activities and social organization which accompanied
that way of life.
Some
of the ARAMAEANS moved westwards into Syria SOON AFTER 1100 BC and BEGAN
TO SETTLE AS FAR SOUTH AS TRANSJORDAN, ULTIMATELY FORMING IMPORTANT
KINGDOMS. Both the Bible and cuneiform inscriptions provide abundant
evidence of their presence in these areas. Genesis 25:20, for example,
speaks of Isaac's wife Rebekah being the daughter of an Aramean of
Paddan-aram (in the Haran area), and Deuteronomy 26:5 accepts that the
Arameans were one element in Israelite ancestry, since on a specified
cultic occasion it required the Israelites to say : 'My ancestor was a
nomadic Aramean' (not 'a Syrian ready to perish' as in the Authorised
Version)." (pp.129-130. "Aramaean and Other Migrations." H.W.F. Saggs.
Babylonians. [Peoples of the Past Series]. Berkely
& Los Angeles. University of California Press. Trustees of the British
Museum Press, London. 2000)
Professor
Mendenhall on a massive migration of settlers from Northern Syria at the
beginning of Iron IA migrating to Transjordan and Canaan (Emphasis mine)
:
"The
tumultuous and tragic events that attended the Late Bronze-Early Iron
period saw the virtual depopulation of central Anatolia and northern
Syria. Communities were destroyed or scattered, and new ones were formed
after massive migration from the centers of the catastrophe in the
North. The considerable rise in the population and populated states in
Transjordan and in central Palestine are to be explained by this
process. In addition to the Philistine society that was the result of a
symbolic relationship between the existing population of Canaanites, and
the newcomers from Anatolia, the Midianite confederation was the result
of the same process involving the indigenous Arabic speaking
populations. It is not surprising that the process did not always take
place without conflict, even though little was left in much later times
than the territorial name. The Midianite cities of the NW Hejaz were
almost certainly the result of population pressures from the North upon
the non-Semitic peoples of especially the Jordan valley." (p.2. George
E. Mendenhall, University of Michigan. The Nature and History of
the Midianite Confederation . ASOR 1999 Annual Meeting
Abstracts. Nov. 17-20 Cambridge, Massachusetts)
Professor
Halpern has also suggested that Iron I Israel may be Arameans invading
from Syria, as noted by Younger :
"In
Baruch Halpern's estimation, since Rameses II was the pharaoh of the
oppression (Exod 1:11), then Merneptah was the pharaoh of the exodus
from Egypt. Thus the Israel mentioned on the Merneptah Stela was a
displaced group of 'homesteaders' who migrated south from Syria through
northern Transjordan. Later, a group of escaped slaves from Egypt
arrived and transformed Israel's beliefs with the "myth" of the exodus,
of the conquest, and of the deity Yahweh." (p. 180. K. Lawson Younger,
Jr. "Early Israel in Recent Biblical Scholarship- Theories in Which
Israel Originates from Outside Canaan." David W. Baker & Bill T. Arnold,
Editors. The Face of Old Testament Studies, A Survey of
Contemporary Approaches. 1999. Baker Books. Grand Rapids,
Michigan; citing Baruch Halpern. The Emergence of Israel in Canaan.
Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series, No. 29. Scholars Press.
1983)
But,
if, IF, Arameans are really Israel, how to account for the stories of an
Exodus from Egypt ca. 1540 BCE, the Hyksos expulsion of Flavius Josephus
and Manetho, or 1 Kings 6:1, ca. 1446 BCE ? How to account for Amarna
era Habiru/Apiru being Hebrews ? Why would the Bible portray an Apiru/Habiru
conquest of Canaan of the 14th century BCE as earlier, ca. 1446 BCE ?
Why would Iron IA Aramaeans claim their ancestors were in Egypt before
the Exodus (Hyksos expulsion of ca. 1540 BCE) ? Why portray Canaanites
of ca. 1140 BCE as Amorites ?
Professor
Clay noted that the Middle Bronze IIC Hyksos were chased all the way
into Amurru, that is, the "later homelands" of the Iron Age Arameans. Is
it possible that the Iron IA Arameans of what had earlier been called "Amurru,"
but later Aram, still "recalled" the expulsion of their Hyksos ancestors
?
Clay (Emphasis mine) :
"In the first half of the second millennium BC, an Asiatic people called
the Hyksos completely dominated Egypt for a century...The late
traditions of Manetho call them Arabians and Phoenicians, while
Josephus, in his diatribe against Apion, calls them Hebrews. When Ahmose
I (1580-1557 BC) captured Avaris in the eastern part of the Delta, he
drove them northward into Amurru. He even pursued them as far as the
land of Zahi (Phoenicia). It was not until more than a half century
later that Thuthmose III was able to break up finally the coalition of
the Amorite kingdoms, which had their center at Kadesh on the Orontes."
(pp.138-139. "Egypt and Amurru." Albert. T. Clay. The Empire of
the Amorites.
New Haven. Yale University Press. 1919)
Redmount noted that Pottery might be a way of identifying the "ethnicity"
of the Delta dwelling Hyksos, and in passing has observed some of the
pottery appears to suggest Syrian as well as southern Canaanite forms.
Redmount
(Emphasis mine) :
"Everyday
household wares predominate in the Hyksos corpus, plain wares are very
rare, and decorated fine wares are notable for their comparative
scarcity. Forms include Syrian, Palestinian, Egyptian, and independently
evolving eastern Delta traditions...Imported pottery at Tell el-Maskhuta
comes from Cyprus, Palestine, Upper Egypt, and possibly Syria. Of
particular importance is a group of two-handled store jars, probably
imported (presumably along with their contents of olive oil or wine)
from Syria-Palestine...Taken as a whole, the assemblage of Hyksos
pottery from Tell el-Maskhuta bears closest resemblance in form and
manufacture techniques to Middle Bronze Age Syria-Palestine...Moreover,
both the geographical and temporal affiliations of theis Hyksos pottery
are eclectic. Northern, Syrian forms appear side by side with southern,
Palestinian forms..."(cf. the 7 page article by Carol A. Redmount. "Ethnicity,
Pottery, and the Hyksos at Tell el-Maskhuta in the Egyptian Delta.
Biblical Archaeologist. Vol. 58. No. 4. Dec. 1995)
Manetho,
an Egyptian priest, as noted by Josephus, claimed that the Hyksos
settled at Jerusalem after their expulsion from Egypt. We are told in
the Bible that Jebusites lived at Jerusalem in Joshua's and David's days,
and Judges 3:5-7 tells us that Israel married Jebusites and worshipped
their gods. If Manetho or Josephus are correct about Hyksos returning to
Jerusalem, it may be possible that memories of an Exodus (Hyksos) before
Iron IA (ca. 1200-1130 BCE), were passed on to the Iron II "Israelite"
great, great, great-grandchildren at Jerusalem from their Iron I
forefather's traditions, Iron IA Canaanites and Arameans INTERMARRYING
EACH OTHER according to Judges 3:5-7.
