This essay is dedicated to Dr. Gabriel “Goby” Barkay and Zachi Zweig, co-directors of the Temple Mount Sifting Project; and to the tens of thousands who have sifted the dirt from the Holy Hill of Zion (Psalm 102:14)

Introduction
It is always the archaeologist’s dream to find inscriptional material, such as a seal, bulla, stela, ostraca, clay tablet, papyrus, scroll, or even just graffiti on a wall.  In Israel, an inscription is a rare find, and some are revealed to be forgeries.

In the summer of 2005, the Jerusalem Post reported the discovery of a tenth-century wall in the City of David in Jerusalem by Dr. Eilat Mazar.  One of her area supervisors also discovered a bulla (a dried lump of clay with a seal impression on it) of an individual named “Jerucal ben [son of] Shelemiah ben [son of] Shevi.”  The name of this person appears in Jeremiah 37:3 and 38:1.  This seal impression adds a detail that the Bible does not mention: the name of his grandfather, Shevi (Lefkovits 2005:13; Mazar 2007:67-69).

In this essay we will examine the command that God gave to Jeremiah to redeem a field from his cousin, Hanamel of Anathoth.  Particular attention will be given to the archaeological background to this chapter and how it illustrates the Biblical text.  Jeremiah’s obedience to God’s command, in spite of a hopeless situation, was a vivid lesson to the people of Judah that God would return His people from the Babylonian captivity.  Jeremiah had publicly proclaimed to the people of Judah that God would restore them to the land after 70 years of captivity in Babylon.  Jeremiah’s faith in the promise of God was shown by buying the field at Anathoth, a city already destroyed by the Babylonians.  Jeremiah was literally putting his money where his mouth was!

Jeremiah Redeems a Field in Anathoth as a Sign of Future Redemption (32:1-15)

The Time Setting.  32:1, 2
The date that is given in this chapter is the tenth year of Zedekiah and the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar (32:1).  This date would be in 587 BC.  Two deportations of Judeans to Babylon had already taken place (605 BC and 598 BC).  In the tenth year of Zedekiah, the Babylonians were besieging Jerusalem (32:2).  Jeremiah was in the court of the prison in the king’s house, possibly on the Western Hill.

In the preceding two chapters (Jer. 30 and 31), Jeremiah forewarned the Judeans of the destruction of Jerusalem and Judah as well as the Babylonian captivity.  But he also predicted that the people would return to the land of Judah.  For this reason, these chapters have been called the “book of consolation” or “book of hope” (cf. Jer. 30:2).  At least nine times he predicts that the people of Judah will return to the land (30:10,11, 30:18, 31:3-6, 31:7-9, 31:10-12, 31:16,17, 31:18, 31:23,24).

King Zedekiah complains of Jeremiah’s prophecies.  32:3-5
The Prophet Jeremiah was not a popular preacher.  He did not say to the people of Judah that God did not care about their lifestyle and that they could go on living in their sins.  Nor did he say that the Babylonians were a peace-loving people with only good intentions toward Jerusalem and Judah.  King Zedekiah understood the words of the prophet: First, the LORD was going to use the Babylonians to destroy Jerusalem (32:3; cf. 21:4-6); second, King Zedekiah would attempt to flee from the Babylonians but he would be captured and taken to see King Nebuchadnezzar face to face (32:4; cf. 21:7); and finally, King Zedekiah would be taken captive to Babylon (32:5a).  Jeremiah also added that it would be futile to fight the Babylonian army (32:5b).

King Zedekiah did not like Jeremiah’s “doom-and-gloom” preaching.  Yet everything Jeremiah said was based on the Mosaic Law as recorded in the Torah.  As history unfolded, everything Jeremiah said in his seven encounters with King Zedekiah (Jer. 21:1-7, 32:1-5, 34:1-7, 37:1-15, 37:16-21, 38:1-6, 38:14-28) came to pass (2 Kings 25:4-7; Jer. 39:1-10).  What Jeremiah had not told him was that his sons would be killed and his eyes would be put out by the Babylonians.

Jeremiah recounts the story of redeeming a field in Anathoth.  32:6-15
The city of Anathoth, Jeremiah’s hometown, is located 4 kilometers (2½ miles) to the north of the Temple Mount in the tribal territory of Benjamin (cf. Josh. 18:11-28; Jer. 1:1, 11:21-23, 29:27, 32:7-9; Hareuveni 1991).  It was also a Levitical city (Josh. 21:18).  Two of David’s mighty men, Abiezar and Jehu, came from this city (2 Sam. 23:27; 1 Chron. 11:28, 12:3, 27:12).  A high priest, Abiathar, was exiled to his estate in the city (1 Kings 2:26).  During the Syro-Ephraimite Campaign, Anathoth was a target for the invading army (Isa. 10:30).  After the Babylonian exile, some of the people of Anathoth returned to their hometown, just as Jeremiah had prophesized (Ezra 2:23; Neh. 7:27, 11:32).

Jeremiah was in prison when the Lord spoke to him and said that his cousin, Hanamel, was going to visit and ask Jeremiah to buy his field in Anathoth (32:6-7).  Jeremiah realized it was the hand of the Lord when Hanamel, the son of Shallum, showed up and asked Jeremiah to redeem his field in Anathoth partially based on the laws recorded in Leviticus 25:23-28.  Jeremiah might have been aware that Anathoth had already fallen to the Babylonians (cf. 32:25).  He redeemed the field because God commanded him to do so, rather than thinking: “This must be some cruel joke by my relatives who plotted to kill me a few years ago along with the men of Anathoth (Jer. 11:18-23). Now they are trying to sell me this field after the Babylonians destroyed the city.  What a scam!”  God commanded him to buy the field so that Judah would have a sign that they would one day return from captivity in Babylon.

In verses 9-15 the transaction is recorded in detail.  The first thing Jeremiah did was to weigh out the 17 shekels of silver scraps in order to buy the field (32:9).  During the Iron Age, money – minted coins – had not yet been invented.  So the shekels of silver would have been a weight of silver, not coins.  Today, we would call it “junk silver,” e.g., broken pieces of a silver ring, silverware, old silver coins.  In 1968, the largest hoard of junk silver ever discovered was in five Iron Age vessels in the ancient city of Eshtemoa in the Judean Hills.  These vessels contained a total of 27.21 kilograms (62 pounds) of junk silver (Yeivin 1987:38-44).

One shekel of silver weighed 11.33 grams (Kletter 1991:122,134).  Jeremiah would have purchased the land for about 182.61 grams (0.182 kilograms) of silver.  To give the American reader a contemporary perspective, that amount of silver would be equivalent to 73 Mercury-head dimes worth of silver.  Keep in mind; however, there is not a speck of silver in the dimes currently being minted because they have been debased by the federal government!

Unfortunately, the circumstances surrounding the transaction are not known.  One cannot conclude that the land was worth $7.30; the amount of silver used to purchase the land is equal to the amount of silver in 73 Mercury-head dimes, but its value is not.  Therefore, we have no idea what the value of silver was at the time or whether its value was inflated because of the siege.  We also do not know the size of the field being purchased or its market value.  All we know for certain is that Jeremiah paid 17 shekels for that field.

Jeremiah put 17 stone shekel weights on a pan on one side of the scale and proceeded to put seventeen shekels of silver scraps on a pan on the other side until the scale was balanced (32:10).  During the 1977 season at the excavations of Tel Lachish, half of a balance beam from a scale was discovered in Stratum IV of Area S, dated to the middle of the eighth century BC.  It was made of ivory, or polished bone, and was 10.1 cm (4 inches) long.  If it were complete, then it would be about 20 cm (8 inches) long.  The only other balance beam to be found in an archaeological excavation was at Megiddo (Barkay 1996:75-82).

To finalize the land purchase, two “purchase deeds” were written up:  an open one and a sealed one (32:10-14).  The deeds were identical, but, in case of a dispute, the sealed one was the one that was binding.  The sealed deed was put in a safe place so it could be opened if there was a problem.  Probably, the transaction information, including the price of the sale, a description of the field being sold, and the identity of the buyer and seller were recorded on the document, which was papyrus.  One deed was rolled up and tied with a string.  A lump of clay was then placed on the string, and an impression was made with a seal that contained the owner’s name and possibly his title.  This clay impression is known as a bulla (plural bullae).  Although it is not stated in the text, the witnesses to the transaction might have added their bullae as well (Avigad 1986:125-127; Shiloh 1986:36-38; for illustrations as to how the deed might have been sealed: Avigad 1986:123, Fig. 4; Brandl 2000:60, Fig. 6; 63, Fig. 9).

The deeds were handed to Baruch the son of Neriah the son of Mahseiah for safe keeping.  A bulla with the inscription “(Belonging) to Berekhyahu son of Neriyahu the scribe” was discovered in a non-provenanced hoard of bullae and published by Professor Nahman Avigad (1978, 1979, and 1986).  A second, identical bulla is in a private collection (Shanks 1996:36-38).  Baruch is the shortened form of the name Berekhyahu.  Most likely this bulla was used by Baruch to seal documents when he was a royal scribe before 605/604 BC.  Avigad suggests that “Baruch seems eventually to have left his official position [of royal scribe] and joined Jeremiah in his struggle against the pro-Egyptian, anti-Babylonian policy of the court, a policy which was soon to lead to the destruction of Jerusalem” (1986:130).  A word of caution is in order: recently one scholar identified these two bullae as forgeries (Rollston 2003:161), but there is still a scholarly debate as to their authenticity.

Jeremiah instructed Baruch to take both purchase deeds and place them in an earthen vessel so they would be preserved for a long time (32:13-14).  During the 1982 season at the City of David excavations in Jerusalem, 51 bullae (later revised to 53) were discovered in Locus 967 in Area G.  This is the “first time that so large a group of easily legible Hebrew sealings has come to light in a controlled excavation, in a clear stratigraphic context and accompanied by architectural, ceramic and historical evidence” (Shiloh 1986:16-17).  On the floor of what is now known as the “House of the Bullae” were found “two vessels of uncommon form – tall kraters with high trumpet bases.  The latter are distinguished by their exceptionally high-quality slip and wheel-burnish covering the entire body.  At the base of the body is a drainage (?) hole, made prior to firing” (Shiloh 1986:23-24; Fig. 6:2-3; Pl. 6A).  The excavator, Yigal Shiloh, suggested the possibility that these two kraters “may have served for storage of the papyri, the bullae from which were found scattered around them” (1986:36).  This collection of bullae dates to the end of the seventh and beginning of the sixth centuries BC, which would make them contemporary with the Prophet Jeremiah (Shoham 2000:30).

Conclusions
Jeremiah paid 17 shekels of silver to redeem his cousin’s field in Anathoth.  He signed the land deed, sealed it with his personal seal, which the witnesses probably did as well, and then delivered the deed to his confidant Baruch for safe keeping in a clay vessel, most likely in an administrative archive.  This account ends with the promise from the Lord that “Houses and fields and vineyards shall be possessed again in this land” (32:15).
The situation looked bleak, because the Babylonians were about to destroy Jerusalem and take the Judeans captive to Babylon.  Jeremiah, however, rested in the promise of God and proclaimed that the people would return to their land and rebuild their cities.  He put his money where his mouth was by redeeming his cousin’s field.
Perhaps one day, archaeologists will find a bulla or seal with the name of Jeremiah the prophet on it in a controlled archaeological excavation!

Bibliography

Avigad, Nahman
1978    Baruch the Scribe and Jerahmeel the King’s Son.  Israel Exploration Journal 28: 52-56.

1979    Jerahmeel and Baruch.  King’s Son and Scribe. Biblical Archaeologist 42: 114-118.

1986    Hebrew Bullae From the Time of Jeremiah.  Remnants of a Burnt Archive. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Barkay, Gabriel
1996    A Balance Beam from Tel Lachish.  Tel Aviv 23/1: 75-82.

Brandl, Baruch
2000    Bullae with Figurative Decoration.  Pp. 58-74 in Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh.  Final Report VI.  Inscriptions.  Edited by D. T. Ariel.  Qedem 41.  Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University.

Hareuveni, Nogah
1991    Desert and Shepherd in Our Biblical Heritage.  Kiryat Ono, Israel: Neot Kedumim.

Kletter, Raz
1991    The Inscribed Weights of the Kingdom of Judah.  Tel Aviv 18/2: 121-163.

Lefkovits, Etgar
2005    Shards of Evidence.  The Jerusalem Post August 11.  Page 13.

Mazar, Eilat
2007    Preliminary Report on the City of David Excavations 2005 at the Visitors Center. Jerusalem and New York: Shalem.

Rollston, Christopher
2003    Non-Provenanced Epigraphs I: Pillaged Antiquities, Northwest Semitic Forgeries, and Protocols for Laboratory Tests.  Maarav 10:135-195.

Shanks, Hershel
1996    Fingerprint of Jeremiah’s Scribe.  Biblical Archaeology Review 22/2: 36-38.

Shiloh, Yigal
1986    A Group of Hebrew Bullae from the City of David.  Israel Exploration Journal 36/1-2: 16-38.

Shoham, Yair
2000    Hebrew Bullae.  Pp. 29-57 in Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh.  Final Report VI.  Inscriptions.  Edited by D. T. Ariel.  Qedem 41.  Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University.

Yeivin, Ze’ev
1987    The Mysterious Silver Hoard from Eshtemoa.  Biblical Archaeology Review 13/6: 38-44.

By Gordon Franz

Some have raised the objection that Mount Sinai could not be in the Sinai Peninsula because millions of Israelites died during the Wilderness Wanderings and no graves of any of these Israelites have been discovered in the Sinai Peninsula from this period.  Recently we received such an inquiry at the Associates for Biblical Research (ABR) website by an anonymous individual identified only as “Curious.”

This individual states: “How can it be logical to say the Israelites wandered in the Sinai Peninsula for 40 years, and the older ones all died, and kept the younger ones very busy burying their older generation (all the millions of adults who came out of Egypt), and yet archaeology in that location never has found a single gravesite from the entire time of the wilderness wanderings?  I don’t think the Sinai Peninsula is the right location for the 40 years of wanderings because there should be millions of graves there if that is where the Israelites wandered” (Italics by Gordon Franz).
Is this a valid objection to Mount Sinai being in the Sinai Peninsula?

First, we should start with the hermeneutical questions: Does the Bible interpret the archaeological finds?  Or, do the archaeological finds interpret the Bible?  In “Curious’” case, archaeology is used to interpret the Bible (see italics quote).  That is a very dangerous precedent to follow because archaeology is not an exact science and it is always changing with new excavations and new interpretations.  Views held by archaeologists today may be passé tomorrow due to new evidence.  So I would reject “Curious’” underlying presupposition.

I believe that the Bible is divine revelation and it should interpret the archaeological finds.  The Bible is clear, Mount Sinai is in the Sinai Peninsula, and so the Bible has to dictate how we interpret the archaeological finds (Har-el 1983; Rasmussen 1989:86-92).

Second, to say that there are no graves in the Sinai from the period of the Exodus / Wilderness Wanderings is very misleading.  One should first ask the question: In what archaeological period was the Wilderness Wanderings (Cohen 1983:16-39; for surveys of Sinai, see Meshel 2000)?  Does a preconceived idea of which archaeological period to look at happen to eliminate all your evidence?

Third, what kind of graves would Israelites have been buried in?  If the Israelites buried their dead in a simple trench burial in the ground, would they have even left a marker on top of the grave?  There would be no reason to mark the grave because they were heading to the Promised Land, the Land of Canaan, and not returning back to visit the graves of their ancestors as Bedouin in Sinai, the Negev, Jordan and Saudi Arabia do today, thus the markers on their graves so they can visit their ancestors!

Fourth, how do we know that most of the Israelites were even buried in Sinai?  The Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian believers that: “But with most of them God was not pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness” (I Cor. 10:5 NKJV).  “Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered over the desert” (NIV).  One gets the distinct impression from this passage that most of the bodies were just left in the Wilderness, exposed to the elements … and the vultures, hyenas and jackals!  If that is the case, there will be very few graves at all, thus “no gravesites in Sinai” would be a dead objection.

Fifth, another possibility that should be pursued is the Hebrew practice of secondary burial.  In this practice, the dead would be buried in a cave for a year and then the bones would be gathered for “secondary burial.”  In the case of the First Temple period, the bones would be placed into a repository in the cave.  During the Second Temple period, the bones would be placed in an ossuary.  The phrase in the Bible that is connected with this practice is: “and he slept with his fathers,” or more literally, “he was gathered to his fathers.”

This practice began with the Patriarch Abraham when he bought a cave near Hebron and buried his wife Sarah in it (Gen. 23).  He was later interned there, as was his son Isaac and his wife Rebecca.  Jacob and one of his wives, Leah, were buried there as well (Gen. 49:28-33; 50:5, 13).  When Jacob died in Egypt, he wanted to be gathered to his fathers in the Promised Land.

Abraham, and later Jacob, bought plots of ground near Shechem and this was later used as a burial plot for others of their descendents, including Joseph (Gen. 33:19; cf. Acts 7:15-16).  Joseph clearly instructs the Children of Israel to rebury his bones in the Promised Land (Gen. 50:24-25; cf. Heb. 11:22; Ex. 13:19; Josh. 24:32).

The Bible places the burial of Rachel in the tribal territory of Benjamin (Gen. 48:7; I Sam. 10:2; cf. Jer. 31:15; Neh. 7:26).  Interestingly, in the territory of Benjamin, there are six or seven megalithic structures clustered together and preserve the Arabic name Qubur Bani Israil, translated “tombs of the sons of Israel” (Finkelstein and Magen 1993: 63*, 371-372, site 479; Hareuveni 1991: 64-71).