Judges
3:5-7 (RSV)
"So
the people of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the
Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and they took
their daughters to themselves for wives, and their own daughters they
gave to their sons; and they served their gods. And the people of Israel
did what was evil in the sight of the Lord their God, and served the
Baals and the Asheroth."
Professor
Redford suspected that the memory of the Hyksos expulsion had been kept
alive in southern Canaan, to later become merged with Hebrew origins
traditions.
Redford
(Emphasis mine) :
"There
is only one chain of historical events that can accomodate this late
tradition, and that is the Hyksos descent and occupation of Egypt...And
in fact it is in the Exodus account that we are confronted with the "Canaanite"
version of this event...the memory of the Hyksos expulsion did indeed
live on in the folklore of the Canaanite population of the southern
Levant." (pp.412-413. "Four Great Origins Traditions." Donald B.
Redford. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times.
Princeton University Press. 1992)
Bietak
noted that the Asiatics at Tell ed-Daba, believed to be the Hyksos
capital of the eastern delta, were a mixed group. Some of the pottery
and building styles suggested for him migrants arriving via ship from
ports in northern Syria, such as Ugarit, and Phoenicia. Other pottery
forms suggested migrants from south Canaan. In the biblical narratives
Israel's patriarchs are from North Syria (Haran and Damascus) and South
Canaan (the Negev). When the Hyksos were expelled, they fled back to
their homelands. The Hyksos were not confined to southern Canaan,
evidently some returned to northern Syria. When Ahmose and his
successors followed up on the Hyksos expulsion they followed their enemy
all the way to the Euphrates and Ugarit, making the former Hyksos empire
an Egyptian empire. The bible's claim that Israel's patrimony would
extend from the river of Egypt (wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates, may be
recalling the Hyksos world lost to New Kingdom Egypt. The Hyksos of
northern Syria evolved into "Arameans" who, in the late 13th-12th
centuries BCE began the re-claiming of the former Hyksos empire. They
may have seen the Canaanites as "Amorites and Hittites" recalling the
area had allied itself with the Armarna era state of Amurru who was in
turn allied with Hatti, who allied themselves with Apiru in Syria,
Transjordan and Canaan, to win back Hyksos lands against Pharaoh
Akhenaten.
Apiru/Habiru
are mentioned in 2d millennium BCE documents for not only Canaan, but
also Syria and Mesopotamia.
Lemche
noted that Syria-Palestine went through phases of Urban control vs.
Rural Tribalism, and that when urban centers collapsed the native tribal
traditions in the area succeeded in asserting control over the land. He
understands that the Arameans of the first-millennium BCE are such an
example, the Late Bronze Age Urban civilizations collapsed and rural
araeas with their tribal networks came to the fore. I suspect that the
Arameans are the descendants of the so-called "Amorite" tribes appearing
in the 18th century BCE Mari annals. Amorite is really a "mis-nomer," as
it is not the description of a tribe or nation but originally a
geographical term coined by the Babylonians, amurru, meaning "westerners."
That is anybody west of Babylonia, usually equated with nomadic peoples
(although archaeology has revealed these "westerners" had villages and
towns and cities). Lemche noted that the biblical traditions of the
tribe of Benjamin being from Trans-Euphrates might be recalling the
Banu-Yamina who appear in the Mari archives. I think he is right !
Lemche
(Emphasis mine) :
"The
Mari documents testify to various such tribal groups, some of them easy
for the state to handle, others extremely unruly, such as the tribe or
tribal coalition of THE BANU-YAMINA. The latter group is of special
interest because in them we see a pastoral society that, in the course
of its yearly migrations, CAME INTO CONTACT not only with the territory
of Mari itself, but also WITH the territory of Yamkhad to the west, as
well as other STATES IN UPPER MESOPOTAMIA. It is also possible that
parts of the Banu-Yamina migrated to Palestine, later to become the
Benjaminites of the Hebrew Bible. The note in the book of Genesis
(35:26), Paddan-Aram (a late name covering part of the territory once
controlled by the kings of Mari), could be a reminiscence of this
migration." (p.1203. Vol.2. Niels Peter Lemche. "The History of Ancient
Syria and Palestine: An Overview." Jack M. Sasson. Editor.
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. [2 vols.] Peabody, Mass.
Hendrickson. [1995], 2000)
Lemche
on States vs. Tribes (Urban vs. Rural) :
"Since
ancient times two political systems have been prominent in Syria and
Palestine : decentralized tribal societies and centralized states...the
inhabitants of Syria and Palestine had to make their minds up whether
they wanted to be reckoned as members of a tribe or citizens of a state.
Although we get the impression that tribes and states have existed in
the same area and at the same time -as at Mari (19th-18th centuries) or
in early Israel (12th-11th centuries)..." (pp.1198-1199.Vol.2. Niels
Peter Lemche. "The History of Ancient Syria and Palestine: An Overview."
Jack M. Sasson. Editor. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East.
[2 vols.] Peabody, Mass. Hendrickson. [1995], 2000)
I
would add to Lemche's observation that nothing has changed since the
days of Mari, today, in the 21st century, we still have nation states in
the Near East, ruling vast territories from urban centers, whilst in the
rural areas, tribalism still prevails !
Dion
noted that 11th-10 century BCE Arameans occuping the Jebel Bishri
highlands just south of the middle Euphrates, a location associated with
"Amorites" in 18th century BCE Mari annals. In passing Dion mentions
that an Aramaean word for clan or community is hibrum. Could hibrum be
related to the earlier, Mari era, hibru (cf. Whiting's
observations below)? Could the ibri or "Hebrews" be a reflection
of a north Syrian/Trans-Euphrates "Amorite"/Aramean background ?
Dion
:
"...Aramean
nouns ummat hibrum (clan), (community), and kaprum (village)
suggest affinities between the ancestors of the Arameans and the
non-urban societies reflected in the 18th century cuneiform tablets of
Mari..."(Vol. 2. p. 1281. Paul E. Dion. "Aramaean Tribes and Nations of
First-millennium Western Asia." Jack M. Sasson. Editor.
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. [2 vols.] Peabody, Mass.
Hendrickson. [1995], 2000)
Whiting's
observations on the Amorites of the Mari documents suggest to me,
another possible origin for `ibri rendered in English as Hebrews.
He mentions in passing Amorites being called in their native language
hibru. Could the Amurru/Amorites of the Mari 2d millennium BCE
archives be the ancestors of the Aramaeans, who appear in the same area,
in a later time-frame, in Assyrian annals ? Thus the Pentateuchal
narrator confused terms ? That is, he correctly noted his ancestors
dwelling in the northern Syria-Trans-Euphrates area in the 3rd and 2d
millenniums BCE, but in error, he called them Arameans, they were in
reality, the "Amorites" of the Mari annals, whose descendants in late 2d
millennium BCE times evolved into Arameans. The "Amorites" Joshua waged
war against ca. 1130 BCE in Transjordan and Canaan was another confusion.
Either the Pentateuchal narrator (ca. 562 BCE) was recalling this area
being led as a coalition against Akhenaton by the Amurru/Hatti/Apiru
coalition of the Amarna era, or he was using the Neo-Assyrian term "Amurru-Hatti,"
which referred to ALL petty kingdoms west of the Euphrates.
Whiting
:
"In
Egyptian documents Amurru refers only to the Syrian kingdom of the
Amarna period...The kingdom called Amurru...was formed when originally
independent small city-states joined (or were forced into) a confederacy.
It occupied a small area between Byblos (modern Jubayl) and Ugarit, but
had few or no ethnic Amorites living within its borders." (Vol.2. p.
1236. Robert M. Whiting. "Amorite Tribes and Nations." Jack M. Sasson.
Editor. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. [1995],
2000)
"After
the collapse of the kingdom of Amurru, amurru and MAR.TU continue
to be used in cuneiform sources either anachronistically or as a compass
point. While in the Neo-Assyrian period (first millennium) Amurru could
still refer geographically to the small kingdoms in Syria, Palestine and
Arabia, only in the Hebrew Bible does the term Amorite (`emori)
continue as an ethnic designation, primarily for the population of
Palestine that was to be displaced by the Israelites when they conquered
Canaan." (Vol. 2. pp.1237-1238. Whiting. "Amorite Tribes and Nations"
[1995], 2000)
"Another
typically Amorite title is abu, "father," referring to tribal
rulers." (p. 1239. Whiting)
I note that Abraham is portrayed as meaning "father of many nations" (Ge
17:5), might this recollect Amorite/Aramean titles of northern Syria and
Trans-Euphrates, abu, a tribal ruler or chief ?
"The
Mari documents...the nomadic character of Amorite life...certainly
included the seasonal movement of sheep and goats to and from
traditional tribal pasturage along the middle Euphrates and the valley
of the Khabur. A number of Amorite words in the Mari documents refer to
this pastoralism: nawu "movable encampment of people and herds;"
hallatu, "transhumant herd;" hibru, "transhumant people;"
nighu, "traditional pasturage;" merhu, "an official in
charge of pasturage;" and hasiratu, "enclosure for sheep." There
is also considerable evidence of Amorites living in villages and
practicing agriculture in the Mari texts. In many such cases, such
villages tended to be inhabited largely by members of a particular tribe
or clan...Amorite society around Mari included two elements:
pastoralists and sedentary agriculturalists." (p.1240. Whiting. "Amorite
Tribes and Nations")
Stiebing noted some scholarly objections to Professor Callaway's and
others proposals that the Iron I villages had been built by Canaanite
refugees.
Stiebing (Emphasis mine) :
"Some archaeologists dispute Callaway's claim (and that of supporters of
the peasant-revolt model) that there was a direct connection between
Canaanite groups of the Late Bronze Age and the Israelite villagers of
Iron I. The pillared (four-room) houses characteristic of the Iron I
villages and the practice of grouping houses to form a defensive belt
around many of those villages ARE FEATURES VIRTUALLY UNKNOWN IN LATE
BRONZE AGE CANAANITE CITIES." (p. 161. "Interpretations of the Israelite
Settlement in Canaan." William H. Stiebing. Out of the Desert ?
Archaeology and the Exodus/Conquest Narratives. Amherst, New
York. Prometheus Books. 1989)
Lemche noted that Late Bronze Age Syria was a land of villages whilst
Canaan in this same era possessed only a few villages:
"In population and territorial extent, the small states of Syria and
Palestine varied enormously. The Syrian states were far bigger than
their Palestinian counterparts, though when compared to those of
Mesopotamia, Anatolia, or Egypt they were small and inconspicuous...In
comparison, the territory of a Palestinian state rarely exceeded an area
of more than a few hundred miles, with perhaps less than one-tenth the
population of one of the Syrian states. Another difference between the
Syrian and Palestinian states of this time was that most of the
population of Syria lived in villages spread out all over the territory,
whereas the Palestinian population almost exclusively lived inside their
walled hometowns. Village culture seems to have been almost totally
absent in Palestine during this period." (p.1207. Vol. 2. Neils Peter
Lemche. "The History of Ancient Syria and Palestine: An Overview." Jack
M. Sasson. Editor. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East.
Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers. [1995], 2000, 4 volumes
in 2 books)
All this was to change in the coming Iron Age IA, when Aramaean invaders,
due to war and famine, abandoned their villages ca. 1130 BCE and settled
the Hill Country of Canaan, bringing their "villages" with them, after
Egypt's withdrawal from Canaan under Pharaoh Ramesses VI. Hundreds of
villages exploded throughout Canaan and Transjordan in Iron IA whilst
hundreds of villages in Syria and Trans-Euphrates were abandoned,
according to archaeological surveys.
Stager noted that the archaeological record showed urbanism in decline
in the Aegean, but blossoming in Philista, as the Sea Peoples recreated
the urban centers they had abandoned in an Iron I Aegean world. There is
an interesting "parallel" here, two waves of invaders strike Canaan in
Iron I, Philistines and Israelites. The former leave an urban world and
recreate this urban world over the Canaanite towns they had destroyed.
By contrast, the invading Iron IA Israelites (who's traditions claim
they are Arameans, and whos ancestors attacked Canaan from Transjordan
according to the same traditions), build rude villages of stone, similar
to the rude stone villages they left in Late Bronze Age Syria and
Trans-Euphrates.
Stager :
"Archaeological surveys of Philista have revealed few Iron Age
settlements in the countryside. During stage one most of the Philistines,
including farmers and herders, lived in the five major cities...As
urbanism dissolved in Greece and Anatolia, some members of Aegean
society transplanted their urban life and values to a new but similar
setting, along the coast of the eastern Mediterranean and Cyprus..." (pp.
344 & 348. Lawrence Stager. "The Impact of the Sea Peoples in Canaan
(1185-1050 BCE)." Thomas Levy. Editor. The Archaeology of Society
in the Holy Land. New York. Facts on File. 1995)
Professor Stiebing on the abandonment of parts of lower Mesopotamia in
Iron I, suspecting Famine as the cause :
"Mesopotamia also suffered a significant loss of population in the
period just after ca. 1200 BC. Archaeological surveys of southern
Mesopotamia indicate that in the old Sumerian heartland just north of
the Persian Gulf the population declined by about 25 percent during this
era. But the situation was much worse further to the north. In the
Diyala region the loss in population appears to have been about 75
percent." (p.182. "The End of the Late Bronze Age." William H. Stiebing,
Jr. Out of the Desert ? Archaeology and the Exodus/Conquest
Narratives. Amherst, New York. Prometheus Books. 1989)
If the Diyala region, northeast of Baghdad, experienced an abandonment
of the land due to famine reaching 75% of the population, one can
appreciate the devastation and abandonment of the more "marginal" steppe
regions to the northwest of Baghdad, inhabited by the Aramaeans !