When the Wilderness Wandering narratives are examined, there are only three accounts of burials recorded.  The first is those who died of the plague at Kibroth Hattaavah [“the graves of craving”] after the LORD sent quail to their camp (Num. 11:31-34).  The second burial that is recorded is that of Miriam, the sister of Moses, at Kadesh Barnea (Num. 20:1).  The final burial is at the death of Aaron, the brother of Moses, on Mount Hor that is on the border with Edom (probably Mount Rimon, Har-el 1983:273-274).   Interestingly, in the account of Aaron’s death, there is no mention of his burial (Num. 20:23-29), but there is mention of him being “gathered to his fathers” (20:24, 26).  In the book of Deuteronomy, however, his burial is mentioned (10:6).

The fact that Aaron would be “gathered to his fathers” indicates secondary burial was practiced, at least with him, during the Wilderness Wanderings.  As was noted with the Patriarchs, their desire was to be buried in the Land of Israel (“Eretz Yisrael”).  It is a distinct possibility that the Israelites gathered the bones of their relatives who died in the Wilderness and carried them to the Promised Land and buried them in the Land of Israel (Gonen 1985: 53 [sidebar], 54 [map]).  If that is the case, there would be no graves of the Israelites in the Wilderness because they would be in Israel!

Finally, the tables should be turned on those who reject Mount Sinai and the Wilderness Wanderings in the Sinai Peninsula.  What is the nature of their “evidence” for graves at their theorized sites?  Again, the questions that need to be answered are these: (1) Where are these “Israelite” graves outside of the Sinai Peninsula?  (2) How does one know they are Israelites burials and not recent Bedouin burials?  (3) What archaeological period are you looking for the Wilderness Wanderings?  (4) What archaeological remains (if any) were excavated at these graves and are they from the period of the Wilderness Wanderings?  (5) Were these human remains carbon dated to determine the possible dates of the bones?  If so, are these dates consistent with the Biblical date for the Wilderness Wanderings?  (6) Were DNA tests done on the bones to determine the ethnic origin of those buried in these graves?  Were the DNA tests results compared to the local Bedouin in the area to see if it matched their DNA?

I think we should pursue other avenues of inquiries before we allow archaeology to interpret the Bible, thus abandoning the clear statements of Scripture and removing Mount Sinai from the Sinai Peninsula and placing it in Saudi Arabia or somewhere else.  Mount Sinai belongs in the Sinai Peninsula, right where the Bible places it!

Bibliography

Cohen, Rudolph
1983    The Mysterious MB I People.  Does the Exodus Tradition in the Bible Preserve the Memory of Their Entry into Canaan?  Biblical Archaeology Review 9/4: 16-29.

Finkelstein, Israel; and Magen, Yitzhak, eds.
1993    Archaeological Survey of the Hill Country of Benjamin.  Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.

Gonen, Rivka
1985    Was the Site of the Jerusalem Temple Originally a Cemetery?  Biblical Archaeology Review 9/3: 44-55.

Har-el, Menashe
1983    The Sinai Journeys.  The Route of the Exodus.  San Diego, CA: Ridgefield Publishing Company.

Hareuveni, Nogah
1991    Desert and Shepherd in Our Biblical Heritage.  Trans. by Helen Frenkley.  Kiryat Ono: Neot Kedumim.

Meshel, Ze’ev
2000    Sinai.  Excavations and Studies.  Oxford: BAR International Series 876.

Rasmussen, Carl
1989    Zondervan NIV Atlas of the Bible.  Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Introduction

The consequence of King Uzziah’s military strategy associated with his foreign policy is summarized by a proverb of wise King Solomon.  He stated: “Pride goes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall” (Prov. 16:18).  Let us examine the geography of King Uzziah’s military expansionist policies and show how these policies led to a proud heart and eventually to his downfall.  King Uzziah (also called Azariah in II Kings 15:1-7) is an example of a king who starts out spiritually on the right foot, but ends up on the wrong foot (II Chron. 26).

Chronology

At this point in Israel’s history the Kingdom is divided.  The ten tribes to the north called Israel and the two tribes to the south called Judah.  King Uzziah, also known as Azariah, reigned from 792-740 BC.  He was 16 years old when he came to the throne (792 BC) after the death of his father Amaziah.  Uzzaih “sought God in the days of Zechariah” which was about 25 years.  When he was 41 years old, about 767 BC, he rebuilt Eilat.  His expansionist policies led to a “strong heart being lifted up” and in the year 750 BC, the Middle East was struck with a devastating earthquake and Uzziah was struck with leprosy.  In the northern Kingdom, Jeroboam II was ruling from Samaria (792-753/2 BC).

The Rebuilding of Eilat

King Uzziah stepped out of the will of God as revealed in the Word of God, by taking territory that did not belong to him.  It is unusual for the writer of the book of Chronicles to mention the building activities in the summary formula of the king’s reign.  The Spirit of God included this statement of the building of Eilat because it a key to understanding Uzziah’s pride, and his subsequent downfall.

The southern border of Israel, which is also the southern border of the tribal territory of Judah, is explicitly given in Numbers 34:3-5.  It states: “Your southern border shall be from the Wilderness of Zin along the border of Edom; then your sourhern border shall extend eastward to the end of the Salt Sea; your border shall turn from the southern side of the Ascent of Akrabbim, continue to Zin, and be on the south side of Kadesh Barnea; then it shall go to Hazar Addar; and continue to Azmon; the border shall turn from Azmon to the Brook Egypt, and it shall end at the Sea.”  Joshua basically reiterates the same borders: “The border of Edom at the Wilderness of Zin southward was the extreme southern boundry.  And their southern border began at the shore of the Salt Sea, from the bay that faces southward.  Then it went out to the southern side of the Ascent of Akrabbim, passed along to Zin, ascended on the south side of Kadesh Barnea, passed along to Hezron, went up to Adar, and went around to Karkaa.  From there it passed toward Azmon and went out to the Brook of Egypt; and the border ended at the sea.  This shall be your southern border” (15:2-4; CBA 51).

There are two things to note in these passages.  First, the line of the border goes from the southern end of the Dead Sea, to the south of the Ascent of Akrabbim (the scorpion), through the Wilderness of Zin to a point south of Kadesh Barnea.  The second thing to note is that the territory of Edom lies to the south of the Land of Israel and the tribal territory of Judah (Crew 2002).

The city of Eilat that was built by King Uzziah was in Edom’s territory.  When King Solomon sent out his Red Sea fleet, they departed from “Ezion Geber, which is near Elath on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom” (I Kings 9:26).  “Then Solomon went to Ezion Geber and Elath on the seacoast, in the land of Edom” (II Chron. 8:17).

In the description of the Children of Israel wandering in the wilderness, the territory of Edom is mentioned and Eilat and Ezion Geber are placed in this territory (Deut. 2:1-8).

When I was a student at the Institute of Holy land Studies in Jerusalem, I had a class on “Modern Israeli Society.”  One lecture was by a member of Israel’s parliament, the Kenesst.  His name was Yehuda ben Moshe.  He made a statement I never forgot.  He said his only claim to fame in life was: “I was the first mayor of Eilat in 1948 and it was a city that did not belong to us Biblically!”  I thought that was an odd statement when he made it, but when I began to study the life of King Uzziah, I realized he was right.  Eilat belonged to Edom, not Israel.

The Identification of the Eilat

The region of Eilat / Akaba was first surveyed by Fritz Frank in 1933.  He identified Tel el-Kheleifeh with Biblical Ezion Geber.  Nelson Glueck conducted three seasons of excavations at this site between 1938 and 1940.  He identified Tell el-Kheleifeh with Biblical Ezion-geber and Eilat (Glueck 1938: 2-13).

Prof. Benjamin Mazar challenged Glueck’s view.  He stated: “The immediate vicinity of ‘Aqaba is the most suitable spot for an Israelite fort to be associated with Ezion-Geber, located within the settled area of Elath.  The latter would be the earlier name of the site, and the fortress of Ezion-Geber would have been founded, after David’s conquest of Edom, as an emporium for the South-Arabian trade” (Mazar 1975: 119*).  He suggested that Tell el-Kheleifeh was Ebronah, one of Solomon’s “store-city” (Mazar 1975: 120*), also known as Biblical Abronah (Num. 33: 34-36).

Burno Rothenberg identifies the Ezion-Geber with Jezirat Fara’un, known as Pharaoh’s Island, to the west of modern Eilat (Rothenberg 1972: 202-207; Flinder 1989: 30-43).

Recently, a reappraisal of the excavations and identification of Tell el-Kheleifeh was done by Gary Pratico (1985: 1-32; 1986: 24-35; 1993: 17-23).  He concluded that the “identification of Tell el-Kheleifeh is both an archaeological and an historical problem.  One may argue the identification from the perspective of possibility or probability but the problem of verification precludes examination of the site in the context of Biblical Ezion-geber and/or Eilath (1985:27).

While we may not know precisely where the ancient site of Eilat is today, it is safe to say that it is in the area of modern day Eilat (Israel) and Akaba (Jordan).  It’s location on the tip of the Red Sea (Gulf of Eilat / Akaba) made it ideal for mercantile trade.  Sea trade and caravans through this port brought an increase in wealth for Judah because of this trade.  There were two other Israelite / Judean kings that took Eilat as well, Solomon (I Kings 9:26; CBA 112, 115) and Jehoshaphat (II Chron. 20:36).

The Military Preparations and Expansionist Conquests

The Chronicler records the military activity of King Uzziah.  He states: “Now he [Uzziah] went out and made war against the Philistines, and broke down the wall of Gath, and the wall of Jabneh, and the wall of Ashdod; and he built cities around Ashdod and among the Philistines.  God helped him against the Philistines, against the Arabians who lived in Gur Baal, and against the Meunites.  And the Ammonites brought tribute to Uzziah.  His fame spread as far as the entrance of Egypt, for he became exceedingly strong.  And Uzziah built towers in Jerusalem …  And Uzziah built towers in the desert (midbar).  He dug many wells, for he had much livestock, both in the lowlands (Shephelah) and the plains (Coastal Plains); he also had farmers and vinedressers in the mountains and in Carmel, for he loved the soil” (II Chron. 26:6-10; CBA 141).

At the beginning of his military campaigns, Uzziah made war against the Philistines and God helped him (26:6, 7).  The southern border of Israel was the “brook Egypt”.  Nadav Na’aman places this border at the Nahal Basor, just south of Gaza city (1979:68-90; 1980:95-109).  Anson Rainey disputes this identification and places it at Wadi al-Arish (1982:130-136).  Judah should have driven the Philistines out of this territory long ago because they were a bad influence on Judah / Israel, a fact acknowledged by the Prophet Isaiah (2:6).

The securing of Philistia and the settlement of Judeans within the coastal plains had two economic benefits.  First, it gave them the opportunity to develop the agriculture in the area.  This was something that Uzziah had a keen interest in (II Chron. 26:10).  Second, Uzziah was able to extract tribute from the caravans that used the International Coastal Highway that went through the territory of Philistia (CBA 9, 10).

Uzziah also turned his attention to the Arabians that lived at Gur Baal (26:7).  The location of Gur Baal is a much debated topic, but it appears to be somewhere in the region southwest of Judah and near Philistia (Eph’al 1982: 77, 78).  The Meunites (26:7) appeared to have settled in the northern Sinai Peninsula to the west of the Aravah and Edom’s territory (I Chron. 4:41, 42; Eph’al 1982:65, 66).  In this military action, Uzziah is trying to secure his trade routes to Eilat from any attacks from the west.

The statement that the Ammonites brought tribute to King Uzziah (26:8), implies that Judah controlled the area as well as the strategic Transjordanian Highway that went through their territory, thus brining more tribute money (CBA 9, 10).

Uzziah built towers (migdalim) in the desert (midbar).  The midbar in view here is the Wilderness of Zin and its surrounding areas (26:10).  Rudolph Cohen has excavated a number of Iron Age fortresses in the Central Negev Highlands, the area of the Wilderness (midbar) of Zin (Cohen 1979: 61-79).  These fortresses, along the southern border of Judah, guarded the road to Eilat (Aharoni 1967: 15-17).  For a contrary view, see Finkelstein 1984: 189-209.

Uzziah also dug many wells, or cisterns (borot) in the area.  Some of which can still be seen in the area (Cohen 1981: xxvii, 62-64, site 101).

The Relationship of the Kings of Judah to Wealth and Power

Moses sets forth the rules and regulations concerning the future rule of kings of Israel / Judah (Deut. 17:14-20).  He states that the king will be chosen from “your brethren” (17:15).  He was not to multiply horses to himself (17:16).  This is to prevent the king from boasting about his own strength (cf. Josh. 11:6; II Sam. 8:4; Micah 5:10).  The king is not to multiply wives (17:17a).  An example of one who did was Solomon and the foreign wives drew his heart away from the Lord.  The king was not to greatly multiply silver and gold to himself (17:17b).  They need silver and gold to keep the kingdom functioning, but the instruction is not to “multiply” the precious metals.  The king was to write a copy of the (Mosaic) Law (17:18) and read the Law (17:19).  The king is subject to the Law and is not above it (17:20).

King Uzziah followed all these principles in the first part of his reign.  In the beginning he learned to fear God (II Chron. 26:16a); he observed God’s statues (26:16b); his heart was not lifted up (26:16b); nor did not turn away from the LORD (26:18), thus his days were prolonged (26:21).  Yet after he took Eilat, he built up his military and it included multiplying horses for his army.  As a result of controlling the international highways and receiving tribute, he multiplied gold and silver to himself.  The Prophet Isaiah acknowledged this state of affairs.  “Their land [Judah] is also full of silver and gold, and there is no end to their treasures; their land is also full of horses, and there is no end to their chariots” (2:7).

The Earthquake in the Days of King Uzziah

In the mid-8^th century BC, the Middle East was hit with a devastating earthquake.  The prophets warned both the Northern Kingdom as well as the Southern Kingdom of impending danger if they did not turn from their evil ways and return to the Lord and His ways.

Two years before this earthquake, the Judean shepherd from Tekoa, cried out against the social injustices in the northern kingdom under the rule of Jeroboam II (Amos 1:1; 9:1).  The book that bears his name is replete with warnings of an earthquake to come.  In the southern kingdom, Isaiah warns of this earthquake as well because of the haughtiness of the people of Judah (Isa. 2:6-21).  Hundreds of years later, the prophet Zechariah reminds the people of Judah of the devastation caused by this earthquake (Zech. 14:4, 5).

Evidence for this earthquake has been uncovered by the archaeologists spade throughout Israel and Jordan.  Graphic evidence can be seen at Hazor and Ein Hazeva (Biblical Tamar).  I tri-authored an article with two geologists on this earthquake and it was concluded that the earthquake measured an 8.2 on the Ritcher scale and the epicenter was located in the Beka Valley, in present day Lebanon (Austin, Franz and Frost 2000: 657-671).  An earthquake of that magnitude would put the fear of the LORD into anybody.

Josephus, the First Century Jewish historian, described the events in Jerusalem during this earthquake.  King Uzziah was in the Temple trying to offer incense on the altar at Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, a duty only allowed the High Priest (Lev. 16 and 17).  The priests tried to stop him, but he was defiant.  Josephus records what happens next: “But, while he [Uzziah] spoke, a great tremor shook the earth, and, as the temple was riven, a brilliant shaft of sunlight gleamed through it and fell upon the king’s face so that leprosy at once smote him” (Antiquities of the Jews 9:225; LCL 6:119; cf. II Chron. 26:19-21, 23).  The Bible does not place the two events together chronologically, but Josephus may have had access to records that are no longer available to us.

Uzziah was so full of pride that he thought he was above the Law and could do anything he wanted to do.  The Chronicler again records: “But when he was strong his heart was lifted up, to his destruction, for he transgressed against the LORD his God by entering the Temple of the LORD to burn incense on the altar of incense” (II Chron. 26:16).  The same Hebrew words are used in Proverb 16:18 which states: “Pride goes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.”  Uzziah paid a high price for his pride and disobedience to the Word of God.  He was put outside the city in an “isolation house” and was not allowed into the Temple again (II Chron. 26:21).

The Death of King Uzziah

The Bible records the death of King Uzziah in these terms: “So Uzziah rested with his fathers, and they buried him with his fathers in the field of burial which belonged to the kings, for they said, ‘He is a leper’” (II Chron. 26:23).  He was buried with his fathers, but not in the royal tombs.  His burial cave is probably the cave in the City of David overlooking the “Tower of Siloah.”

In the 19^th century, a burial inscription was discovered on the Mount of Olives (Cameron 1973: 120, #255).  It read: “Here were brought / the bones of Uzziah, / King of Judah, / and not to be opened.”  The paleography of the inscription is late 1^st century BC.  Joesphus records that Herod the Great erected a monument over the tomb of David after he tried to steal some of the gold and silver from the tomb.  This was probably the time when Uzziah’s bones were moved and the inscription was written.

Summary of King Uzziah’s Foreign Policy and Spiritual Regression

King Uzziah began his reign on the “right foot” by being obedient to the Word of God.  Somewhere along the line, he stepped out of the will of God, as revealed in the Word of God, by taking Eilat.  When he did this, he had built up his military in order to control the Transjordanian Highway and the International Coastal Highway.  As a consequence of controlling these roads, he had to fortify these and other routes.  Yet with the control of these roads, the national treasury increased.  Yet the sad fact is, because of his military strength and wealth, King Uzziah developed a proud heart that led to his downfall (II Chron. 26:15, 16; Prov. 16:18).

Outline of the Life and Times of King Uzziah (II Chron. 26)

A.   Introduction.  26:1-5.

B.   The prosperity of King Uzziah.  26:6-15.

1.    Material possessions.  26:6-10.

2.    Military preparations.  26:11-15.

C.   The pride of King Uzziah.  26:16-19; cf. Deut. 8:6-18; Prov. 16:18.

D.   The punishment of King Uzziah.  26:20-23.

Bibliography

Aharoni, Yohanan

1967    Forerunners of the Limes: Iron Age Fortresses in the Negev.  Israel Exploration Journal 17/1: 1-17.

Aharoni, Yohanan; Avi-Yonah, Michael; Rainey, Anson; and Safrai, Ze’ev

2002   The Carta Bible Atlas.  Fourth edition.  Jerusalem: Carta.  (Footnoted as CBA).

Austin, Steve, Franz, Gordon, and Frost, Eric

2000    Amos’s Earthquake:  An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C.  International Geology Review 42/7: 657-671.