Dion noted that the beginning of the Iron Age witnesses Arameans on the
move, invading new lands.
"Aramaean Expansion-
For the Aramaeans, the beginning of the Iron Age was a time of forceful
expansion, and Tiglath-pileser did not succeed in curbing their
progress. For more than a hundred years, the shadowy figures that
succeeded him were unable to cope with this situation, and the same was
true of Babylonia after Nebuchadnezzar I. In Babylonia the Aramaeans
were to remain a major ethnic ingredient, alongside the related
Chaldeans and the longstanding Akkadian population; 8th century Assyrian
sources list 36 of their tribes. Like unsubmissive elements of all times,
in resisting imperial authorities they are branded as bandits. In a text
in which Sargon II boasts of having successfully hacked his way through
to Babylon, he names Aramaeans in one breath with lions and wolves as
sources of insecurity." (Vol. 2. p. 1282. Paul E. Dion. "Aramaean Tribes
and Nations of First-Millennium Western Asia." Jack M. Sasson. Editor.
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Peabody, Mass.
Hendrickson. 1995)
"In southern Syria too, Aramaean penetration was anything but a straight
forward process. Egypt maintained important strongholds in Canaan until
the mid-twelfth century, but no source tells us what became of its
possessions in the hinterland of Lebanon and southern Syria (Upi) after
the reign of Merneptah." (P.1284.Paul E. Dion. "Aramaean Tribes and
Nations of First-Millennium Western Asia." Jack M. Sasson. Editor.
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Peabody, Mass.
Hendrickson. 1995)
"The populations of northern and middle Syria and of northern
Mesopotamia retained many pre-Aramaic ethnic features deep into the Iron
Age...In northern Mesopotamia, the onomastic sample available in former
Hurrian territories, around Haran (ancient Carrhae) on the Balikh river
and Tell Halaf on the Khabur shows a high degree of Aramaization in the
8th and 7th centuries..." (P.1285.Vol.2. Paul E. Dion. "Aramaean Tribes
and Nations of First-Millennium Western Asia." Jack M. Sasson. Editor.
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Peabody, Mass.
Hendrickson. 1995)
Hyksos, Arameans, Covenants, Circumcision and Divine Marriage
According to the bible, God makes a covenant with Abraham, he promises
his descendants all the land of Canaan. To confirm to Abraham his
committment, God is portrayed as a "flaming torch" that passes between
the cut-up bodies of several animals (Ge 15:7-18). According to
Professor Stager, the village-pastoralist Amorites of Trans-Euphrates
concluded covenants by cutting up the foal of an ass, or killing a puppy
or a goat. Stager noted that the Hebrew phrase kerat berit means "to cut
a covenant." According to biblical traditions Israel's ancestors were
from Trans-Euphrates (Haran and Damascus, Ge 12:4;15:2), and the "cutting
of a covenant" seems to parallel the Trans-Euphrates customs recorded at
Mari on the Euphrates in the 18th century BCE.
Stager :
"A second major discovery in the courtyard of the Canaanite tripartite
temple at Avaris, in Egypt, highlights another important role these
temples played : They served as the sites for covenant and treaty
ratification ceremonies. In front of the Avaris temple, near the altar,
pairs of sacrified donkeys were buried in pits. This temple may have
been dedicated to Baal Saphon, the Canaanite storm god and protector of
sailors. He is later identified with the Egyptian god Seth. A cylinder
seal found in the 18th century BCE palace at Avaris shows Baal Saphon
striding from mountain to mountain (just as Yahweh does in the Bible)
with Sea (the god Yam, represented by a snake) below, a bull and a lion
on one side and a ship and a dolphin on the other. In the temple
courtyard at Tel Haror [in south Canaan] many sacred pits (called
favissae) were filled with ritually slaughtered animals, such as birds,
puppies and donkeys. Finding the remains of animals in temples is no
surprise, but the animals were not only used as sacrifices to the gods.
They were also played an esential role in treaties between various
peoples. One well-known tablet form 18th century BCE Mari reads:
"I went...in order to kill a donkey foal between the Haneans and
Idamaraz. They brought me a puppy and a goat, but out of respect for my
lord I would not allow a puppy or a goat, so I insisted on sacrificing a
donkey foal, the offpspring of a female donkey. Thus I made peace
between the Haneans and Idamaraz."
"The notion of killing a donkey foal (or some lesser sacrifice) in order
to seal a treaty between two parties gave rise to the Hebrew phrase
kerat berit (literally, "to cut a covenant"), meaning "to make a
treaty." Frank M. Cross has shown that the divne name El-berith, "God of
the Covenant," is attested already in a Hurrian hymn from the 2d
millennium BCE." (p.66. Lawrence Stager. "The Shechem Temple, Where
Abimelech Massacred a Thousand." Biblical Archaelogy Review.
July/August 2003. pp.26-35,66-68)
Perhaps God's request of Abraham to circumcise himself and all males in
his household, reflects a type of "cutting a covenant" ? That is,
Abraham's descendants bind themselves to God by a "cutting" of the
foreskin.
Other biblical texts portray God as "married" to Israel, she being
portrayed as his "harlot" bride. Moses leads Israel into the Sinai
wilderness to meet God who renews his covenant, taking Israel to be his
bride. Shortly after entering the Promised Land under Joshua, a new
generation goes through a ritualistic circumcision at Gibeath-haaraloth,
the "hill of the foreskins" (Josh 5:3).
Of interest here is the observation by Muller that circumcision was
practised in Egypt, but as an act preparatory to marriage. Could the
Hebraic notion of a God "marrying" Israel, be, what is -in part-
behind Israel's having to circumcise themselves ? That is, two
traditions may lie behind Hebraic circumcision, 1) the "cutting a
covenant," binding one's self to an oath, of Syrian/Trans-Euphrates
derivation, fused with 2) Egyptian notions of circumcision as a
precursor to marriage ?
Muller:
"Circumcision existed in Egypt from time immemorial, but had no
religious character and was merely a preparation for marriage; it
applied to girls as well as to boys." (p.186. "Ethics and Cult." W. Max
Muller. The Mythology of All Races, Egyptian. Vol. XII.
Boston. Marshall Jones Company. 1918)
My research suggests that the Primary History, Genesis-Kings was
composed in the Exile ca. 562 BCE by one author-redactor, who brought
together earlier traditions and compositions. He understands that
Israel's patriarchs are Aramaeans of Trans-Euphrates in the late 3rd
millennium or early 2d millennium BCE. In this era, according to
scholars, a nation calling themselves "Aramaeans" DID NOT YET EXIST.
Aram appears earliest in an Egyptian text of Amenhotep III (ca.
1390-1352 BCE) which mentions "one of Aram," another text about 1210 BCE
mentions a colleague arriving from a town " in the district of Aram,"
and at Ugarit (which came to end ca. 1175 BCE) mention is made of the "fields
of Arami" (cf. p. 348. Vol. 1. A. R. Millard. "Arameans." David Noel
Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York.
Doubleday. 1992).
Arameans are first attested to in Assyrian documents of the late 12th
century BCE, by Tiglath-Pileser I, ca. 1114-1076 (cf. p. 345. Vol. 1. A.
R. Millard. "Arameans." David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor
Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992). They are portrayed
as attacking the western borders of Assyria. Scholars have noted that
the Haran area was under Hurrian control in 14th century BCE, then when
their state of Mittani came to an end by the 12th century BCE, the rise
of Arameans began. By the 8th century BCE the predominate names in the
Haran area are Aramaean.
The Hebrew language uses 22 consonants, so too, does Aramaic. But
scholars understand that the Arameans earliest alphabet was borrowed
about 1100 BCE from Canaanite and Phoenician forms, apparently by the
middle of 8th century BCE true Aramaic script begins to appear. A statue
found at Tell Fekheriye, near Gozan, is written in 11th century BCE
Proto-Canaanite script (cf. pp.342-343. Vol. 1. Joseph Naveh. "Aramaic
script." David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary.
New York. Doubleday. 1992). The study of the evolution of Aramaic script
is important for the light it sheds on Israel's origins. The
Pentateuchal narrator understands that Israel's patriarchs are Aramaeans.
Hebrew is related to Aramaic, but differs from it. The bible is written
with an alphabet consisting of 22 consonants.
Naveh:
"About 1100 BC the Aramaeans adopted the alphabetic script which was
employed at that time by the Canaanites and Phoenicians. They wrote in
this same script until the mid-8th century BC...The impact of the
Phoenician script on people who wrote in Aramaic was so strong that they
took over the set of 22 letters employed by the Phoenicians without
adding to it a single character, even though the phonetic system of the
Aramaic language was much richer than that of the Phoenician...After 732
BC, the year of the Assyrian conquest of Damascus (the southernmost
Aramaic city-state), the Aramaic script ceased to be a national script,
and people of various national or ethnic origins began writing in it.
Therefore the Aramaic script, not being restricted by the
conservativeness which characterizes national writing traditions, was
used for purely practical purposes. This phenomenon enabled the
evolution of a cursive script which did not preserve the older letter
forms, and any unnecessary strokes were dropped from the letters. as
early as the end of the 7th century BC, the Aramaic script looked like
shorthand in comparison with the Phoenician and particularly, with the
Hebrew script." (p.343. Vol.1. Vol. 1. Joseph Naveh. "Aramaic script."
David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary.
New York. Doubleday. 1992).
"References in various Assyrian inscriptions mention Aramean tribes
taking control of these areas at the end of the 11th century...Other
Aramean groups settled along the lower course of the Euphrates and
further east, all the way into Babylonia." (p.345. Vol. 1. A. R. Millard.
"Arameans." David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible
Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992).
Two Assyrian kings, Tiglath-pileser I (ca. 1114-1076 BCE) and his son,
Asshur-bel-kala (ca. 1073-1056 BCE) both mention places where they
engaged Aramaeans in war, "...along the Euphrates from the Babylonian
frontier at Rapiqu to Carchemish, in Mount Bishri, Tadmor (Palmyra) in
Amurru, as far as the foot of the Lebanon mountains. Asshur-bel-kala met
them in the mountains to the north, around the sources of the river
Habur..."(p.345. Vol. 1. A. R. Millard. "Arameans." David Noel
Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York.
Doubleday. 1992).
Millard noted that most scholars thought that the biblical term Arameans
as an early 2d millennium BCE descriptor of the Patrirachs was
anachronistic, and observed that Noth had attempted link the Arameans
with the Amorites of the 2d millennium BCE Mari documents. I suspect
Noth was correct, they are the same people. The words are similar, both
dwell in the same general area.
Millard:
"The eruption of the Aramean tribes into upper Mesopotamia and their
expansion into Babylonia is comparable with the spread of the Amorites
along the same routes a millennium earlier. Kinship of Arameans and
Arameans is possible, but the attempt by Noth (1961) to prove the
Arameans originated from the Amorites was disproved by D. O. Edzard
(1964). Certainly there are a few similarities, such as names beginning
with ya and ending with -an..." (p.348. Vol. 1. A. R. Millard. "Arameans."
David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary.
New York. Doubleday. 1992).
The
Arameans were seminomadic pastoralists, based in villages set in the
coutryside near good sources of water. Some of the populace remained in
the villages throughout the year, while others took the flocks to find
pasture. In this, they followed the style attested for the Amorites a
millennium before, for Laban and his family (Ge 29:30), and for others
since. The term kaprum, "village," known in the Mari tablets, continued
as a designation for Aramean settlements (Aramaic kepar). The Aramean
lifestyle affected the Assyrian language, which took over their terms
for steppe and hill country (mudabiru, cf. Hebrew midbar,
and gab`ani, cf. Hebrew gib`a).
Assyrian lists of booty taken from Aramean towns include grain, cattle,
and sheep and from about 700 BC the area about Harran was occupied by
small farmers raising livestock, grain, and vines, according to the "Harran
Census" (Fales 1973)." (p. 349. (p.345. Vol. 1. A. R. Millard. "Arameans."
David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary.
New York. Doubleday. 1992).
"Aramean Cuture and Religion-
The Aramean states were centered around existing cities and absorbed the
remnants of Late Bronze Age populations. Although many cities in the
west suffered in the upheavals of the 12th century, knowledge and skills
survived. Aramean tribesmen assimilated much of the material culture of
their predecessors and the continuing traditions of the Hittites. Of
prime importance was the adoption of the Phonecian alphabet for writing
Aramaic dialects even though the phonemes did not correspond exactly."
(p. 349. (p.345. Vol. 1. A. R. Millard. "Arameans." David Noel
Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York.
Doubleday. 1992).
Aramean gods were El, Baal-Hadad, Reshep, Baal-Shamem (Lord of heaven),
Baalat, Atar/Athar, Atta (Anat). (p.350. Vol. 1. A. R. Millard. "Arameans."
David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary.
New York. Doubleday. 1992).
If
I am correct that the Primary History was written ca. 562 BCE, then
perhaps its narrator is preserving ancient hoary traditions of a late
3rd, early 2d millennium BCE origin of Israel's ancestors, but in ERROR
calling them Aramaeans, in other words, he is employing what is called
in scholarly language an "anachronsim" ? That is, by the 8th century BCE
the area of Israel's 3rd/2d millenium BCE ancestors is now known as
being Aramaean !
Thus Israel is, in a sense, CORRECTLY preserving ancient traditions of
her ancestors being of northern Syria, and Trans-Euphrates ca. the early
2d millennium BCE in an area originally called Amurru (Akkadian for "the
west"), but identified as Aramean by the 11th-8th century BCE.