Carmon, Efrat, ed.

1972    Inscriptions Revealed.  Trans. by R. Grafman.  Jerusalem: Israel Museum.

Cohen, Rudolph

1979   The Iron Age Fortresses in the Central Negev.  Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 236: 61-79.

1981   Archaeological Survey of Israel.  Map of Sede Boqer – East (168).  Jerusalem: Archaeological Survey of Israel.

Crew, Bruce

2002   Did Edom’s Original Territories Extend West of ‘Wadi Arabah?  Bible and Spade 15/1: 2-10.

Eph’al, Israel

1982    The Ancient Arabs.  Jerusalem and Leiden: Magness and E. J. Brill.

Finkelstein, Israel

1984      The Iron Age “Fortresses” of the Negev Highlands:

Sendentarization of the Nomads.  Tel Aviv 11/2: 189-209.

Flinder, Alexander

1989    Is This Solomon’s Seaport?  Biblical Archaeology Review 15/4: 30-43.

Glueck, Nelson

1938    The Topography and History of Ezion-Geber and Elath.  Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 72: 2-13.

Josephus

1937   Antiquities of the Jews.  Books 9-11.  Vol. 6.  Trans. by R. Marcus.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library 326.  Reprinted in 1987.

Mazar, Benjamin

1975    Ezion-Geber and Ebronah.  Eretz-Israel 12: 46-48, 119*.

Na’aman, Nadav

1979    The Brook of Egypt and Assyrian Policy on the Border of Egypt.  Tel Aviv 6: 68-90.

1980    The Shihor of Egypt and Shur that is Before Egypt.  Tel Aviv 7: 95-109.

Pratico, Gary

1985    Nelson Glueck’s 1938-1940 Excavations at Tell el-Kheleifeh: A

Reappraisal.  Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental

Research 259: 1-32.

1986    A Reappraisal of the Site Archaeologist Nelson Glueck Identified as King Solomon’s Red Sea Port.  Biblical Archaeology Review 12/5: 24-35.

1993    Nelson Glueck’s 1938-1940 Excavations at Tell el-Kheleifeh.  A Reappraisal.  Atlanta, GA: Scholars.

Rainey, Anson

1982     Toponymic Problems (cont.).  Tel Aviv 9/2: 130-136.

Rothenberg, Beno

1972    Timna.  Valley of the Biblical Copper Mines.  Aylesbury: Thames and Hudson.

This paper was first read at the Association of American Geographers meeting in Boston, MA on April 16, 2008.

The last ten years has witnessed the proliferation of books, videos, websites and television programs that have proposed a new site for Mt. Sinai – Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia.  They also told about underwater searches for Pharaoh’s chariots and weapons from the Egyptian army.  This paper examines three aspects of the identification of Mt. Sinai in Saudi Arabia.  First, the paper questions the credibility of the claims.  Second, the paper disputes the false assumptions by the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz.  Third, the paper examines the archaeological evidence.

This paper discusses the first two aspects briefly because they have already been dealt with in the Fall 2000 issue of Bible and Spade (Franz 2000:101-113).  I have given you a copy of that article.  You have my permission, as well as the editor, Dr. Bryant Wood, to make copies and pass along to those who might be interested.  The article is also posted on Lambert Dolphin’s website.  (www.ldolphin.org/franz-sinai.html).  A revised form of this paper will appear as an article in Bible and Spade.

The paper discusses the third aspect, the archaeological evidence, in more detail.  The questions dealt with include, 1) Are the archaeological remains that were observed by the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz credible?  And 2) Does the remains match the Biblical text?  The final section of this paper deals with the location of the Red Sea crossing.  Was it in the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat or the Gulf of Suez?

I believe that this paper, along with the Bible and Spade article, will conclusively demonstrate that there is no credible historical, geographical, archaeological or Biblical evidence to support the thesis that Mt. Sinai is at Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia.

The Proponents of Jebel al-Lawz as Mt. Sinai

Ron Wyatt first proposed the idea that Mt. Sinai was at Jebel al-Lawz.  Whatever one may think of Ron Wyatt’s “discoveries”, he should be given full credit for this discovery.  However, I would like to call your attention to a recent book examining the claims of Ron Wyatt.  It is entitled Holy Relics or Revelation, by two SDA researchers, Russell and Colin Standish.  (Hartland Publications, Box 1, Rapidan, VA 22733.  1-800-774-3566).  This book is a careful, meticulous, in-depth study of Ron Wyatt’s claims.  These researchers “speak the truth in love” but state that Ron Wyatt has not been truthful in his claims.

During the course of writing the first article, other proponents of Jebel al-Lawz requested that I not mention Ron Wyatt.  Their stated concern to me was that my mentioning of him would “dignify him” and they consider him a “con man”.  They feared that mentioning them in the same paragraph as Wyatt would result in “guilt by associations”!  I pointed out to them that when publishing research results one must begin with a discussion of the history of research and include a review of the literature on the subject.  Ron Wyatt is the key player in this discovery.  Both sets of proponents of this view used the same archaeological evidence to prove their points.  The only difference between the views is their proposed route from Egypt to the Red Sea and the placing of the Red Sea crossing.

Ron Wyatt went to Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia with his two sons in 1984.  They were arrested for entering Saudi Arabia illegally and expelled after 78 days.  Eleven months later, Wyatt returned with David Fasold and his “molecular frequency generator” to look for the “gold of the Exodus.”  Again they were expelled and made to promise that they would not return to Saudi Arabia or talk or write about their findings.

Fasold told Jim Irwin, the Apollo 15 astronaut, of their discoveries.  Irwin, in turn, made contact with Bob Cornuke and Larry Williams who eventually went to Saudi Arabia at least twice in order to ascertain whether Mt. Sinai is at Jebel al-Lawz.  Both returned home and wrote books about their adventures.  Others have since gone and taken video footage of the sites that are now in videos and television programs.  The most recent is a video entitled “The Exodus Revealed” by Lennart Moller.  He also has a book entitled The Exodus Case.  He basically uses Ron Wyatt’s material and follows his ideas.

Problems with the Jebel al-Lawz location view

The biggest problem with the identification of Jebel al-Lawz as Mt. Sinai is that it does not meet the Biblical criteria for the site.  In my Bible and Spade article I point out three questionable assumptions made by the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz.

The first questionable assumption that the proponents make is that the Sinai Peninsula was considered part of the “Land of Egypt” (Franz 2000: 103-105).  The Bible says that when the Israelites left Succoth they were “out of Egypt” (Ex. 13:8-20).  The Land of Goshen was the eastern limits of Egypt.  Apparently the line of fortresses on the eastern frontier canal was the border between Egypt and Sinai (Hoffmeier 1997: 164-175).

Nadav Na’aman, a professor of Bible geography at Tel Aviv University, made an important point in an article on the “Brook of Egypt”. He states, “Traditionally, in the eyes of the Egyptians the Nile or the Isthmus fringes were considered to be their northern boundary, the Sinai peninsula being regarded as part of Asia.  This view is diametrically opposite to the northern point of view, according to which the southern limits of Gaza, the southernmost city along the coast of Philistia, and the edges of the urban settlements on its eastern side were thought of as the southern border of Canaan, the intervening desert of Sinai being regarded by the northerners as part of Egypt.  In the Late Bronze Age, as the Egyptians came into closer contact with the north, they also became aware of the fact that the Sinai desert was not part of Canaan.  Thus, when their scribes were concerned with the southern coastal area exclusively, they considered its border to be the southernmost limits of the urban settlements in this region, Sinai having the status of a kind of ‘no-man’s land’.”  (Italics his; 1979:74).  Moses never arrived in Canaan so he wrote from an Egyptian, not a Canaanite perspective.  Also note that part of northeastern Sinai was Amalakite territory (Mattingly 1992).

The second inaccurate assumption is the claim that Mt. Sinai is in the Land of Midian (Franz 2000:105,106).  Most scholars would agree that Midian is in the area of northwest Saudi Arabia, and even part of southern Jordan.  The proponents of Jebel al-Lawz often point to the interview of Prof. Frank Moore Cross of Harvard University in Bible Review as their authority on this point (Shanks 1992: 32).  However, they fail to point out that one of the reasons Cross and “Continental scholars” hold to this view is their adherence to the Documentary Hypothesis (JEDP).  See Cross 1998:53-70.  I also have a letter from Prof. Cross, which states his rejection of the evidence of the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz even thought he still believes Mt. Sinai is still in Midian (Letter from Cross, May 21, 2001).

Two Biblical passages clearly place Mt. Sinai outside the Land of Midian.  In Exodus 18, Moses and the Israelites are camped at “the Mountain of God” (Mt. Sinai) when Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, visits them.  Verse 27 says, “Then Moses let his father-in-law depart [from Mt. Sinai], and he went his way to his own land [Midian].”  Jethro departs from Mt. Sinai to return to the Land of Midian.  According to Mandelkern Biblical Concordance, the phrase “his own land” (third person singular possessive) is used 30 times in the Hebrew Scriptures (Ex. 18:27; Num. 21:24,26,34,35; Deut. 2:24,31; 3:2; 4:47; 11:3; 29:1 [29:2 Eng.]; 33:13; 34:11; Josh. 8:1; I Kings 22:36; II Kings 18:33; Isa. 2:7,8; 13:14; 18:2,7; 36:18; 37:7; Jer. 2:15; 27:7; 50:18; Prov. 8:31; Dan. 11:19,28; Neh. 9:10; Mandelkern 1896:153).  In the Pentateuch the phrase is use 13 times.  Each time it is used of a specific geo-political entity, a kingdom, nation or tribal area.  It is used of the Kingdom of the Amorites (Num. 21:24,26; Deut. 2:24,31; 4:47), with the borders clearly delineated as going from the Arnon to the Jabbok (Num. 21:24).  The Kingdom of Bashan (Num. 21:34,35; Deut. 3:2; 4:47), which is implied as going from the Jabbok to Mt. Hermon (Deut. 4:48).  The nation of Egypt (Deut. 11:3; 29:1 [29:2 Eng.]; 34:11) as well as the tribal territory of Joseph (Deut. 33:13).  Joshua gives the delineation of the tribal territory of Ephraim and Manasseh which make up the tribes of Joseph (Deut. 33:17; Josh. 13:29-33; 16:1-10; 17:1-18).  If Moses is consistent with his use of the word, and I think he is, the context suggests Jethro returned to the country of Midian, not to a plot of ground that he controlled as the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz contend.

Ken Durham, a research assistant for Bob Cornuke and the BASE Institute, interpret the phrase “his own land” as an “actual, physical tract of land under the control of a person mentioned in the text- not to an arbitrary political/geographical designation” or “land under ones jurisdiction”  (Letter to Bryant Wood, April 12, 2001).  There does not appear to be lexical support or Hebrew dictionary references that support this use of the term.

The second passage that places Mt. Sinai outside the land of Midian is Numbers 10:30.  It states, “I [Hobab] will not go, but I will depart [from Mt. Sinai] to my own land [Midian] and to my kinsmen.”  Hobab is returning to Midian where his kinsmen live from Mt. Sinai.

The third questionable assumption made by the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz is that Galatians 4:25 says that Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia (Franz 2000: 106,107).  One proponent affirms this conclusion when he writes, “The apostle Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, informs us that Mount Sinai is in Saudi Arabia.  Not Egypt!” (Cornuke and Halbrook 2000: 17).  The Bible does not say Saudi Arabia, it only says Arabia.

One can easily argue that the Apostle Paul used the First Century AD Roman concept of Arabia in this passage.  In the first century AD, based on the prior use by Herodotus, Pliny and Strabo, Arabia extended from the Persian Gulf to the Nile Delta, thus including the Sinai Peninsula in Arabia.  Paul would be perfectly correct in placing Mt. Sinai in the Sinai Peninsula because the Sinai Peninsula was part of Arabia of his day.

I also interacted in this section with Prof. Cross and Mike Heiser’s suggestion (made at the NEAS meeting in 1998) that Mt. Sinai was outside the Sinai Peninsula based on three passages from the Bible, Deut. 33:2; Judges 5:4; and Habakkuk 3:3 (Franz 2000: 107).  Cross (1998) and Heiser suggest that Seir, Mt. Paran and Teman are located in present day Jordan or even Saudi Arabia.  In my article, I suggested that Teman was at or near Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, Mt. Paran is situated in the area of Kadesh Barnea (Num. 13:26) and Seir (Biblical Edom) included the area of the Central Negev Highlands, the area to the west of the Aravah.

When my article came out, I realized that I had not adequately documented the thesis that Edom is also on the west side of the Aravah.  My assertion initially came 20 years ago from a friend and fellow student at the Institute of Holy Land Studies in Jerusalem, Bruce Crew.  This assertion was part of his MA thesis.  At my request, Bruce wrote a follow-up article for Bible and Spade on why Edom was also west of the Aravah.  He produced an excellent article demonstrating the case, which will appear in a forthcoming issue of Bible and Spade.  In the course of his writing, I was able to supply him with some articles to help update his material.  I was surprised at the number of archaeologists that had come to this same position based on the Biblical text as well as the topography and archaeological considerations.  Perhaps some day Biblical scholars might catch up with the archaeological world!

The Archaeological and Geographical Evidence

There are at least eight pieces of archaeological or geographical evidence that the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz use to support their idea.

• A land bridge that goes across the Strait of Tiran from the southern tip of Sinai to Saudi Arabia, or the other view has a land bridge that crosses the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat from Nuweiba.
• A set of bitter wells that they identify as Marah.
• Twelve springs of al-Bad’ that they identify as Elim.
• The caves of Moses and Jethro at al-Bad’.
• An altar for the golden calf with petroglyphs of bovine.
• The altar of Moses and the twelve pillars.
• The blackened rock on top of Jebel al-Lawz.
• The “split rock of Horeb”.

I examined the archaeological evidence in my article in Bible and Spade and found that this evidence did not line up with the Biblical record (Franz 2000:107-111).   One Saudi archaeologist was very helpful in explaining what the archaeological sites actually were.  I stated in my article that Biblical scholarship ought to wait for an archaeological publication of the material.  I am pleased to announce that an archaeological report of the surveys and excavations in the al-Bad’ area, with a special chapter on Jebel al-Lawz, is “in press” and will be out “shortly”.  My Saudi friend promised me the first copy off the press!

My original article elicited an interesting exchange of letters with the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz.  One proponent considered the evidence I put forth as the “Muslim position / interpretation” (Letter from Cornuke, May 30, 2001).  Another proponent “discounted the Saudi archaeologists’ objectivity” because they were Moslems (Letter from Durham, Sept. 7, 2001, p. 20, see also pp. 1-5).  These proponents want to take the archaeological evidence out of the realm of science and scientific investigation and placing it in the realm of religion.  One went so far as to suggest that if the Saudis found anything that might relate to the wilderness wanderings of the Israelites they would follow the example of the Talibans in Afghanistan and destroy the evidence!  (Letter from Durham, Sept. 7, 2001, p. 2).  I was shocked and appalled that he would even suggest such a thing.  Saudi Arabia is a member of ICOMOS, the International Council of Monuments and Sites.  This is an “international non-governmental organization of professionals, dedicated to the conservation of [the] world’s historic monuments and sites.”   Afghanistan is not a member.  If the Saudis found anything of interest, they would do what they have done to over 300 other sites in Saudi Arabia. They would fence them in to protect them, not destroy them!  A Saudi archaeologist recently took an Australian archaeologist to the rock art site of Jubbah in northern Saudi Arabia where they had fenced in the site with 5 km of fence.  The Australian was surprised to see this fence and commented that no other country has gone to such great length to fence in an area!

While I agree with the stated view of the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz that the Bible should interpret the archaeological finds, my conclusion is that in some instances, it is obvious they have not followed their own principles.  For example, the so-called “altar of the golden calf” is made up of huge boulders.  The Bible clearly states that Aaron built the altar (Ex. 32:5).  Yet the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz reconstruct an elaborate scenario whereby the Israelites lifted these heavy boulders into place because they had done heavy manual labor in Egypt.  This scenario goes contrary to the Scriptures; Aaron built the altar, not the Israelites.  These boulders contain petroglyphs of bovine which the proponents claim is the Egyptian deities Hathor or Apis.  Jeff Harrison reports in the video of the proponents that he saw other kinds of animals as well (www.totheends.com).  If that is the case, then an explanation for why they are there must be given.  An ibex can be clearly seen in a picture in one of their books (Williams 1990: plate 14).  Yet more telling is the fact that Moses destroyed the golden calf because it was an idol.  If this was the altar, why didn’t he remove the petroglyphs as well, after all, they represent graven images!  A Saudi archaeologist who did his doctoral dissertation on the petroglyphs in Saudi Arabia informed me that the bovine dated to the Neolithic period, considerably earlier than the Exodus and Wilderness Wanderings.  The archaeological evidence goes contrary to the Biblical records and must be rejected.

One claim I have heard from people who have heard the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz is that this “altar” with the bovine petroglyphs is the only one in the area.  I was informed by the Saudi archaeologist who did the survey of the area that there were about 300 rock art sites in the northwest Saudi Arabia and about 50 rock art sites with bovine in the al-Bad’ / Jebel al-Lawz area.  If they were drawn by Israelites, then Hebrew graffiti artists drew them as they roamed the desert drawing what the Lord had forbidden them to make!

The proponents of Jebel al-Lawz might discount the objectivity of the Saudi archaeologists, but they must consider the archaeological remains.  The so-called “Cave of Moses” is clearly a First Century AD Nabatean tomb.  A British archaeologist who worked on the survey of those tombs explained to me how he could date them so precisely.  He said the paleography of an inscription in an al-Bad’ tomb is identical with the paleography of another tomb at another site nearby.  This tomb had an inscription with the name of the decease as well as a date of his death.  It is safe to say the style of those tombs is Nabatean and not earlier.

The archaeology of the so-called “altar of Moses and the 12 pillars” is also clear.  I was informed by a Saudi archaeologist that the pottery is purely, and only, Nabatean.  There is nothing earlier.  One may debate the function of the building, but the dating is clear.  It is considerably later than the Exodus.

The proponents of Jebel al-Lawz rejected a Mt. Sinai in the Sinai Peninsula because of lack of archaeological evidence.  They also objected to my suggestion that one would not expect to find any because they were nomadic people dwelling in tents.  A leading American archaeologist, William Dever, said, “we would still find no remains of their ephemeral camps in the desert.”  He goes on to say that any attempts to make maps tracing the route of the Exodus was “doomed to failure” (1997:72).  K. A. Kitchen, a British Egyptologist, concurs with him on the first statement when he says, “That we should find no trace of ever-moving camps in the Sinai desert is entirely correct” (1998:107).  But he goes on to chide Dever about not being able to trace the route.

The proponents also claim they have other archaeological evidence (Letter from Durham, Sept. 7, 2001, p. 2), but that their evidence awaits publication.  Hopefully it will appear in a peer-reviewed archaeological journal.

I have asked a British archaeologist to review the soon to be released excavation and survey report of the al-Bad’ area and Jebel al-Lawz for Bible and Spade.  He is a non-Moslem archaeologist who has worked on the survey of the area as well as an expert on Midianite and Nabatean archaeology.  His approach to reviewing the excavation report for the article will include the following steps.  First, he will discuss each of the archaeological sites cited by the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz.  Second, he will deal with how they interpreted the archaeological data.  Third, he will include what the Saudis excavated or surveyed and how they interpreted the finds.  His final step will be his assessment of the different interpretations.  The archaeologist will be well qualified to bring the discussion back to an archaeological debate and not a religious one, as the proponents would like to make it.

MT. SINAI IS NOT AT JEBEL EL-LAWZ IN SAUDI ARABIA – part 2

By Gordon Franz

Where was the Red Sea Crossing?

The location of the Red Sea Crossing is a hotly debated topic and I would like to throw my two cents worth into the debate.  There are two studies that I have found to be very helpful and would highly recommend them.  The first is Dr. James Hoffmeier’s book, Israel in Egypt (1997).  While I do not agree with some of his conclusions, it is well documented and sets forth all the different views.  The second study is a ThM thesis by Joel McQuitty done at Capital Bible Seminary in 1986.  It is entitled “The Location and Nature of the Red Sea Crossing.”  Ironically, McQuitty wrote it at the time the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz were carrying out their adventures in Saudi Arabia!  He does not interact with this view because the proponents’ view was not yet in print.

Is the location of the Red Sea Crossing important for Bible believers?  One commentary on the book of Exodus observes, “The exact place of Israel’s crossing of the Red Sea has no direct theological importance” (Cole 1973:44).  McQuitty points out, “In the form of the statement Mr. Cole is correct, geography normally impinges very little upon theology.  However, how one determines the geography of the Bible may speak volumes concerning one’s theology” (1986:2).

In the literature, I have been able to discern five general areas that have been proposed for the Red Sea Crossing.  Within each area there are several variations.  I was intrigued to see in the book of one of the proponents, and it is also in their advertisement in BAR, five “proposed traditional Red Sea Crossing sites”.  I have not been able to document four of these anywhere in the literature and he does not have the three usual sites above the Gulf of Suez marked (Williams 1990: map following page 128).

The five areas that I have been able to discern, from north to south, are;

• The Mediterranean Sea sites. Usually the crossing is placed at Lake Sirbonis. This identification is based on placing the Baal-Zephon with a sanctuary of Zeus Casios nearby. The leading proponents of this view are O. Eissfeldt, M. Noth, H. Cazelles, Y. Aharoni and M. Avi-Yonah.
• The northern sites. Several lakes north of the Bitter Lakes have been proposed. They are Lake Timsah, Lake Balah or the southern extension of Lake Menzaleh. The proponents of this area are E. Naville, M. F. Unger, K. A. Kitchen and J. Hoffmeier.
• The central site. The proponents of this view place the crossing at the Bitter Lakes. Some would suggest that the Gulf of Suez actually came up to the Bitter Lakes in antiquity. The proponents of this view are J. Simons, C. Condor, U. Cassuto, John J. David.
• The southern view. The proponents place the crossing at the northern end of the Gulf of Suez. Within this view there are two areas. One view places it just off shore from the modern day Suez City. The other places it at a land bridge 4 miles south of Suez City between Ras el-’Adabiya and Birket Misallat. The proponents of this view are E. Robinson, A. Smith, E. H. Palmer (1977:35-37), Keil and Delitzsch, James Murphy, John Rea, J. McQuitty and G. Franz.
• The southeastern view. This view places the crossing in the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat. Within the gulf there are two proposed crossings. One crossing, proposed by R. Wyatt and L. Moller, is a land bridge to the east of Nuweiba. The second crossing that was proposed is at a land bridge at the Strait of Tiran. R. Knuteson, J. Irwin, B. Cornuke and L. Williams hold this view.

Within the debate on the location of the Red Sea crossing there is a sub-debate on the meaning of the name Yam Suph.  The common interpretation of these words today is “Reed Sea”.  The first to suggest Yam Suph means “reedy swamp” appears to be Rabbi Shelomoh Yetzhaki (Rashi) in the 11^th century AD.  Personally I am not comfortable with that etymology.  I will leave that discussion for another paper.  I think the meaning of Yam Suph is Red Sea.

The word Yam Suph is used 24 times in the Hebrew Scriptures (Ex. 10:19; 13:18; 15:4,22; 23:31; Num. 14:25; 21:4; 33:10,11; Deut. 1:40; 2:1; 11:4; Josh. 2:10; 4:23; 24:6; Judges 11:16; I Kings 9:26; Neh. 9:9; Ps. 106:7,9,22; 136:13,15; Jer. 49:21).  The Greek words, Erythra Thalassa, is used two times in the New Testament (Acts 7:36; Heb. 11:29).  These are the Greek words used to translate the Hebrew Yam Suph in the Greek Septuagint.

In the Greco-Roman world the term Erythra Thalassa covered “all eastern waters, including the Indian Ocean; it specifically referred to the modern Red Sea and Persian Gulf” (Warmington and Salles 1996:1296,7).  Strabo, writing his Geography at the beginning of the First Century AD, said, “There is another canal which empties into the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf near the city Arsinoe, a city which some call Cleopatris [modern day Suez City - GF].  It flows through the Bitter Lakes, as they are called” (17:25; LCL 8:77).  Strabo makes a distinction between the Red Sea, also called the Arabian Gulf, and the Bitter Lakes.  The Bitter Lakes is never called the Red Sea.

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the Yam Suph could refers to either the Gulf of Suez or the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat.  The context determines the location.  For example, Exodus 10:19 says, “And the LORD turned a very strong west wind, which took the locusts away and blew them into the Red Sea.  There remained not one locust in all the territory of Egypt.”  As J. Rea points out, the “strong west wind” should be translated “sea wind”.  In Egypt, the sea winds are from north-northwest to the south (1975:1:572).  Since the locusts covered “the face of the whole earth [land of Egypt]” (10:15), there would need to be a large body of water to destroy the locusts.  The Gulf of Suez is what is in view.  Exodus 13:18 and 15:4,22; Num. 33:10 refer to the Gulf of Suez.  On the other hand, I Kings 9:26 says “King Solomon also built a fleet of ships at Ezion Geber, which is near Elath on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom.”  This is clearly referring to the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat.  Judges 11:16 and Jer. 49:20, 21 are most likely referring to this gulf as well.

What are the Biblical criteria for the Red Sea Crossing?  There are three passages that deal with the topography of the Red Sea crossing.  Exodus 14:2 gives Moses perspective.  It states, “Speak to the children of Israel, that they turn and camp before Pi Hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, opposite Baal Zephon; you shall camp before it by the sea.”  Exodus 14:9 gives Pharaoh’s perspective.  It states, “So the Egyptians pursued them, all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, his horsemen and his army, and overtook them camping by the sea beside Pi Hahiroth, before Baal Zephon.”  In the itinerary of sites where the Israelites traveled in Numbers 33:7, 8 it is stated: “They moved from Etham and turned back to Pi Hahiroth, which is east of Baal Zephon; and they camped near Migdol.  They departed from before Pi Hahiroth and passed through the midst of the sea into the wilderness.”  Three topographical sites must be identified from these passages.  They are the Pi Hahiroth, the Migdol and Baal Zephon [See Map 1].

Scholars have debated the meaning of Pi Hahiroth but the consensus seems to be that it is a Hebraized form of Akkadian origin meaning “mouth of the canal” (Kitchen 1998:78; Hoffmeier 1997: 169-172, 182-183, 188-189, 211, 214; Currid 1997:134; Redford 1992:5:371; Sneh, Weissbrod and Perath 1975: 547; Albright 1948:16; Skipwith 1913:94, 95).  If that is the case, what canal is being referred to?  I would like to propose that there was a canal from the Bitter Lakes to the Gulf of Suez, or at least the remnants of a canal that was started and abandoned by the time of the Exodus, but the toponym was still known.

Strabo writes of such a canal.  He says, “There is another canal which empties into the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf near the city Arsinoe, a city which some call Cleopatris. … The canal was first cut by Sesostris before the Trojan War – though some say by the son of Psammitichus, who only began the work and then died – and later by Dareius the First, who succeeded to the next work done upon it.  But he, too, having been persuaded by a false notion, abandoned the work when it was already near completion; for he was persuaded that the Red Sea was higher than Aegypt, and that if the intervening isthmus were cut all the way through, Aegypt would be inundated by the sea.  The Ptolemaic kings, however, cut through it…” (Geography 17:1:25; LCL 8:77).

Aristotle, in his Meteorologica, states, “One of the kings tried to dig a canal to it [the Red Sea].  (For it would be of no little advantage to them if this whole region was accessible to navigation: Sesostris is said to be the first of the ancient kings to have attempted the work.)  It was, however, found that the sea was higher than the land: and so Sesostris first and Dareius after him gave up digging the canal for fear the water of the river should be ruined by an admixture of sea-water” (1:15:25-30; LCL 117).

Pliny describes the planned canal between the Nile River and the Red Sea in these terms, “This project was originally conceived by Sesostris King of Egypt, and later by the Persian King Darius and then again by Ptolemy the Second, who did actually carry a trench 100 ft. broad and 30 ft. deep for a distance of 34 ½ miles, as far as the Bitter Lakes” (Natural History 6:33:165; LCL 2:461, 463).

Herodotus, writing in the 5^th century BC, describes the building of this canal into the Red Sea.  It was begun by the Egyptian Pharaoh Necho II and finished by the Persian King Darius (The Persian Wars 2:158; LCL 1:471,473).  He does not, however, mention the attempt by Sesostris.

James Breasted, a noted Egyptologist, believes that Queen Hatshepaut’s expedition to Punt went down the Nile River to a canal through the Wadi Tumilat to a canal connecting to the Red Sea (1912:188, 274-276).  If he were correct, that would demonstrate that there was a canal in existence right before the Exodus from Egypt.  However, several other Egyptologists have disputed this idea (Kitchen 1971: 184-207).

As Dr. Hoffmeier points out, “The possibility remains that a genuine memory of the canal-excavating accomplishments of one or more of the Sesotrises or Senuserts from Dynasty 12 may be preserved in these classical writers.  The late George Posener thought these references might be connected with the work of Senusert I or III.  Currently, no contemporary Egyptian texts support or deny this tradition” (1997:169).

The classical sources seem to indicate that a canal was started by Sesostris in the 12^th Dynasty [ca. 1900 BC] but not completed.  If that is the case, he might have begun part of the project at the Red Sea but later abandoned it.  This would have been called the Pi Hahiroth, the “mouth of the canal.”  The toponym would have been preserved even at the time of the Exodus.  I would propose that the Pi Hahiroth would be located somewhere near today’s Suez City at the northern end of the Gulf of Suez.

The next toponym to consider is the Migdol.  K. A. Kitchen says that “the term migdol is simply a common noun from Northwest Semitic, for a fort or watchtower, and we do not know how many such migdols existed in the East Delta region” (1998:78).  There was a fortress at Clysma-Qolzoum (modern day Suez City) that dates to the Late Bronze Age (Bruyere 1966).  The question is, was there an occupational level at the time of the Exodus, or was there another fortress in the area?  This fortress would have guarded the northern end of the Gulf of Suez and the canal, if it existed, as well as the road coming up from the Sinai.

The next toponym to be considered is Baal-Zephon.  The identification is problematic.  Dr. Hoffmeier has pointed out that the “expression literally means ‘lord of the north’ and is a deity in the Ugaritic pantheon associated with Mount Casius just north of Ugarit” (1997:190).  Eissfeldt suggested it was located at Ras Qasrun based on the account of Herodotus (Persian Wars 2:6, LCL 1:281; 3:5, LCL 2:9).  Baal-zephon was worshipped at Memphis and Tell Defeneh and a cylinder seal depicting Baal-Zephon as the “protector of sailors” was found at Tell el-Dab’a (Hoffmeier 1997:190).  W. F. Albright states that, “Baal-saphon was the marine storm-god par excellence, like Greek Poseiden.  As such, he was also the protector of mariners against storms.  In his honour temples were built and ports were named along the Mediterranean litoral as far as Egypt, where we find Baal-zephon worshipped at Tahpanhes (Daphne) and Memphis” (1968:127.128).  Quite possibly there would have been a temple on Jebel ‘Ataqa over looking the northern end of the Gulf of Suez.  The sailors could petition him on their way out to sea for a safe trip and thank him when they arrive safely to port.

More than likely, when the Israelites camped by the sea, it would have been on the plains at the north shore of the Gulf of Suez between Suez City and the impressive mountain to the west, Jebel ‘Ataqa.  Robinson describes this area as a “desert plain … composed for the most part of hard gravel” (1977:70).  There is adequate space for the tribes of Israel.

Where would the crossing have been?  Edward Robinson, in 1838, placed the crossing along the northern shore of the Gulf of Suez.  He seems to favor a somewhat naturalistic explanation for a miraculous event (1977:81-86).

Topographically, the most suitable site for the crossing is a natural land bridge that lies 4 miles south of the northern shore of the Gulf of Suez that averages 6 meters (ca. 20 feet) below the surface.  This land bridge is ½ mile wide and four miles across.

With Jebel ‘Ataqa on their right and the sea on their left and the wilderness closing in to a point at Ras el-’Adabiya, Pharaoh’s statement in Exodus 14:3 makes sense.  “For Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, ‘They are bewildered by the land; the wilderness has closed them in.”

When the Israelites saw Pharaoh and his army approaching they were terrified and complained to Moses.  Moses responded, “Do not be afraid.  Stand still and see the salvation of the LORD, which He will accomplish for you today” (Ex.14:13).  Moses lifted up his rod and the LORD divided the sea with a wall on one side and on the other as well (Ex. 14:16, 21, 22, 29) and they went through on dry land.  When the made it to the other side, the waters returned and covered the Egyptians (14:28; 15:4, 5, 19).  There is no naturalistic explanation for this occurrence; it was a first class miracle.

This location is also where the early Christian pilgrims place the Red Sea Crossing (Wilkinson 1981: 100,101,205-207).

Once on the other side, where Birket Nisallat is today, the Israelites were in no rush to go anywhere.  There was nobody chasing them anymore.  The Egyptians had drowned.  The Israelites probably spent the next day worshiping the Lord for His great salvation.  We know that Moses composed a song and Miriam and the women danced and sang (Ex. 15:1-21).

When they began their journey again, they went into the Wilderness of Shur (Ex. 15:22).  Edward Palmer, a 19^th century explorer, best described this scene.  He said, “The word Shur in Hebrew signifies ‘a wall;’ and as we stand at ‘Ayin Musa and glance over the desert at the Jebels er Rahah and et-Tih which border the gleaming plain, we at once appreciate the fact that these long wall-like escarpments are the chief if not the only prominent characteristics of this portion of the wilderness, and we need not wonder that the Israelites should have named this memorable spot, after its most salient feature, the wilderness of Shur or the wall” (1872:44).  When I stayed in Suez City last May, I had dinner in a hotel over looking the Suez Canal.  As the sun was setting, I noticed this prominent line of escarpment as well.

The waters of Marah are three days journey from the Red Sea (Ex. 15:22).  Where these are located, I do not know for sure.  The Numbers account places it in the wilderness of Etham (33:8).  The Wilderness of Etham appears to be the larger area with the Wilderness of Shur the southern part if this wilderness.  The Israelites headed north to Marah.  E. Robinson identifies a “fountain Naba’, three hours distance across the Gulf and so brackish as to be scarcely drinkable (1977:69).  The local Arabs called it el-Ghurkudeh.  This was the source of the drinking water for Suez.  Robinson’s Arab guide described it as “a basin eight or ten feet in diameter and six or eight feet deep, with stone steps to go down into it.  In this basin the water, which is quite brackish, boils up continually and stands two or three feet deep, without any outlet; furnishing enough to supply two hundred camel-loads at once” (1977:89).  Moses cast a tree into the bitter water and it was made sweet (Ex. 15:25).