The Israeli scholar Benjamin Mazar challeneged Genesis-Judges as
reflecting a Bronze Age world, suggesting rather that it was an Iron Age
world, another scholar Amihai Mazar, disagrees. Amihai has argued that
although Benjamin is correct about some details being of the Iron Age
era, there are other details which suggest a Bronze Age provenance. I
find myself in agreement with Amihai.
Amihai :
"Various scholars have suggested that the cultural environment of Middle
Bronze II provides the most suitable background for the patriarchal
sagas in the book of Genesis...Various phenomena in the book of Genesis
which apply to a later period (such as the extensive use of the camel
and the appearance of arameans and Philistines) were considered by
scholars as anachronisms, introduced by later editors and compilers of
the old oral traditions. The essential stories were considered as
reflecting traditions which go back to the Middle Bronze II Age. This
approach, which was common during the sixties and early seventies, has
been severely opposed by some current authors who believe the stories
themselves reflect a much later period, closer to their time of
compilation. Thus Benjamin Mazar has suggested that the book of Genesis
was compiled by the court of David and Solomon...Others, such as Thomas
L. Thompson and John Van-Seters...suggesting much later dates for the
patriarchal traditions. I find the similiarities between the Middle
Bronze II culture and that illustrated in the Genesis stories too close
to be ignored. The patriarchal narratives known to us from the book of
Genesis must have been very old traditions which were orally passed on
from generation to generation until they were written for the first
time, perhaps during the time of the United Kingdom of david and Solomon.
To substantiate this theory and identify the earliest nucleus of these
traditions, we should note the many details which do not correspond to
the period of the Israelite settlement and monarchy. As is the nature of
oral transmission, many features have been added, yet the origin of the
traditions might go back as early as Middle Bronze II." (pp.225-226.
"The Patriarchal Narratives and the Middle Bronze Age." Amihai Mazar.
Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000-586 BCE. New
York. Doubleday-Anchor. 1990)
My research substantiates Amihai's supposition about the traditions'
hoary antiquity, I have traced some elements in the biblical narratives
back to Early Bronze Age times.
I understand that the Hyksos expulsion of ca. 1540 BCE, Middle Bronze
IIC, is what, is -in part- behind the bible's Exodus traditions.
According to archaeologists, the Hyksos' cultural background is Syria
and Palestine. Redmount suggested that a number of the cultural
features associated with the Hyksos in Egypt originated in early Middle
Bronze IIA Syria, then penetrated south into Palestine, and thence into
Egypt. To a degree this cultural development parallels somewhat Israel's
origins, Syria, Canaan, Egypt.
Muller noted that the Hyksos god, Baal (Baal Hadad or Baal Zephon/Saphon)
was assimilated to the Egyptian god Seth. In Ugaritic myths, Baal wars
with and defeats his brother Yam, also called Yaw. Also of note is that
the sea is also at times associated with a serpent called Lotan. The
Egyptians also portrayed Seth as the god of thunderclouds, like Baal. In
Egyptian myths Seth, on the solar bark of Re, spears the sea monster,
Apep (Greek Apophis, the great serpent who tries to devour the Sun-god
as he arises each day), paralleling somewhat Baal's victory of the
7-headed sea-serpent, called Lothan (just as Yahweh in the bible
triumphs over the sea serpent, Leviathan). Seth's wives were Anat and
Astarte, daughters of the sun god Atum-Re according to one Egyptian myth
(cf. p. 67 "The Feud Between Horus and Seth [the Chester Beatty
Papyrus]. Fred Gladstone Bratton. Myths and Legends of the Ancient
Near East. New York. Barnes & Noble. [1970], 1993), whilst
Baal's lovers were Anat and Athtart (p.110. Bratton. 1970).
There appear to be parallels between Egyptian and Syrian/Canaanite myths
about Seth and Baal. Both contend with their brother to be ruler, Baal
vs. Yam/Yaw (the sea) whilst Horus contends with Seth for rulership.
Atum-Re allows Horus to be ruler, but announces that Seth will be a god
of thunder and be feared by all of mankind ( cf. p.71. Bratton). In
Egyptian myths an ass is associated as an animal sacred to Seth; the ass
is shown being attacked by a serpent in one Egyptian scene, an Egyptian
coming to its aid lancing the serpent (cf. fig. 106. p. 107. W. Max
Muller. The Mythology of All Races, Egyptian. Vol. XII. Boston. Marshall
Jones Company. 1918). I note donkeys were ritually sacrificed and buried
near the altar of the Canaanite/Hyksos temple at Avaris (Tell ed-Daba),
and a donkey is slain near Mari to bring about peace between warring
Amorites. Was the ass or donkey also sacred to Baal in Syria ? When
Israel assembles at Mt. Sinai God tells his people that the male
firstling of an ass is to either be redeemed with a lamb or have its
neck broken, as a memorial to God's slaying all the male firstborn of
Egypt, both man and animal (Ex 13:13). Could perhaps the donkeys found
buried in the temple courtyard at Avaris be what is being recollected,
if the Hyksos expulsion is being recalled as the Exodus ? In other words
perhaps donkeys or asses dedicated to the stormgod Seth/Baal at Hyksos
Avaris are reformatted as dedications to the stormgod Yahweh, recalling
the Exodus from Egypt in Hyksos times ?
In Ugaritic myths Baal's prowess with a lance/spear is alluded to (
p.75. line 49. "Baal and Mot." J.C. L. Gibson. Canaanite Myths and
Legends. Edinburgh. T & T Clark. 1956, 1978). A stele shows Baal with a
lance whose heel suggests for some lightning, he treads upon the sea,
suggesting he has mastery over the sea god with his lance. This
parallels Seth, whose lance subdues the sea serpent Apep at the sun's
rising each day. I note also scarabs showing a winged Seth lancing a
serpent at his feet, the other shows a winged Reshef in the same act and
posture. In the Rameside 400 year stela, a wingless Seth is shown
wearing the garb of Reshep. Baal has several epithets that appear to
have been assimilated to Yahweh, like aliyn Baal meaning "mighty," (cf.
Hebrew Elyon), and "rider of the clouds" (p.69. line 7. "Baal and Mot."
J.C. L. Gibson. Canaanite Myths and Legends. Edinburgh. T
& T Clark. 1956, 1978).
Gibson noted that the Ugaritic myths mention that the supreme god El (Bull-El)
summons the gods to a new-naming ceremony for his son Yam, who earlier
was also called YAW, but whose new name, a coronation name evidently, is
to be "darling of El," Ugaritic mdd.il (mdd, alternately rendered ydd,
'darling, beloved' p. 150 Ugaritic Glossary. Gibson; compare with Hebrew
David, meaning 'beloved" Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, Hebrew
and Chaldee Dictionary, #1730, #1732), all this is in
preparation for Yam's coming battle with his brother Baal for dominion
of the earth (cf. pp. 4, 39,150. J.C. L. Gibson. Canaanite Myths
and Legends. Edinburgh. T & T Clark. 1956, 1978). A number of
scholars have suggested that Yahweh may have evolved from Yaw, a notion
Gibson expresses reservations about (cf. p. 4. note 2. Gibson. 1978).