Apparently after this incident, the Israelites turned south to Elim with its twelve springs and 70 palm trees (Ex. 15:27; Num. 33:9).  A good candidate for this site is one of the most prominent springs in the Sinai Peninsula, ‘Ayun Musa.  Two geologists observed that “there are twelve springs, from two which good drinking water may be obtained” (Moon and Sadek 1921:2).  In their geological report, they have pictures of this spring with palm trees in the area.  When Robinson visited in 1838 he observed only seven springs (1977:90).

The Numbers account says that they camped by the Red Sea after their time in Elim (Num. 33:10,11).  Somewhere at the entrance to the Wadi Sudr would be a good candidate for this campsite.  After, they headed up Wadi Sudr to Jebel Sin Bishar, the Biblical (and real) Mt. Sinai (Har-el 1983; Faiman 2000:115-118).

Menashe Har-el makes a solid case for Jebel Sin Bishar being the real Mt. Sinai.  He points out that Jebel Sin Bishar is the only mountain in the Sinai Peninsula that preserves the toponym “Sinai” in the word “Sin” (Har-el 1983:421).  He states that “the meaning of Sin Bisher is the reporting of the Law, or Laws of man.  This name hints at the “Giving of the Law” (ibid).  Josephus says that Mt. Sinai is the highest mountain in that area (Antiquities 2:264, 3:75,76; LCL 4:279, 355).  While “Jebel sin Bishar is only 618 meters above sea level, it is the most prominent of its surrounding” (ibid).  Remember, Moses at 80 years old, had to climb that mountain several times!

MT. SINAI IS NOT AT JEBEL EL-LAWZ IN SAUDI ARABIA- part 3

]]> http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/04/mt-sinai-is-not-at-jebel-el-lawz-in-saudi-arabia-part-2/feed/ 0 http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/04/mt-sinai-is-not-at-jebel-el-lawz-in-saudi-arabia-part-3/ http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/04/mt-sinai-is-not-at-jebel-el-lawz-in-saudi-arabia-part-3/#comments Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:05:35 +0000 sherri http://www.lifeandland.org/?p=262

By Gordon Franz

The Chronology from Rameses to the Red Sea

Bible geographers who deal with the Exodus take the three encampments from Rameses to the Red Sea, i.e. Succoth, Etham and Migdol, to refer to three days of travel.  The Bible does not explicitly say this.

Joel McQuitty made an interesting suggestion back in 1986.  He suggested that the seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread commemorates the seven days it took to go from Rameses to the Red Sea (1986:103-105; Ex. 13:3,4; 12:33f.; Deut. 16:3; Lev. 23:42-43).  Ironically, one of the proponents of Jebel al Lawz does as well.  However, he goes one step further and says that the Israelites rested on the Sabbath (Letter from Durham, Sept. 7, 2001, p.  14).

If McQuitty is correct, and I believe he is, then this would fit very nicely with a crossing at the northern end of the Gulf of Suez.  As K. A. Kitchen has pointed out, Rameses is located in the area of Khataana / Qantar (1998:77).  Others place Rameses at Tell el-Dab’a, another site in the area (Shea 1990:98-111).  Kitchen goes on to locate Succoth at Tell el-Maskhuta and Pithom at Tell er-Retaba (1998:78).  From the Qantar area to Suez City is approximately 100 miles.  If we take that number and divide it by seven days it comes out to about 15 miles per day.  Considering the Israelites left Egypt in “haste” (Ex. 12:33; Deut. 16:3) and in “orderly ranks”, a military term for battle array (Ex, 13:18), 15 miles a day would be very reasonable.  Robinson observed that “the usual day’s march of the best appointed armies, both in ancient and modern times, is not estimated higher than fourteen English, or twelve geographical miles, and it cannot be supposed that the Israelites with women and children and flocks, would be able to accomplish more” (1977:75).

A near contemporary event to the Exodus would be Thutmose III’s first campaign against the land of Canaan.  Aharoni describes the march by Thutmose III and his army to Megiddo this way:  “From Sile, the chief frontier post on the Egyptian border, the army covered the 150 miles to Gaza in nine or ten days, a very rapid pace” (1979:153).  In this march across the northern Sinai they encountered very sandy conditions, but they would have averaged 15 miles per day.  Once they got to Canaan, they slowed down because of resistance along the way by the Canaanites (Aharoni 1979:153).

Problems with the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat Crossings

The proponents of Jebel al-Lawz do not agree on the crossing site of the Red Sea in the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat.  One group, consisting of R. Wyatt, J. Pinkoski and L. Moller suggests that the Israelites crossed at Nuweiba.  The other group, consisting of J. Irwin, R. Cornuke, L. Williams, R. Knuteson, K. Kluetz, and K. Durham argues for the Strait of Tiran.

Regarding the Nuweiba crossing, there are several problems.  The first problem is the distance it takes to go from Rameses to Nuweiba.  Moller, in his video, said their route through the Sinai would take three weeks.  This does not meet the Biblical requirements of seven days.  The second problem is the topography of the underwater land bridge.  From Nuweiba the land bridge slopes down to 850 meters (2,790 feet) but then comes up sharply on the east side as it gets to the shore of Saudi Arabia.  This sharp incline would make the ascent extremely difficult, if not impossible for the Israelites to cross in one night.  Dr. Roy Knuteson, a retired pastor who has done a considerable amount of research on the Red Sea crossing also points out, “The wadi they claim the Israelites traveled on [to Nuweiba] is much to small for those millions of people” (Letter from Knuteson, June 8, 2001).  He goes on to say in the same letter, “…the coral encrusted chariot wheels are interesting, but not convincing.  The so-called ‘golden wheel’ is a fabrication.”  Russell and Colin Standish have also examined the other claims of Wyatt regarding the so-called chariot wheels that were discovered (1999:164-194).

The second crossing site at the Strait of Tiran has serious problems as well.  The first problem is the distance from Rameses to their Red Sea crossing.  From Tell el-Dab’a to Ras Nasrani at the southern end of the Sinai Peninsula is approximately 350 miles.  The “Geological Photomap of Israel and the Adjacent Areas” shows that most of the way down the west side of the Sinai Peninsula is sand, alluvium, clay, marl and sandstone.  Robinson observed and wrote about the sand and gravel as he traveled south to Jebel Musa (1977:89-96).  This terrain would be difficult to travel on foot or with carts, especially when making a hasty exodus out of Egypt!  This trip would be impossible to do in seven days unless they averaged 50 miles per day for seven days or 58 miles a day if they took Shabbat off.  One should remember Thutmose III’s army averaged only 15 miles per day across the sandy northern Sinai.  The conditions would be very similar.

The second problem is the topography of their land bridge across the Strait of Tiran.  One of the proponents claims that “the distance shore to shore at the Strait of Tiran is no more than two miles – by far the narrowest channel on both sides of the gulf” (Cornuke and Halbrrok 2000:215).  If one measures on the nautical maps, the distance from Sinai to Saudi Arabia is eleven miles, not two.

The proponents also seem to imply that the land bridge is relatively flat and can be crossed very quickly.  One proponent says, “Due north sat an oddity of Ripley’s Believe it or Not: a five-hundred-yard-wide coral reef, invisible on the surface yet spanning the entire straits like a stealth aircraft carrier” (Cornuke and Halbrook 2000:212).  He goes on to say, “The coral reef we inspected is sturdy and broad enough – and situated in water shallow enough – to meet this ‘dry land’ criteria.  Two million Israelites, columns of cattle, flocks, fleets of carts and wagons – even Egyptian troops and chariots – would have been able to pass quickly over the tightly compacted coral without getting their feet wet” (Cornuke and Halbrook 2000:214-215).

The British Admiralty map 801 and the American NOAA map 62222 show that these statements are not accurate.  The shallow reefs do not go all the way across and the land bridge is not flat.  In the midst of the Strait of Tiran is the Enterprise Passage [See Map 2, taken from the NOAA map 62222].  This is an underwater passage / channel that goes north south through the Strait.  It is approximately ¾ of a mile wide with a depth of 700 feet.  The eastern side has a slope with at least a 60% incline.   To put this incline number in perspective, in Bergen County, NJ, where I live, roads can not have an incline of more than 10%.  The 60% would be an extremely difficult, if not impossible, obstacle for travel.  One of the proponents acknowledges this depth, but does not seem to grasp the significance of the problem (Cornuke and Halbrook 2000:214).  It would be a near impossible process for 2 million people to go down and up these slopes, along with their carts and wagons.  It would be next to impossible for the Egyptian chariots to go down and up unless they were SUV chariots with traction tires!  Also, if any of them stumbled going down the slopes they would be cut very badly on the coral.  This passage would be next to impossible, if not an impossible obstacle, because it would slow the pace of the Israelites down considerably or even stop it, as well as cause serious problems for the Egyptian chariots.

To illustrate the impossibility of the Strait of Tiran crossing, I would like to issue the following challenge to the proponents of this view.

The Exodus Challenge

Bob Cornuke and Larry Williams are self-proclaimed “Adventurers of History.”  This challenge will be the ultimate adventure to validate their claims that Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia.

The Challenge

Two of the three BASE participants (Bob Cornuke, Larry Williams and/or Ken Durham) are to walk from Tel el-Dab’a (Biblical Rameses) to their Red Sea Crossing, northeast of Sharm el-Shiek, in seven days with one day of rest for the Sabbath (either Saturday or Sunday).

The Conditions

They are to wear sandals and walk on the sandy ground, not on the paved road.

They are to take two ten-year-old children.  (Please get a parental consent form signed by both parents.  I do not want you to be hauled into court for child abuse).  Also bring along two sheep and two goats.

They will be permitted to buy bottled water along the way.  I do not want to be responsible for their death by dehydration!

In the event that the pillar of cloud/fire does not reappear, they will be permitted to use road maps and their good judgments as to the timing so as to cover the 350 miles, averaging 58 miles per day, in the allotted time.

The Concessions

They will not have to take 2 million men, women or children with them, nor a herd of cattle, a flock of sheep and herd of goats.

They will not have to bring along any nursing mothers with newborn children.

They will not need to bring along senior citizens.  Remember, Moses, Aaron and Miriam were all more than 80 years old.

The Promise

In the unlikely event the challengers are successful, after being observed by a neutral party and documented on video, I (Gordon Franz) will publicly and in print, renounce my articles against the idea that Mt. Sinai is at Jebel al-Lawz and will wholeheartedly endorse their views.  I will also donate $1,000 to the BASE Institute.

In the likely event of failure, I will let them decide what their course of action will be.

Ken Durham called this an “intentionally frivolous challenge”! (Letter from Durham, Sept. 7, 2001, p. 7).  With all due respect, I am very serious about this challenge because if they walk it, they will abandon the idea because they will know (experientially) that it is impossible.  He also objected to placing Rameses at Tell el-Dab’a and would prefer to see it in eastern Goshen.  As they say at Burger King, “Have it your way!”  I am willing to let you start from the eastern end of the Wadi Tumilat and go the 250 miles you think was the distance.

Durham says, “A steady walking rate of 3.5 miles per hour sustained for 12 hours of navigable daylight results in a ‘days journey’ optimal linear distance of 42 miles. … Therefore, as odd as it may sound to our ears to reckon a ‘day’s journey’ as 42 to 43 miles, it is probably very close to the optimum of the Exodus Hebrews” (Letter from Ken Durham, September 7, 2001, p. 14).  He then sets forth his scenario for the distance traveled each day (pp. 13-15).  On the first day they traveled 36 miles.  The second, 36 miles and camped at Etham, but he does not identify where Etham was located.  On the third day they pick up the pace to 16-18 hours per day and travel 45-48 miles.  The fourth day they cover 48 miles.  The fifth day they cover 40-45 miles, and the sixth day another 45-50 miles.  On Shabbat they rested.  If they can walk those distances each day, I would be impressed.  What really stretches the imagination is his reckoning of the Egyptian forces.  Pharaoh had spies following the Israelites for three days.  On the third day when they realize the Israelites are not stopping, they return to Pharaoh by the fourth day so he can muster his chariot force and foot soldiers in order to pursue the Israelites.  Those spies would have to run back overnight to Pharaoh covering a distance of approximately 120 miles in less than 12-16 hours (running a steady 10 miles per hour!).  If Pharaoh were successful in mustering his troops in one day, they would have three days to catch up to the Israelites.  They would have to average 83 miles per day, on foot and in chariots, in order to cover the 250 miles in three days!  Anybody want to join them? J

Other Problems With This View

It has been said, “The devil is always in the details.”  There are other problems with this view.  For example, the Israelites camped at Etham at the edge of the wilderness (Ex. 13:20; Num. 33:6).  The wilderness that is implied is the Wilderness of Etham.  After they cross the Red Sea, they journey in the Wilderness of Etham again (Num. 33:8), also called the Wilderness of Shur (Ex. 15:22; Robinson 1977:80).  If the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz were consistent with their views, the Wilderness of Etham would be somewhere on the west side of the Sinai, yet it would also be across the Straits of Tiran in Saudi Arabia.  It does not make geographical sense to have one wilderness on the west side of Sinai and the same wilderness across the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat in Saudi Arabia.

Another problem is the Israelites second camp at the Red Sea.  According to the Number’s itinerary, the Children of Israel cross the Red Sea, stop at Marah, then moved on to Elim and camped by the Red Sea (Num. 33:8-11).  According to the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz, Elim is located at al-Bad’ (Williams 1990:178; Cornuke and Halbrook 2000:96, 97, plate 13,14).  If their view were consistent, they would have to give a reasonable explanation as to why the Israelites backtracked to the Red Sea before they proceeded to Jebel al-Lawz.  On the other hand, a stop at the Red Sea, at the mouth of Wadi Sudr, on the way to Jebel Sin Bishar makes perfect geographical sense.

A third problem is the motivations of the Amalekites to attack Israel at Rephidim (Ex. 17:8-16).  The Biblical records place the territory of the Amalekites around the area of Kadesh Barnea (Gen. 14:7) and the Negev (Num. 13:29).  For a discussion of the archaeology and geography of the Analekites, see Mattingly 1992:1:169-171.  If Mt. Sinai is at Jebel Sin Bishar than the motive is clear.  The Israelites are heading to the Land of Canaan and the most direct route is through Kadesh Barnea and the Negev.  The Amalekites were also protecting the abundant water source at Kadesh Barnea.  If Mt. Sinai is at Jebel al-Lawz, then there is no motive for the Amalekites to travel all the way down to the site to attack the Israelites.  If the Israelites were going to the Land of Canaan, they could go up the Transjordanian Highway and avoid Kadesh Barnea and the Negev all together.  Some proponents of Mt. Sinai in Midian place Kadesh Barnea in the area of Petra.  I have repeatedly asked the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz where they place Kadesh Barnea and they have yet to give me an answer.

The Conclusion of the Matter

As popular as this idea may be in certain evangelical (and even Jewish) circles, there is no credible historical, geographical, archaeological or Biblical evidence for the thesis that Mt. Sinai is at Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia.

There are several unsubstantiated claims that the proponents of this site need to substantiate or abandon.  First, the Sinai Peninsula was not part of Egypt proper, but “out of Egypt.”  Second, Biblically, Mt. Sinai is not in the Land of Midian, yet Jebel al-Lawz is in Midian territory (northwest Saudi Arabia).  Third, the Sinai Peninsula was part of “Arabia” in the First Century AD.  Paul would be perfectly correct in stating Mt. Sinai is in Arabia if Mt. Sinai was at Jebel Sin Bishar.

The proponents also need to face up to the archaeological evidence at their site.  The petroglyphs of bovine existed long before Moses ever lived.  The so-called “Cave of Moses” at el-Bad’ were not hewn until long after Moses lived.  The so-called “altar of Moses and the 12 columns” dates to the Nabatean period and has nothing to do with the Wilderness Wanderings.

The Red Sea crossings at the Gulf of Akaba / Eilat have serious topographical and Biblical / geographical difficulties that the proponents of the view need to consider.

A more plausible location for Mt. Sinai is at Jebel Sin Bishar in the west central Sinai.  If that is the case, the Red Sea crossing would best be located at a natural land bridge that goes east-west across the northern Gulf of Suez to the east of Jebel ‘Ataqa.  The Pi Hahiroth, the “mouth of the canal”, would be the remnant of an unfinished canal near the modern day Suez City.  The Migdol, “fortress”, would be at or near Clysma.  Baal-Zephon would be a temple to the mariner storm god Baal somewhere on Jebel ‘Ataqa.

Had the proponents of Jebel al-Lawz examined the evidence in the libraries in the United States carefully and visited the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, they would have come to a different conclusion.  First of all, they would have discovered that they were looking in the wrong place for the Red Sea Crossing and Mt. Sinai.  Second, in the Cairo Museum they would have noticed the chariots of Pharaoh Tutankhamen.  With the exception of Pharaoh’s gold plated chariot, all the other chariots were made of wood and rawhide (leather) with a few copper components.  The first two items that would have disintegrated quickly underwater (Littauer and Crouwel 1992:1:888.889).  Thus there would be nothing left of the chariots to discover with the exception of a few pieces of copper.

Finally, the proponents would have considered the words of Josephus.  “On the morrow, the arms of the Egyptians having been carried up to the Hebrews’ camp by the tide and the force of the wind setting in that directions, Moses, surmising that this too was due to the providence of God, to ensure that even in weapons they should not be wanting, collected them and, having accoutred [equipped] the Hebrews therein, led them forward for Mount Sinai, with intent there to sacrifice to God and to render to Him the thanks-offerings of the people for their deliverance, even as he had received commandment” (Antiquities 2:349; LCL 4:317,319).  Why look for things that had disintegrated long ago and weapons that were providentially given to the Israelites?  It would be better to follow the example of Moses and go and worship the Lord for His great salvation!

Bibliography

Aharoni, Y.

1979    The Land of the Bible.  A Historical Geography.  Revised edition.  Trans. A. Rainey.  Philadelphia: Westminster.

Albright, W.

1968   Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan.  Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Aristotle

1952    Meteorologica.  Trans. H. Lee.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library.

Blum, H.

1998    The Gold of Exodus.  The Discovery of the True Mount Sinai. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Breasted, J.

1912    A History of Egypt from the Earliest Times to the Persian Conquest.  New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Bruyere, B.

1966    Fouilles de Clysma-Qolzoum (Suez) 1930-1932.  Le Caire: L’Institut Francais D’Archeologie Orientale.

Cole, R.

1973   Exodus.  Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity.

Cornuke, R., and Halbrook, D.

2000    In Search of the Mountain of God.  The Discovery of the Real Mt. Sinai.  Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman.

Cross, F.

1998   From Epic to Canon.  Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins.

Currid, J.

1997   Ancient Egypt in the Old Testament.  Grand Rapids: Baker.

Dever, W.

1997    Is there Any Archaeological Evidence for the Exodus?  Pp. 67-86 in Exodus The Egyptian Evidence.  E. Frerichs and L. Lesko, eds.  Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Faiman, D.

2000    Digging Mount Sinai from the Bible.  Bible and Spade 13/4: 115-118.

Franz, G.

2000   Is Mount Sinai in Saudi Arabia?  Bible and Spade 13/4: 101-113.

Har-el, M.

1983    The Sinai Journeys.  The Route of the Exodus.  San Diego, CA: Ridgefield.

Herodotus

1999   The Persian Wars.  Books I-II.  Trans A. Godley.  Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library.

1995    The Persian Wars.  Books III-IV.  Trans. A. Godley.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library.

Hoffmeier, J.

1997   Israel in Egypt.  New York: Oxford.

Josephus

1978    Jewish Antiquities.  Books I-IV. Trans. H. Thackeray.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library.

Kitchen, K.

1971    Punt and How to Get There.  Orientalia 40: 184-207.

1998    Egyptians and Hebrews, from Ra’amses to Jericho.  Pp. 65-131 in The Origin of Early Israel – Current Debate.  S. Ahituv and E. Oren, eds.  Beer-sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.

Littauer, M, and Crouwel, J.

1992    Chariots.  Pp. 888-892 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary.  Vol. 1.  D. Freedman, ed.  New York: Doubleday.

McQuitty, J.

1986    The Location and Nature of the Red Sea Crossing.  Unpublished ThM thesis from Capital Bible Seminary.

Mattingly, G.

1992    Amalek.  Pp. 169-171 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary.  Vol. 1.  D. Freedman, ed.  New York: Doubleday.

Moon, F., and Sader, H.

1921    Topography and Geology of Northern Sinai.  Petroleum Research.  Bulletin No. 10.  Cairo: Government Press.

Na’aman, N.

1979    The Brook of Egypt and Assyrian Policy on the Border of Egypt.  Tel Aviv 6: 68-90.

Palmer, E.

1872   The Desert of the Exodus.  New York: Harper and Brothers.

Pliny

1989    Natural History.  Books III-VII.  Vol. 2.  Trans. H. Rackham.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library.

Rea, J.

1975    The Exodus.  Pp. 568-577 in Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia.  Vol. 1: 568-577.

Redford, D.

1992    Pi-Hahiroth.  P. 371 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary.  Vol. 5.  D. Freedman, ed.  New York: Doubleday.

1997    Observations on the Sojourn of the Bene-Israel.  Pp. 57-66 in Exodus The Egyptian Evidence.  E. Frerichs and L. Lesko, eds. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Robinson, E.

1977   Biblical Researches in Palestine, Mount Sinai and Arabia Petraea.

New York: Arno.  Reprint of 1841 edition.

Shanks, H.

1992   Frank Moore Cross.  An Interview.  Bible Review 8/4: 20-33, 61-63.

Shea, W.

1990   Leaving Egypt.  Archaeology and Biblical Research 3: 98-111.

Skipwith, G.

1913    Pi-Hahiroth, “The Mouth of the Canals”.  Palestine Exploration Quarterly ??: 94-95.

Sneh, A., Weissbrod, T, and Perath, I.

1975    Evidence for an Ancient Egyptian Frontier Canal.  American Scientist 63: 542-548.

Standish, R., and Standish, C.

1999   Holy Relics or Revelation.  Rapidan, VA: Hartland.

Strabo

1982    The Geography of Strabo.  Vol. 8.  Trans. H. Jones.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard university.  Loeb Classical Library.

Warmington, E., and Salles, J.

1996    Red Sea.  Pp. 1296-1297 in The Oxford Classical Dictionary, Third Edition.  S. Hornblower and A. Spawforth, eds.  Oxford and New York: Oxford University.

Wilkinson, J.

1981   Egeria’s Travels to the Holy Land.  Revised edition.  Jerusalem:

Ariel.

Williams, L.

1990    The Mountain of Moses.  New York: Wynwood.

This paper presented at the ETS / NEAS meeting Thursday, November 15, 2001, 9:50-10:30 a.m. session.  Broadmoor Hotel, Colorado Springs, CO.

]]> http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/04/mt-sinai-is-not-at-jebel-el-lawz-in-saudi-arabia-part-3/feed/ 0 http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/the-synagogue-on-the-island-of-delos-and-the-epistle-of-james/ http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/the-synagogue-on-the-island-of-delos-and-the-epistle-of-james/#comments Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:32:21 +0000 sherri http://www.lifeandland.org/?p=178

By Gordon Franz

Introduction

Sefar Ya’akov, written by Ya’akov Ben-Zavdai, was addressed to Messianic Jews residing in the Diaspora, outside of Eretz Yis-rael.   This small epistle, only five chapters long, has a distinct Jewish flavor based on the teachings of Yeshua ha-Mashiach.

I believe that James, the son of Zebedee, wrote this epistle soon after AD 30, as a follow-up letter, in order to encourage Jewish believers in the Lord Jesus who had come to faith during the annual pilgrimage of Shavuot (Pentecost) in Jerusalem (Acts 2).

In the First Century AD, there was a Jewish community living on the island of Delos.   This island, situated at the center of the Cyclades Islands, was famous in Greek mythology as the birthplace of the god Apollo and his sister, the goddess Artemis.

This article will give a brief overview of the history of the island, and will discuss the Jewish and Samaritan communities that resided on the island, as well as the synagogue that was discovered during the archaeological excavations in 1912-13.   The setting of the epistle of James is a synagogue in the Diaspora.   I will use the Delos synagogue to illustrate several passages in the epistle.   Using our “sanctified imagination,” we will try to comprehend how a Jewish believer in the Lord Jesus on the island of Delos would understand the word-pictures in the epistle in light of the First Century AD history, geography, and material culture.   The archaeology of the islands of Delos and Rheneia, an island opposite Delos, will help to illustrate the word-pictures.   To conclude this study, I will discuss the implications for the dating of the epistle of James.

A BRIEF GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY OF THE ISLAND OF DELOS

Delos is a small island in the center of the Cyclades.   Pliny describes these islands as “lying round Delos in a circle which has given them their name”.   He goes on to state, “By far the most famous of the Cyclades and lying in the middle of them, Delos, celebrated for its temple of Apollo and for its commerce” ( Natural History 4.12:65; LCL 2: 165,167).

If one climbs to the top of Mt. Cynthus on a clear day, the islands of Siros can be viewed to the west, Tinos to the north, Mykonos to the northeast, Paros and Naxos to the south.

The island is 5 km long in a north-south direction.   At its widest, it is 1.3 km in an east-west direction.   The highest mountain is Mt. Cynthus which rises 112 meters above sea level.   From a spring on the side of the mountain, flowing for 1.2 km, is the River Inopus, that flows into the Bay of Scardanas.

The first settlement on the island of Delos was discovered on Mt. Cynthus dating to the 3^rd millennium BC.   It did not seem to last long and the island was abandoned until the late Mycenaean period (1580-1200 BC) when the plain below the mountain was inhabited.

It was colonized by the Ionians about 750 BC.   At this point in history, the island takes on its sacred status.   Homer’s Odyssey (Book 6, line 162; LCL 1: 233) and the Homeric Hymns, written about 700 BC, said that Delos was an important religious center.   It becomes important because, according to Greek mythology, the island of Delos offered Leto a place to safely give birth to Apollo and Artemis from the fury of Hera, the wife of Zeus ( To Delian Apollo LCL 325-337).

Athenian influence was exerted over the island in the 6^th century BC.   They “purified” the island by removing all the burials from the area around the Temple of Apollo in 540 BC.

The Persian Wars broke out about 490 BC.  An alliance of Greek city-states was formed, called the Delian League, against the Persians in 478/7 BC.   Delos became the center for this league and the treasury was kept on the island.

In the winter of 426/5 BC the second “purification” of the island occurred.   This time all the burials from the island were removed and reburied in what the archaeologists call the “Purification Trench” on the island of Rheneia (Catling 1996:443).

From 314-166 BC, Delos enjoyed a period of independence and prosperity.   The island began to develop as a commercial center with public and private banks.   There was extensive building activity and foreigners began to populate the island.

In 166 BC the Romans gained control of the island.   They put Athens in charge of the island and made it a free port.   With economic prosperity came foreign influence.   Foreigners from Italy, Egypt, Syria, Phoenicia, Israel brought their cults with them and built temples and shrines to their gods.

In 88 BC, Menophanes, an officer of Mithradates VI, “razed Delos itself to the ground”.   If one can believe the reports of Appian and Pausanias ( Description of Greece III:23.3-5; LCL 2:147), upwards to 20,000 people were killed on the island in this attack.   In 69 BC, the pirates of Athenodorus, sacked the island, and it never regained its glory.   It’s religious and commercial influenced waned.   As Strabo put it, “When the Romans again got the island, after the king withdrew to his homeland, it was desolate; and it has remained in an impoverished condition until the present time” ( Geography 10.5.4; LCL 5: 167).

However, in 58 BC, the Roman Senate confirmed privileges on the people of Delos.   Throughout the First Century AD, there was a community on the island, and life went on under the control of the Athenians.

In the second century AD, during the reign of Hadrian, the Athenians put the island up for sale, but there were no takers!   In fact, Pausanias states, “Delos, once the common market of Greece, has no Delian inhabitants, but only the men sent by the Athenians to guard the sanctuary” ( Description of Greece 33:2; LCL 4: 69).

At the end of the 3^rd century AD, there was a small Christian community on the island.   Toward the end of the 7^th century AD the island becomes abandoned.

For a detailed history of the island, see Laidlaw 1933.

THE JEWISH AND SAMARITAN COMMUNITIES ON THE ISLAND OF DELOS

Jewish and Samaritan communities on the island of Delos are well attested to in the contemporary literature as well as inscriptions discovered in the excavations on Delos and Rheneia.

The first mention in the literature to a Jewish community on the island of Delos is in I Macc. 15:16-23.   This passage contained a letter from the Roman proconsul, Lucius Calpurnius Piso (140-139 BC).   It affirmed that the Jews were friends of Rome and the various kings should protect them.

During the reign of Julius Caesar, two edicts were given that protected the rights of the Jews on the island of Delos, both are recorded by Josephus ( Antiq. 14: 213-216; LCL 8: 561-563 and 14: 231-232; LCL 8: 571-573).

Two funerary stela of Jewish women who were murdered on Delos were found on the island of Rheneia.   Each stela contained a prayer for vengeance against the murderers (Deissmann 1995: 413-424).   Interestingly, the Greek form of “El Elyon” (”God, Most High”) is used on both inscriptions.   This name also appears on one inscription found in the synagogue.

Recently, two Samaritan inscriptions were found 90 meters to the north of the synagogue building.   One read, “The Israelites on Delos who make offerings to hallowed Argarizein crown with a gold crown Sarapion, son of Jason, of Knossos, for his benefactions toward them” (Kraabel 1984: 44).   The second one said, “[the] Israelites [on Delos] who make offerings to hallowed, consecrated Argarizein …” (Kraabel 1984: 45).

One can assume that both communities were engaged in the trade and commerce on the island.

THE SYNAGOGUE ON THE ISLAND OF DELOS

Excavations on the island of Delos began in 1873 and were conducted by the Greek Antiquities Service and the Ecole Francaise d’Archeologie at Athens.   The most intensive excavations were carried out between 1902 and 1914.   During the 1912-13 excavations, a synagogue building was discovered by the excavator, Andre Plassart.   The site was later re-excavated by Philippe Bruneau in 1962 and published by him in 1970 and 1982.

The structure is located in a residential area in the northeast part of the island.   It consists of several rooms.   The main room, the hall of assembly, measures 16.9 meters north-south by 15.04 meters east-west, with a triportal entrance.   The assembly hall was divided into two rooms, probably after the War of Mithridates in 88 BC.   In the northern room, there are marble benches that line the wall.   In the center of the west wall is a kathedra (throne) with a footstool.   The entrance to a cistern is located In the southern room.

Four inscriptions were found in the excavations.   Each contained the words, Theos Hypsistos (”God, the Most High”) or Hypsistos (”the Most High”).   The former is translated El Elyon in the LXX (cf. Gen. 14: 19,20,22; Goodenough 1957).   This name of God also appears on the “Vengeance Inscription” from the island of Rheneia.   One also contained the word proseuchai, sometimes translated “prayer halls” and could refer to a synagogue.

The excavator concluded that the synagogue was in use from the First Century BC into the Second Century AD.   Recently, Monika Trumper published a comprehensive article advocating that this structure is the oldest original synagogue building in the Diaspora (2004).   She contents that there were five phases of occupation from the 2^nd century BC to the 2^nd century AD.   This, however, is not the final excavation report.

The identification of this structure has been hotly debated.   The original excavator, Andre Passart, identified it as a Jewish house of worship (1913).   E. L. Sukenik, in his Ancient Synagogues in Palestine and Greece, followed this identification (1934).   In 1935, Belle D. Mazur came out with a study, Studies of Jewry in Ancient Greece disputing this identification.   As a result of this study, Sukenik reversed his position on the structure (1949).   Edwin R. Goodenough, in his monumental work, Jewish Symbols of the Graeco-Roman Period (1965:2: 71-75) anaylized Mazur’s work and offered counter arguments.   However, he concluded that the structure “might almost certainly … be taken, without any protest, to be probably a synagogue” (2: 74).   So much for archaeological dogmatism!

Hershel Shanks concluded that the structure was actually a temple to Zeus (1979: 43-45).   There have been other studies by L. Michael White (1987) and A. T. Kraabel that reaffirm the synagogue interpretation.   For the purpose of this paper, the synagogue interpretation will be accepted and followed.

THE SETTING OF THE EPISTLE OF JAMES

It is not the intent of this article to imply or suggest that the epistle of James reached the island of Delos, or that James had this synagogue in mind.   This synagogue is used only as an example of a First Century AD Diaspora synagogue to illustrate two passages in the epistle.   Nothing more is implied.   James was writing to Jewish believers in the Lord Jesus in the Diaspora (James 1:1).

The setting of the epistle of James is a synagogue in the Diaspora.   The Diaspora is a technical Jewish term, in Greek, for the Jewish people living outside of the Land of Israel.   James 2:2-4 says, “For if there should come into your synagogue a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing fine clothes and say to him, ‘You sit here in a good place,’ and say to the poor man, ‘You stand there,’ or, “Sit here at my footstool,’ have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?” [2]

The early church met in synagogues before there was the split between the Church and the Synagogue (Acts 26:11).   The Delos synagogue can illustrate James 2.   On the west wall of the assembly hall was a kathedra (throne) of white marble that has been identified as a “seat of Moses.”   This was the most prominent seat in the synagogue where the rabbi would teach the congregation the Torah.   Below his feet was a footstool.   When the rich man came in, he was given a “good place”, probably the seat next to the “seat of Moses” on the bench reserved for the elders.   On the other hand, the poor man was relegated to stand in the corner or sit at the footstool of the rabbi.

The kathedra, or seat of Moses, illustrates the second passage.   James 3:1 says, “My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.”   The teacher of the Word of God, like the rabbis, scribes and Pharisees, would sit in the “seat of Moses” and expound the Scriptures.   James warns the teacher about living a life that is contrary to what he is teaching.   James still has the words of the Lord Jesus that he heard only a short while before ringing in his mind.   “The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat, therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works, for they say, and do not do” (Matt. 23:2,3).

Most English Bibles translate the Greek word “synagogue” as either “assembly,” “congregation,” “meeting,” “place of worship,” or even “church”!   If we see the epistle of James in its Jewish Diaspora context it should be translated, as the New Jerusalem Bible translates it, “synagogue.”   For a full discussion and debate of the word “synagogue,” see Kee 1990; Oster 1993; Kee 1994.

THE WORD PICTURES FROM THE EPISTLE OF JAMES

Permit me to use my “sanctified imagination” for a moment.   Let’s assume that the epistle of James did reach the island of Delos and believers in the Lord Jesus read it.   How would they understand the word pictures used by James in the book?   They, like us, read the Bible in the context of the world in which the reader lives.   The believers on Delos would understand the epistle from the surroundings of their world.

Perhaps the believers were meeting on the Lord’s Day in the synagogue of Delos when somebody came from the harbor carrying a copy of the epistle of James.   With great anticipation they began to read it.   “James, a servant ( doulos) of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (1:1a).   Delos had an earlier reputation as a great slave market.   Strabo describes the slave market of Delos in these terms: “… Delos, which could both admit and send away ten thousand slaves on the same day; whence arose the proverb, ‘Merchants, sail in, unload your ship, everything has been sold.’   The cause of this was the fact that the Romans, having become rich after the destruction of Carthage and Corinth, used many slaves” ( Geography 14.5.2; LCL 6:329).

James goes on to say, “To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad” (1:1b).   The Jews who had come to faith were descendents of the tribe of Judah.   Also living on the island of Delos were Samaritans, those of the northern tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh.

They continued to read, “My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials.”   James wrote this epistle to encourage the people as they go through trials and testings in their walk with the Lord.   He recounts the words he heard the Lord Jesus say on the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:11,12).   He then writes about testings from without (1:2-12) and temptation from within (1:12-18).