I understand that the Bible's story of Yahweh contending with Baal for
rule of the earth, is but an Iron Age recollection and transformation of
the Late Bronze Age myths of the brother gods who contended with each
other for dominion of the earth, the Ugaritic and Hyksos Baal/Seth vs.
Yaw/Horus. Yahweh has assimilated the feats and epithets of all the
above gods.
If I am correct in identifying the Hyksos expulsion of ca. 1540 BCE as
what is being recalled in the Exodus narratives, it follows that the
Hyksos Storm and Thundercloud god, Baal, is the "God of the Exodus." Of
note, is that the prophet Amos states that Israel in his day still
called Yahweh-Elohim, BAAL (Hos 2:16). And Yahweh is portrayed at Mount
Sinai manifesting himself to the nation as a Stormcloud god, LIKE BAAL,
who's thunder frightens the people (Ex 19:16). In the southern Sinai at
the Egyptian mining camp of Serabit el Khadim exists a stele of Seth/Baal.
Perhaps Seth/Baal of the Hyksos and of the Southern Sinai is behind
Yahweh's appearance at Mount Sinai ? Hyksos Tell el Yehudiyeh wares and
scarabs have also been found at the Egyptian Hathor shrine at Serabit el
Khadim, perhaps linking the southern Sinai with the Hyksos expulsion and
the Hebrew Exodus ? Also of interst is that the so-called 400 year
anniversary stele erected by Ramesses to the god Seth, shows this god in
the garb of the Canaanite plague god Reshef (the same costume appears on
the Canaanite plague god, Mekal at Beth-shean, honored by two Ramesside
era Egyptians). So, Yahweh-Elohim as a God who can assume the form of a
Storm-cloud, who subdues the great serpent of sea, and who is famed as a
God of plague, striking down not only Egyptians but his own people in
the Sinai, appears to be a fusion of Baal-Hadad/Saphon, Reshep and Mekal.
His monuments exist in the eastern delta from which Israel departed in
the Exodus, at Serabit el Khadim in the southern Sinai where Israel
encounters Yahweh, and in Canaan, where Israel eventually settles.
Secular scholars understand Yahweh is but a fusion of Canaanite gods and
goddesses, El, Baal and Yaw.
I also understand Egyptian gods have also been fused to Yahweh.
Avaris, the capital of the Hyksos in the eastern delta of Egypt, is
believed to be modern Tell ed-Daba. Bietak has unearthed there Canaanite
temples and houses who's earlier parallels are from Midle Bronze II
Syria. Some of the pottery looks to be similar in style to Syria as well
as southern Canaan. Donkeys were buried in temple courtyards, evidently
as some ritualistic act. To the degree that Mari records slain donkeys
as part of a covenant act amongst dwellers of the Trans-Euphrates area,
perhaps this is evidence of Syrian customs penetrating Canaan and Egypt.
Bietak understands that some of the arrivals were by ship from ports in
northern Syria, Phoenicia and Ugarit, as well as Cyprus. Others came
from ports in south Canaan (Gaza ? and Tell el-Ajjul).
Moscati has commented that "Canaan" in the Bronze Age was _ALL_ of
Syria-Palestine. The area was HOMOGENEOUS in culture. It was the Iron
Age which witnessed the break-up into differing states, Aram, Israel,
Phoenicia, Edom, Ammon, Moab.
All the above suggests to me that the bible is CORRECTLY recalling
Middle Bronze and Late Bronze events of Israel's origins in
Trans-Euphrates and northern Syria and her ancestors penetrating south
to Canaan and thence to Egypt, to become the Hyksos who were expelled at
the end of Middle Bronze II C. Yahweh-Elohim is a fusion of
Syro-Canaanite gods and godesses as well as Egyptian gods and goddesses.
The Penteuchal narrator understands not only are the Patriarchs from
Trans-Euphrates and Damascus, but that they invaded from the east, that
is from Transjordan, the Hill Country of Canaan. Archaeologists have
determined that IRON I A best fits this description. The problem ? Some
scholars think Israel is just locals moving into the sparsely settled
land. I suspect, like Saggs, that Iron I A Aramaeans are settling from
Trans-Euphrates, driven out of their ancestral lands by famine and war.
They enter a nearly empty Transjordan and Hill Country Canaan AFTER
Egypt as left the area ca. 1130 BCE. They settle the land and eventaully
intermarry with local Canaanites. The Canaanite mothers pass on to their
Israelite sons, the Bronze age traditions of their ethnic origins, which
become fused to Iron I Aramaean origins traditions. Thus two different
origins traditions, Canaanite Bronze Age and Aramaean Iron I, become by
late Iron II, Israel's origins. There is a "twist" however. When the
Hyksos were expelled, they returned to their homelands. Some of those
homelands were Syria. As Egypt came to expand her empire to the
Euphrates, the HOMOGENEOUS BRONZE AGE world of Syria-Palestine,
remembered in tradition their ancestor's expulsion as Hyksos and their
ancestor's 400+ year oppression by Egypt (1540-1140 BCE). So, too a
degree, the invading Iron IA Arameans of Trans-Euphrates and Syria (the
Aramaean homelands extended from northern Syria, Damascus, Tadmor, Jebel
Bishri and the foothills of northern Lebanons to Haran in northern
Mesopotamia) , may have brought with them traditions of their Hyksos
ancestors being expelled from Egypt.
One of the mysteries about the Iron IA settlement of the Hill Country of
Canaan is that the new arrivals built villages. Some scholars, like
Israel Finkelstein, have argued that Israel was nomadic in the Late
Bronze Age and suddenly became agrarian settlers in Iron I. Stiebing
doubted that nomads would suddenly give up their nomadic ethos and
settle down. The villages of Iron I A Israel suggested to him that
whoever the Israelites were, they had a previous tradition of making
villages and brought that tradition with them, nomads were not in the
habit of constructing villages.
The 18th century BCE Mari annals, however, as well as archaeological
surveys of Trans-Euphrates, reveal that the peoples, from Early Bronze
times through Iron I, were village dwellers who practised sheep herding.
That is, they migrated seasonally with their flocks back and forth from
Jebel Bishri south of the Euphrates to Haran, but they also had villages
to return to. Thus the villages appearing in the Canaanite Hill Country
of Iron IA "proto-Israel" are probably to be linked to the same villages
appearing in the Trans-Euphrates area which came to be abandoned
according to archaeologiclal surveys, in Iron I, due to a lengthy and
severe famine, recalled perhaps in the biblical narratives of the
patriarchs, Abraham and Jacob, who both wander to Egypt to escape famine.