The believer who doubts the wisdom of God in testings is described as “a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind” (1:6).   James had in mind the eastern windstorms that he had experienced while fishing on the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 8:23-27 // Mark 4:35-41 // Luke 8:22-25 and Matt. 14:22-33 // Mark 6:45-52 // John 6:15-21).   The reader on Delos knew from experience the description of “holy Delos” given by Callimanchus.   “Surely all the Cyclades, most holy of the isles that lie in the sea. …Wind-swept and stern is she set in the sea, and, wave-beaten as she is, is fitter haunt for gulls than course for horses.   The sea, rolling greatly round her, casts off on her much spindrift of the Icarian water” ( Hymn to Delos 4; LCL 85).   One can experience the winds and the waves today on the ferry from Mykonos to Delos.

When he describes temptation he uses a word from fishing terminology, “enticed” (1:14; Kent 1986:51).   James the son of Zebedee used this word from his own fishing profession.   The readers on Delos would understand this word picture from their personal experience as well.   Callimachus continues in his Hymn to Delos, describing Delos as a place where “sea-roaming fishermen have made her their home” ( To Delos 4; LCL 85).   In the excavations of Delos, a number of fish hooks and implements used for mending nets (cf. Mark 1:19) were discovered.   The term “entice” depicts a live bait, either a worm or fish on a hook to prompt the fish to bit it.   The fish is deceived and caught.   The temptation to sin is the same way.   It looks alluring (Heb. 11:25), but when partaken of, it leads to death (James 1:15).

James gives an outline for the rest of the book in verse 19 (Hodges 1994: 15,16).   “Therefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath.”   James expands on the theme, “be swift to hear” in James 1:21-2:26.   The believer is not just to hear the Word of God, but is also to do it (1:22).   The second section, “be slow to speak” is expanded on in chapter 3.   The third section, “be slow to wrath” is expanded on in James 4:1-5:6.   The final section of the book gives the key for going through trials and temptation.   James says the believer is to have patience (waiting for the Lord’s return) and pray (5:7-20).

The first section, “be swift to hear” is set in the synagogue, with its “seat of Moses” and footstool.   James admonishes the believers to be swift to hear the Word of God and apply it to ones life.   The setting of the synagogue has already been discussed.   However, within the context of the synagogue in James 2, James quotes the Hebrew Scriptures in verse 8 (cf. Lev. 19:18) and verse 11 (Ex. 19:13,14).   Passages that would be found in the Torah scrolls of the synagogue.   In his discourse on “faith and works” he says, “You believe that there is one God, you do well” (2:19).   The statement “one God” comes from the Shema (Deut. 6:4) that was recited in the synagogue as well as the Scriptures contained within the tefillin (Ex. 13:1-10; Deut. 6:4-9; Ex. 13:11-16).   Tefillin were used in the First Century as attested to by the ones discovered at Qumran (Yadin 1969:13).   James then gives two examples of people who expressed their faith before their fellow human beings by their works, Abraham and Rahab (2:21-25; cf. Matt. 5:16; Tit. 3:5,8).   He concludes this section with verse 26, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.”   The Delians had an interesting custom concerning the dead.   Strabo describes Rheneia, the island opposite Delos, in these terms.   “Rheneia is a desert isle within four stadia from Delos, and there the Delians bury their dead; for it is unlawful to bury, or even burn, a corpse on Delos itself” ( Geography 10.5.5; LCL 5: 167).   Since Delos was a “holy” island, nobody could be born on the island for fear of infant mortality, nor die there.

The theme of “slow to speak” is addressed in James 3.   James admonishes the teacher who would sit in the “seat of Moses” and expound the Scriptures.   James uses seven illustrations from the Sea of Galilee to describe the effect the tongue has on other people.   At least six of these would be clearly understood on Delos.

The first illustration is the bit in the horses’ mouth that turns his body (3:2b,3).   On the walls of one of the houses was found a painting of a man riding a horse with the bit in the horses mouth.   The Delians would understand this because of the hippodrome on the island.   As previously mentioned, Callimachus mentions the course for horses.   Few archaeological remains of a hippodrome were discovered to the east of the sacred lake.

The second illustration is that of a small rudder on a large ship (3:4).   James the son of Zebedee, being a fisherman, knew the power of the rudder to turn a ship in the wind.   The Delians understood the workings of the rudder from watching the ships maneuver as they came and went from this maritime trading center in the midst of the Aegean Sea.

The third illustration is that of a forest fire (3:5,6).   James the son of Zebedee painted this word picture from the summer fires that were in the forests of Galilee and the Golan (cf. Amos 7:4; Joel 1:19,20; 2:3).

The fourth illustration is of the animals (3:7).   The “creatures of the sea” would be understood by James as the fish in the Sea of Galilee.   The Delians would understand it as the sea creatures in the Aegean Sea.

The fifth illustration is that of a spring (3:11,12).   James would have understood the contrast between the fresh water and bitter water from the time he spent at Tabgha, the fishing grounds for Capernaum.   There were seven springs there; some were bitter and some very sweet.   The island of Delos had only one source of fresh water, a spring on the side of Mt. Cynthos creating the Inopos River that flowed down to the salt water of the sea.

The sixth illustration James uses is of fruit trees, figs, olives and grapes.   These trees were local to the Sea of Galilee as well as most of the Land of Israel.   Today, if one visits Delos, it appears to be devoid of fertile land.    The reason for that is twofold.   First, during the nineteenth century, the island was used a pastureland for the sheep from Mykonos.   Second, today it is an archaeological park under the auspices of the World Heritage Federation and farming in not permitted (Reger 1994:95).   There are a few fig trees scattered here and there, but in antiquity there were farms that engaged in agricultural activity (1994:127-145).   One can see vines on funerary monuments from Rhenea that would have reflected the earthly activities of the dead.   Callimachus also mentions olive trees on the island ( Hymn to Delos 4; LCL 105).

In the final word-picture, James describes the “wisdom that is from above” as being “without hypocrisy” (3:17).   The word “hypocrisy” is a Greek theatric term for an actor that performs for the applause of the audience.   James was well aware of at least three theaters in the area of the Sea of Galilee.   From the northern shore of the Lake, one could see the Tiberias, Hippos and Gadara theaters.   The recipients of the letter on Delos knew the theatric term “hypocrisy” because of the theater on the island.   Also, a common motif of the period is painted masks on the walls and mosaics on the floors.   In a private house called the House of the Masks one can see such examples.

The third section, “be slow to wrath,” begins in chapter 4.   James asks, “Where do wars and fights come from among you?”   The implication of that verse is that the believers were fighting in the church meeting.   Whenever I speak on this passage in a church I ask, tongue in cheek, “Christians don’t fight, do we?”   I usually hear snickering from the audience.   Of course we always justify our fighting and bickering by saying, “We fight in Christian love!”   James also states that some believers murder and covet (4:2).   A sword found in the excavations reminds us of potential weapons that could be used to carry out this gross and sinful deed.   A wall painting of two boxers fighting each other from one of the houses would illustrate the fighting.

In this context as well, James says that some believers are adulterers and adulteresses (4:4).   Most commentaries say this is spiritual adultery, but in the context of the Greco-Roman world, it could be both physical as well as spiritual.   On the island of Delos, there were temples to a host of deities that would try to lure the believer away from the Lord Jesus Christ.   Some cults even used sexual immorality to attract people to it.   The most notable one on Delos would be the cult of Dionysos, the god of wine and merrymaking.   His shrine, called the Stoibadeion, was “a rectangular exedra which at both ends has a pillar which supported an oversize phallus, the symbol of Dionysos” (Zaphiropoulou 1993:32).   Dionysos was also discovered on mosaics in private houses on the island (1993:34-37).

In the section on “slow to wrath”, James addresses the source of the problem, which is pride (4:6,10).   James goes on to describe the arrogant merchants as saying, “Come now, you who say, ‘Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit’” (4:13).   James reminds them that they don’t even know what tomorrow brings because life it like a vapor.   Most of the Jewish community on the island of Delos probably engaged in trade and commerce.   For the self-sufficient believer, this would strike home.

After the tragedy of September 11, 2001, I was watching an interview with several New York firefighters.   One of them recalled the words of the chief chaplain of New York’s bravest, Mychal Judge, who died in the collapse of the World Trade Center.   He said, “If you want to make God laugh, tell Him what you are going to do tomorrow!”   This caught the essence of James 4:13-17.   In this passage, James describes the arrogant merchants who plan their buying and selling activities and anticipate a profit, yet they do not realize that life is like a vapor.   James admonishes them to say, “If the Lord wills, we shall do this or that” (4:15).   It is a humbling thought to realize Someone else holds our future!

James goes on to address the rich in James 5:1-6.   During the Hellenistic period, Delos was a very wealthy island.   Several residential quarters of the city had very luxurious two and three story houses with beautiful mosaics and frescos on the walls.   There were farms on Delos that grew wheat and barley (Reger 1994:95-101).   James reflects the farmer / reaper who is being taken advantage of by the wealthy farm owner (5:4)

In the final section of the book, James returns to the opening theme, trials and suffering (5:7-20).   He encourages the believers to have patience and look for the Lord’s return (5:7-12) and to be persistent in prayer (5:13-20).   In each of these sections, the believer on Delos has a decision to make, either to follow the Lord Jesus Christ or one of the deities on the island.

In the first section, James encourages them to look for the Lord’s return and follow the example of the prophets.   Delos was famous as the birthplace of Apollo, the god of prophecy, poetry and music.   His temples stood in the center of the island.   An individual could go to his oracles to consult the future, but the believe in the Lord Jesus has a “more sure word of prophecy,” the Bible (II Pet. 1:19).   The prophetic Scriptures were given to encourage the believers to godly living, comfort in times of sorrow, and patience as the believer preservers through trials (I John 3:2,3; I Thess. 4:13-18; Rom. 8:18-30; Blackstone 1989: 181-183).

James asks the question, “Is anyone among you sick?” (5:14).   Most of the people on the island would go to the Asclepion at the headlands of the Fourni Bay for healing (Zaphiropoulou 1993: 52).   James instructs the believers to “call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.   And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up” (5:14,15a).   The response of the believer would be different than the society around.

THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DATING OF THE EPISTLE OF JAMES

The epistle of James was written by James the son of Zebedee (Bassett 1876), and not the half-brother of the Lord as most commentators suggest (Davids 1982: 2-7; Hiebert 1992: 24-32).   The view that James the son of Zebedee wrote the book is based on the internal content of the book and well as the word pictures.   Many of the statements in the epistle are based on the teachings of the Lord Jesus, primarily the Sermon on the Mount and parables given in Galilee.   James the son of Zebedee was an “ear witness” to these sayings.   Many of the word pictures that are used in the epistle are from the Sea of Galilee.   The authorship and date of the epistle will be discussed in greater length in another article.

It is also believed that the epistle was written soon (one or two years) after Pentecost ( Shavuot) of AD 30 to encourage those believers in their new found faith in the Lord Jesus as they return to their family and friends in the Diaspora (Acts 2:8-11,41; James 1:1).   These early Hebrew-Christians (or Messianic Jews) met in the synagogue buildings until the break with their Jewish brethren (Acts 26:11).

Archaeology and geography can add a third dimension to Biblical studies.   The black and white (and sometimes red!) letters on the pages of Scripture can be placed in a historical and geographical context that can be visualized.   The reader can say, “Now I see what the inspired writer is talking about.”   Just as the readers on Delos could “see” the word pictures used by James when they read the epistle, so we can as well.   Might we not just see the word pictures, but also apply them to our lives.   As James admonishes us, “But be doers of the word, and not hearers only” (1:22).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bassett, Francis

1876       The Catholic Epistle of St. James .   London: Samuel Gagster and Sons.

Blackstone, William

1989       Jesus is Coming. God’s Hope for a Restless World .   Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel.

Bruneau, Philippe

1970       Recherches sur Les Cultes de Delos a L’Epoque Hellenistique et a L’Epoque Imperiale .   Paris: Editions E. de Boccard.

1982       Les Israelites de Delos et la Juiverie Delienne.   Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique 106: 465-504.

Catling, Richard

1996       Delos .   Pp. 442-444 in The Oxford Classical Dictionary.   S. Hornblower and A. Spawforth, eds.   Oxford: Oxford University.

Callimachus

2000       Callimachus – Hymns and Epigrams, Lycophron, Aratus.   Translated by A. W. Mair and G. R. Mair.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

Danker, Frederick

1982       Benefactor: Epigraphic Study of a Graeco-Roman and New Testament Semantic Field .   St. Louis, MO: Clayton.

Deissmann, Adolf

1995       Light From the Ancient East .   Translated by L. Strachan.   Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.   Reprint of 1927 edition.

Fine, Steve, ed.

1996       Sacred Realm.   The Emergence of the Synagogue in the Ancient World .   New York: Oxford University and Yeshiva University.

Goodenough, Edwin

1957       The Bosporus Inscriptions to the Most High God.   Jewish Quarterly Review 47: 221-244.

1965       Jewish Symbols of the Graeco-Roman Period.   13 vols.   New York: Pantheon.

Hodges, Zane

1994       The Epistle of James.   Proven Character Through Testing .   Irving, TX: Grace Evangelical Society.

Homer

1998    Odyssey.   Books 1-12.   Vol. 1.   Translated by A. T. Murray.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

Homeric Hymns

2000       Hesiod, Homeric Hymns Epic Cycle, Homerica .   Translated by Hugh G. Evelyn-White.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

Josephus

1980       Jewish Antiquities.   Book XV-XVII.   Vol. 8.   Translated by R. Marcus and A. Wikgren.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

Kee, Howard Clark

1990       The Transformation of the Synagogue after 70 C.E.: Its Import for Early Christianity.   New Testament Studies 36: 1-24.

1994       The Changing Meaning of Synagogue.   A Response to Richard Oster.   New Testament Studies 40: 281-283.

Kent, Homer

1986       Faith That Works.   Studies in the Epistle of James .   Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books.

Kourtara, Vasso

1995       Mykonos Delos .   Athens: Toubis.

Kraabel, Alf Thomas

1979    The Diaspora Synagogue: Archaeological and Epigraphical Evidence since Sukenik.   Pp. 477-510 in Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt II.   Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.   Pp. 95-126 in Ancient Synagogues.   D. Urman and P. Flesher, eds.   Leiden: E. J. Brill.

1981       Social System of Six Diaspora Synagogues.   Pp. 79-121 in Ancient Synagogues.   The State of Research. J. Gutman, ed.   Chico, CA: Scholars.

1983       The Roman Diaspora: Six Questionable Assumptions.   Journal of Jewish Studies 33/1-2: 445-464.   Pp. 1-20 in Diaspora Jews and Judaism.   J. Overman and R. MacLennan, eds.   Atlanta, GA: Scholars.

1984        New Evidence of the Samaritan Diaspora has been Found on Delos.   Biblical Archaeologist 47: 44-46.

1985    Synagoga Caeca: Systematic Distortion in Gentile Interpretations of Evidence for Judaism in the Early Christian Period.   Pp. 219-246 in “To see Ourselves as Others see Us:” Christians, Jews, “Others” in Late Antiquity.   J. Neusner and E. Frerichs, eds.   Chico, CA: Scholars.   Pp. 35-62 in Diaspora Jews and Judaism.   J. Overman and R. MacLennan, eds.   Atlanta, GA: Scholars.

1991       Unity and Diversity among Diaspora Synagogues.   Pp. 21-33 in Diaspora Jews and Judaism.   J. Overman and R. MacLennan, eds.   Atlanta, GA: Scholars.

Laidlaw, W. A.

1933    A History of Delos.   Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Levine, Lee, ed.

1981    Ancient Synagogues Revealed.   Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Mazur, Bella

1935    Studies on Jewry in Greece.   Athens: Hestia.

Oster, Richard

1993       Supposed Anachronism in Luke-Acts’ Use of Synagogue.   New Testament Studies 39: 178-208.

Overman, J. Andrew

1992       The Diaspora in the Modern Study of Ancient Judaism.   Pp. 63-78 in Diaspora Jews and Judaism.   J. Overman and R. MacLennan, eds.   Atlanta, GA: Scholars.

Pausanias

1993       Descriptions of Greece .   Books III-V.   Vol. 2.   Translated by W. H. S. Jones and H. A. Ormerod.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard university.   Loeb Classical Library.

1995    Descriptionsof Greece.   Books VIII.22-X.   Vol. 4.   Translated by W. H. S. Jones.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

Plassart, Andre

1914       La Synagogue Juive de Delos.   Revue Biblique 11: 525-534.

Pliny

1989       Natural History .   Vol. 2.   Translated by H. Rackham.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

Reger, G.

1994       Regionalism and Change in the Economy of Independent Delos, 314-167 B.C.   Berkeley, CA: University of California.

Renov, I.

1975       The Seat of Moses.   The Synagogue: Studies in Origins, Archaeology and Architecture.   H. Orlinsky, ed.   New York: Ktav.

Shanks, Hershel

1979       Judaism in Stone.   The Archaeology of Ancient Synagogues .   New York: Harper and Row.

Strabo

1988       The Geography of Strabo .   Vol. 5.   Translated by H. L. Jones.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

1989       The Geography of Strabo .   Vol. 6.   Translated by H. L. Jones.   Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.   Loeb Classical Library.

Sukenik, E. L.

1934       Ancient Synagogues in Palestine and Greece .   London: Oxford University.

1949       The Present State of Ancient Synagogue Studies.   Louis M. Rabinowitz Fund for the Exploration of Ancient Synagogues Bulletin I: 8-23.

Trebilco, Paul

1991       Jewish Communities in Asia Minor .   Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Trumper, Monika

2004       The Oldest Original Synagogue Building in the Diaspora.   The Delos Synagogue Reconsidered.   Hesperia 73: 513-598.