It is my understanding that Noth was correct about the 2d millennium BCE
Amorites of Trans-Euphrates appearing in the Mari annals, being the
ancestors of the 1st millennium BCE Aramaeans, and that these people
are, -in part- Israel's ancestors.
Archaeologists have determined that pigs were raised and consumed in the
Ancient Near East. Their remains have been found in various contexts in
Bronze Age Egypt, Canaan, Syria and Mesopotamia. What was a surprise,
was that pig remains tended to be absent in the Iron IA Hill Country of
Canaan where an Aramaean Israel settled, whilst they appear frequently
in Iron Age Philista.
Hesse:
"Much of the variability in pig abundance is correlated with rainfall,
with wet climate being a favorable indicator for finding remains...both
southern Mesopotamia and Khuzestan, as well as northern Mesopotamia and
Anatolia, have relatively abundant pig remains...The linkage of pig
remains with wet conditions also describes the distribution of pigs in
Syro-Palestine through the Chalcolithic. In the Early Bronze Age, an
additional principle came into play. Based on samples from Lahav, it
appears that pig remains are less abundant in periods and places of
urban development.This is even clearer in Middle Bronze Age samples from
the same region, where the evidence shows that site size is inversely
correlated with pig abundance...In Canaan we have no archaeological
evidence for the cultic use of pigs after the Bronze Age, unless the
partial pig skeleton from Hazor is so interpreted. The oft cited
evidence of pig sacrifice from Megiddo and Ta`anach is spurious; the
bones were misidentified. The only incidence of intensive swineherding
until the Hellenistic period is associated with the arrival of the
Philistines..." (p.215. Vol.1. Brian Hesse. "Animal Husbandry and Human
Diet in the Ancient Near East." Jack M. Sasson. Editor.
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Peabody, Massachusetts.
Hendrickson Publishers. [1995], 2000)
Hesse further noted :
"One considerable advantage of pigs is their exceptionally rapid herd
growth. Thus, they are a good choice at an initial settlement in a
region, which may partly explain their abundance in early Philistine
deposits." (p.216)
The bible understands that Israel is forbidden to eat pork.
Archaeological investigations of the Iron IA Hill Country of Canaan
reveal an absence of pig remains, yet this same era reveals pig remains
in abundance in Philista. The bible is adamant that Israels ancestors
are wandering Arameans. Of interest here is an observation made by Dion,
in describing the animals raised by the first-millennium BCE Aramaeans
of Syria, he noted the absence of pig remains.
Dion :
"Sheep and oxen are almost ubiquitous in native inscriptions, and much
more common in the documentation than any other domestic species; ovines
were about ten times as common as cattle. PIGS ARE AS GOOD AS MISSING.
Among domestic fowl, only ducks and geeses are documented..." (p.1287.
Vol. 2. Paul Eugene Dion. "Aramaean Tribes and Nations of
First-Millennium Western Asia." Jack M. Sasson. Editor.
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Peabody, Massachusetts.
Hendrickson Publishers. [1995], 2000)
Lev-Tov on the rarity of pigs in the Near East (which would include
Canaan) prior to the arrival of the Philistines (Emphasis mine) :
"The starting point for the pig discussion is that while swine were
generally quite rare in the Near East during the Late Bronze Age, they
were common in the contemporary Aegean world and at Iron Age Philistine
sites. Pork in the Aegean area was an important supplement to a diet
where most of the meat, as in the Near East, came from sheep and goats."
(Justin Lev-Tov, Research Fellow, AIAR Ph.D. Candidate, University of
Tennessee. "The Social Implications of Subsistence Analysis of Faunal
Remains from Tel Miqne-Ekron." ASOR Newsletter. Spring
1999. Vol. 49, No. 1. pp. 13-15. "Papers Presented at the Albright
Appointees' Colloquium at ACOR in Amman, Jordan. Jan. 1999)
If I am correct that Arameans from Northern Syria and Mesopotamia are
the "Village builders" of Iron IA Hill Country Canaan and Transjordan,
it follows then, that the Hebrew language is itself an amalgum of
Canaanite and Aramaic. That is, over a course of about 500 years
(1200-586 BCE), the Arameans, via intermarriage with the Canaanites,
adopted many Canaanite words, to such a degree, that the original
Aramaic was lost, as noted by the biblical narrator himself, when he
portrays the people of Judah as NOT understanding their "mother language",
Aramaic (recalling Israel's Patriarchs are called Wandering Arameans),
and having Hezekiah's envoys asking the Assyrian envoy to speak to them
in Aramaic .
2 Kings 18:26-28
"Then Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebnah, and Joah, said to the
Rabshakeh, "Pray, speak to your servants in the Aramaic language, for we
understand it; do not speak to us in the language of Judah within the
hearing of the people who are on the wall." But the Rabshakeh said to
them, "Has my master sent me to speak these words to your master and to
you, and not to the men sitting on the wall, who are doomed with you to
eat their own dung and to drink their own urine ?" Then the Rabshakeh
stood and called out in a loud voice in the language of Judah" "Hear the
word of the great king, the king of Assyria."
Just such also happened to the Philistines ! Their Aegean language, by
the time of the fall of Philista to Nebuchadrezzar revealed they wrote
in a Semitic language akin to Hebrew, they too had lost contact with
their mother tongue over a 500 year acculturation period (an
inscription being found in a burned out Philistine tell, destroyed by
Nebuchadrezzar). The late Cyrus Gordon argued that the Philstines had
spoken a Semitic language, because when he studied the biblical texts he
found no indication that translators were needed between Philistines and
Israel, each is portrayed carrying on conversations without need of a
translator. Gordon was right and wrong ! The Philistine language was
originally Aegean, but they acculturated to Canaan like the Iron IA
Arameans, in fact the bible suggests marriages between Israelites and
Philistines (Samson and Deliah)- oh the power of acculturation ! "The
conqueror had become the conquered."
Stiebing on the Alt-Noth proposal that Israel is indigenous to the
periphery of Canaan, noting the anomalies of the proposal (Emphasis mine)
:
"Alt and Noth saw the establishment of Israel in terms of a gradual
settlement of seminomadic tribes who, with their flocks of sheep and
goats, moved peacefully back and forth from the adjoining steppes and
desert fringes to the largely unoccupied central hill country of
Palestine...Archaeological discoveries still produce a major problem for
the Alt-Noth thesis -the same problem they produce for the Conquest
model. Where did the Israelites come from ? THERE IS NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL
EVIDENCE OF THEIR PRIOR EXISTENCE IN SINAI OR IN THE STEPPES AND DESERT
FRINGES OF CANAAN. Another problem with the peaceful-infiltration model
is that it unconsciously views the seminomadic or nomadic way of life as
a temporary stage of existence between that of primitive hunting,
fishing, and gathering and that of sedentary agriculture and
civilization. It assumes a "land hunger" on the part of the incoming
Israelites that led them to |