Urman, Dan

1995       The House of Assembly and the House of Study are they one and the same?   Pp. 232-255 in Ancient Synagogues, Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery.   D. Urman and P. Flesher, eds.   Leiden: E. J. Brill.

White, L. Michael

1987       The Delos Synagogue Revisited: Recent Fieldwork in the Graeco-Roman Diaspora.   Harvard Theological Review 80/2: 133-160.

1990       Building God’s House in the Roman World .   Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.

Yadin, Yigael

1969    Tefillin from Qumran.   Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Zaphiropoulou, Photini

1992       Delos Monuments and Museum .   Athens: Krene.

ben Zeev, Miriam Pucci

1996       Who Wrote a Letter Concerning Delian Jews?   Revue Biblique 103/3: 237-243.

1  This article is dedicated to my fellow travelers: Richard, Donna, Zion and Judy (June 4, 2002), Alan, Heather, John, Karin and Stephen (Oct. 26, 2002) who tromped all over the island of Delos with me and listened to my “crazy idea” on the epistle of James.

[2] All Scripture quotes are from the NKJV.

]]> http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/the-synagogue-on-the-island-of-delos-and-the-epistle-of-james/feed/ 0 http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/job-in-the-land-of-uz/ http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/job-in-the-land-of-uz/#comments Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:31:16 +0000 sherri http://www.lifeandland.org/?p=176

By Gordon Franz

The Book of Job, the oldest book in the Bible, has its historical-geographical setting in the Land of Uz. The book begins, “There was a man in the Land of Uz, whose name was Job; and the man was blameless and upright, and one who feared God and shunned evil” (Job 1:1 NKJV).

THE LAND OF UZ

Scholars are divided on the location of the Land of Uz. Some have suggested it was near Damascus; others, based on Lamentations 4:21, have placed it in the Land of Edom. Jeremiah wrote, “Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom, you who dwell in the Land of Uz!” The Edom location makes geographical sense in light of the Biblical statement of Jeremiah and the flora, fauna and material culture mentioned in the book.

The ancient territory of Edom is located to the east and west of the Aravah, the Jordan Rift Valley that goes from the Dead Sa to the Red Sea, also known as the Gulf of Akaba or Eilat. On the west side of the Aravah, in Israel today, it goes from the Wilderness of Zin in the north to Eilat in the south. On the east side of the Aravah, in Jordan today, it goes from the Wadi Hasa (Brook Zered) in the north to Eilat in the south (Crew 2002: 2-10).

THE OUTLINE OF JOB

The book of Job is divided into three sections. Chapters 1 and 2 describe Satan’s diabolical attack on Job. All through this section, Job does not have a clue where his suffering is coming from. He does not see the “big picture” and understand that Satan is behind these attacks. Yet through it all, he could say, “The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; Blessed be the name of the LORD” (1:21). His dear wife, seeing the situation he was in says, “Do you hold to your integrity? Curse God and die!” (2:9). Bless her heart, she must have had the gift of encouragement!

The second section is Job’s debate with his friends. As the old saying goes, “With friends like these, who needs enemies!” This goes from chapter 3-37. Job begins the debate by cursing the day he was born, but he does not curse God. The final section is God’s one-sided dialogue with Job in chapters 38-42. In this section, God asks Job a series of questions out of the whirlwind. He begins by asking, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (38:4). In other words, “Job, were you with me at the Creation?” The book ends with Job’s confessing his lack of knowledge, and he turns from his rebellious ways (42:1-6). The Lord restores double what Job has lost (42:7-17).

THE THEME OF JOB

Most commentators and preachers would say that suffering is the theme of the book. But a careful examination of the book seems to reveal a slightly different theme: that of lessons learned from suffering. The emphasis is on the lessons learned.

The two key verses in the book are Job 13:15 and 37:23, 24. Job expresses his faith by saying, “Though he slay me, yet will I trust Him.” “As for the Almighty, we cannot find Him; He is excellent in power, in judgment and abundant justice; He does not oppress. Therefore men fear Him; He shows no partiality to any who are wise of heart.”

CHRONOLOGICAL SETTING

The Patriarch Job lived soon after the Noahic Flood. This fact is reflected in the book. Job recalls this event several times (Job 9:5-8; 12:14-16; 26:11-14; 28:9). Job also recalls the post-Flood period when the earth is dried up (Job 14:11, 12). His friend Eliphaz mentions it in his third discourse. He said, “Will you keep to the old way which wicked men have trod, who were cut down before their time, whose foundations were swept away by a flood? They said to God, ‘Depart from us! What can the Almighty do to them?’” (Job 22:15-17). The Lord reminds Job of the Flood as well. When the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, He asked Job if he was at the creation (Job 38:4-7). The interrogation began, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (38:4). God then asked Job if he was at the Flood in verses 8-11 (Morris 1988: 23-33).

After Job’s encounter with Satan and the LORD he lived another 140 years (42:16). Job might have been close to 200 years old when he died. Job would have been a Neanderthal (Cuozzo ????). His age would put him in the period of the Patriarchs. Perhaps he was a contemporary of, or slightly before, Abraham who lived to be 175 years old (Gen. 25:7).

At this point, we should raise the issue of the place of Job in the archaeological chronology. If we assume a Biblical date for the universal, worldwide Flood in Noah’s Day, with no gaps in the chronology, than the date for the flood would be 2459 BC (Whitcomb and Morris 1973: 478). If there are gaps in Genesis 11, then the Flood could be several hundred years before (Whitcomb and Morris 1973: 474-483). It is important to note, we are talking hundreds, not thousands or millions of years.

If you look at the standard archaeology chronological tables the so-called “Prehistoric” period for human history is as followed: The Paleolithic period – 1 million down to 18,000 BC. The Mesolithic period – 18,000 to 8,300 BC. The Neolithic period – 8,300 to 4,500 BC. The Chalcolthic period – 4,500 to 3,300 BC. This is in obvious conflict with the Biblical chronology. This is where evangelical archaeologists need to “rethink early earth’s history.”

Using round numbers for a moment, if the Flood is at approximately 2450 BC and Abraham is about 2000 BC, then one must take the archaeological chronology and compress 1 million years into 450 years! It will take an individual, or individuals, who will devote a lifetime (or at least a doctoral dissertation) to reading excavation reports, archaeological journals, paleontology journals and books on assorted subjects to rethink this chronology. One will have to define what the presuppositions of the evolutionary assumptions are in archaeology and remove the underpinning of those assumptions. Then, using a Biblical framework, harmonize the known archaeological and paleontological data with the Biblical record. Where exactly Job fits in the archaeological chronology, I do not know for sure.

THE FLORA, FAUNA AND MATERIAL CULTURE OF THE LAND OF UZ

The flora, fauna and material culture of the book of Job fits the Aravah / Wilderness. In his discourse on wisdom (Job 28), Job describes the mining operations in the Aravah region. “Surely there is a mine for silver, and a place where gold is refined. Iron is taken from the earth, and copper is smelted from ore. Man puts an end to darkness, and searches every recess for ore in the darkness and the shadow of death. He breaks open a shaft away from people; in places forgotten by feet. They hang far away from men, they swing to and fro” (28:1-4). While scholars debate the precise archaeological period of Job, the Timnah Copper mines just north of Eilat, did have small-scale mining activities during the Chalcolithic period (Rothenberg 1972: 24-64). It is interesting that the rock engravings from Chalcolithic Site 191 have ostriches on them, an animal mentioned several times in the book of Job (1972: 55, Fig. 14; cf. Job 30:29; 39:13-18).

When I take the Tablot Seminary students to the Timnah Copper mines during their January “Biblelands” program, I always have the host of the program, Dr. Richard Rigsby, read Job 28 at the deepest mine. Dr. Rigsby was the one who translated Job in the New King James Bible.

The most intensive exploitation of the Timnah Copper mines was during the Ramesside period by the Egyptians with Midianite help. There was also mining activities during the Roman period and Medieval Arab period.

In his discourse on wisdom, Job also mentions coral. “No mention shall be made of coral or quartz, for the price of wisdom is above rubies (28:18).” Coral was found in the excavations at the Timnah Copper mines. They came from some of the most beautiful coral reefs in the world, the eastern branch of the Red Sea. The port of Eilat is famous for its snorkeling in the coral reefs. Unfortunately, the coral reefs in the Red Sea are dying off today because of pollution. It is obvious; man does not have wisdom!

Elsewhere in the book, the (Red) sea with its sea serpents, fish of the sea, and ships are mentioned (Job 6:3; 7:12; 9:8, 26; 12:8; 26:12).

A number of animals mentioned in Job are indigenous to this region, most of which can been seen in the Hai Bar (Yotvata) Biblical Wildlife Reserve (Clark 1981: 22-35). Avraham Yoffe founded this reserve in 1968 in order to preserve species that were indigenous to this region in antiquity. One of their goals is to breed species that are on the verge of extinction and then have a controlled release of various species back into their open, natural habitat (Clark 1981: 22-35).

At Hai Bar, one can see the wild donkey and onager (Job 6:5; 11:12; 24:3, 5; 39:5-8). Mountain goats, also known as ibex are in the reserve (Job 39:1-4; Ps. 104:18). The deer, or gazelle (Job 39:1); the cobra and viper (20:14-16); jackal (30:29); ostrich (30:29; 39:13-18); hawk (39:26); eagle (9:26; 24:3; 39:27); stork (39:13) and locust (39:20) are in the reserve as well.

In Job 38:39-39:30, God asks Job questions concerning the animal kingdom. Of the ibex He asks, “Do you know the time when the wild mountain goat bears young?” Interestingly, when Dr. Rigsby translated the book of Job for the NKJV, he had not had the privilege of visiting the Hai Bar Reserve. If he had the chance to retranslate Job, he would have changed “wild mountain goat” to “ibex”.

One of my favorite animals in the Hai Bar is the oryx. This animal with its straight horns is classified in the antelope family. It is the Biblical re’em [Heb.] and has been identified by some scholars as the “unicorn” in the King James Bible (Clark 1984: 66-70). It has also been translated “wild ox” in some translations (Job 39:9-12; also mentioned in Num. 32:22; 24:8; Deut. 33:17; Ps. 22:21; 29:6; 92:10; Isa. 34:7). These animals also are depicted on the rock carvings of the Timnah Copper mines. There is also a relief found in Egypt with a side profile of this animal and it looks like it has only one horn! Interestingly, the Los Angeles Zoo presents this possibility on the plaque in front of the oryx pen.

The Cloisters in upper Manhattan has the famous “Unicorn Tapestry.” Usually artists depict the unicorn as a horse with a single horn. Yet if one looks at the unicorn tapestry closely, the unicorn is depicted, not in the equine (horse) family, but rather the antelope family (Clark 1984: 68). Perhaps the oryx is the basis of the unicorn legends. People might have seen a side profile of the oryx from a distance and thought the animal only had one horn.

The Lord asks Job some questions about this creature. “Will the re’em be willing to serve you? Will he bed by your manger? Can you bind the re’em in the farrow with ropes? Or will he plow the valleys behind you? Will you trust him because his strength is great? Or will you leave your labor to him? Will you trust him to bring home your grain, and gather it to your threshing floor?” (39:9-12).

The oryx is a fascinating creature. It can live indefinitely without drinking water, but gets its water through the vegetation that it eats and the dew it licks off stones in the early morning hours. It hardly perspires and has a high concentration of urine and dry feces. It’s white hairs are hollow and create excellent insulation and acts like Styrofoam. Its only problem is man. When threatened, it will stand and fight. With the introduction of firearms, the oryx was hunted and is now on the verge of extinction. The Hai bar Reserve is breeding a herd for controlled release into the Maktesh Ramon.

Another animal that has personality at the Hai Bar is the ostrich. The Lord says of the ostrich, “The wings of the ostrich wave proudly, but are her wings and pinions like the kindly stork’s? For she leaves her eggs on the ground, and warms them in the dust; she forgets that a foot may crush them, or that a wild beast may break them. She treats her young harshly, as though they were not hers; her labor is in vain, without concern, because God deprived her of wisdom, and did not endow her with understanding. When she lifts herself on high, she scorns the horse and its rider” (39:13-18).

The ostrich can weigh up to 150 kg and stand 2.5 meters high. They are birds, but flightless ones. Their wings are too small to allow the bird to fly. However, the wings are good for helping the bird make sudden stops and shape turns as they run at speeds up to 60 kph.

The Lord contrasts the ostrich with the stork. The ostrich lays her eggs in the sand and has other eggs lying around. Some think as decoys for predators or food to nourish the newly hatched chicks. While the ostrich seemingly abandons her eggs, the stork guards them carefully. The stork has its nest high up and watches over the eggs and cares for the young after they are hatched. The Hebrews used the word hesed, usually translated “loving kindness”, as a characteristic of the Lord. He was lovingly loyal to His people, guarding them, watching over them, and nourishing them. The stork had been named chasidah. This afforded the Hebrew a vivid word picture of God’s character.

The Lord says that He deprived the ostrich of wisdom and did not endow it with understanding. Arabs in the Middle East will call someone “stupid as an ostrich” as a sign of reproach. We in the West have a similar concept. A billboard was put up on a road near my house that had an ostrich sticking his head in the ground. The caption said: “Only a bird brain crosses without looking.”

Two animals not in the Hai Bar are the Behemoth (Job 40:15-24) and the Leviathan (Job 41:1-34). Job describes the Behemoth, apparently a dinosaur of some sort, as moving his tail like a cedar. The indication is that he had a thick tail, something an elephant or hippopotamus does not have (40:17). He is found lying under lotus trees and willows, and in the reeds and marshes of the Jordan River (Job 40:21-23), probably just north of the Dead Sea near Jericho. Job knew the Leviathan, a marine dinosaur of some sort, from his travels to the Red Sea, known today as the Gulf of Eilat / Akaba (Job 41).

Footprints of land dinosaurs have been discovered in Israel. In 1962 an Israeli found some three-pronged prints in the bedrock of his garden at Beit Zayit, a suburb of western Jerusalem (Avnimelech 1966). The area was exposed and more tracks uncovered. Most likely the dinosaurs that made these prints were the Struthiomimus and laid down toward the end of Noah’s Flood.

A plant that is indigenous to the area is the broom tree ( rotem Heb.). The white broom is not an edible plant, but can be sold to earn bread (Job 30:1-4). The young men who scorned Job made embers from the root of the white broom to sell in the marketplace. What lowlier livelihood could there be in the eyes of a once wealthy Job than one that involves sitting by a fire night and day, black with soot and reeking with smoke?

Yehuda Feliks (1981), a professor of Biblical and Talmudic Botany, gives a number of examples of plants mentioned in the book of Job and which are indigenous to the region of the Wilderness and Aravah.

JOB’S SPIRITUAL LIFE

What are we to learn from the life of Job? He was a blameless and upright man who feared the Lord (1:1). He would offer sacrifices for his children (1:5) and believed he needed a mediator between him and the Lord (9:33; 25:4; 33:23). Yet one of the most profound statements in the book of Job comes from his lips when he proclaims, “For I know that my Redeemer lives, and He shall stand at last on the earth; and after my skin is destroyed, this I know, that in my flesh I shall see God. Whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!” (19:25-27). Neanderthals had superior physical, cultural, technical and intellectual abilities (Cuozzo 1998). Because of evolutionary influences, I do not think we give the Patriarchs enough credit for knowing about the Lord Jesus Christ. Job knew about the Redeemer and the resurrection.

In reality, the Lord Jesus Christ is the answer to Job’s problems. It was the death of the Lord Jesus on Calvary’s cross that put an end to sin, defeated Satan and conquered the grave so there could be a resurrection. Just as Job trusted the Lord through his difficult situation, so each and every individual needs to trust the Lord Jesus for his or her salvation. A person’s salvation is not dependant upon his or her good works, church membership or baptism. It is dependent solely upon faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone as the one who died and paid for all sins and rose again from the dead.

When it comes to trials and testings in our lives, Dr. Henry Morris summarizes the message of the book of Job in this way: “God’s central message to Job, and to us, is not an explanation of why the righteous suffer, but rather a call to sound belief in creation and an emphasis on our stewardship over creation, under God. Afflictions that come our way can then be placed in proper context. We belong to Him, both by creation and by redemption, and He has the right to do with us whatever He will. We can trust Him, no matter what comes our way in this life, knowing that in the balances of eternity the Judge of all the earth will do right” (Morris 1988: 108, 109).

James, the son of Zebedee, sets forth Job as an example of patience. He writes, “Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. … My brethren, take the prophets, who spoke in the name of the Lord, as an example of suffering and patience. Indeed we count them blessed who endure. You have heard of the perseverance of Job and seen the end intended by the Lord – that the Lord is very compassionate and merciful” (5:7a, 10, 11). Might we learn the lessons of Job as well.

Bibliography

Avnimelech, Moshe A.

1966 Dinosaur Tracks in the Judean Hills. Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.

Clark, Bill

1981 Animals of the Bible. Living Links to Antiquity. Biblical Archaeology Review 7/1: 22-35.

1984 The Biblical Oryx – A New Name for an Ancient Animal. Biblical Archaeology Review 10/5: 66-70.

Crew, Bruce

2002 Did Edom’s Original Territories Extend West of ‘Wadi Arabah? Bible and Spade 15/1: 2-10.

Cuozzo, Jack

1998 Buried Alive. Green Forest, AR: Master Books.

Feliks, Yehuda

1981 Nature and Man in the Bible: Chapters in Biblical Ecology. London, New York: Soncino.

Morris, Henry

1988 The Remarkable Record of Job. Grand Rapids: Baker.

Rothenberg, Beno

1972 Timna. Valley of the Biblical Copper Mines. London: Thames and Hudson.

Whitcomb, John; and Morris, Henry

1973 The Genesis Flood. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed.

]]> http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/job-in-the-land-of-uz/feed/ 0 http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/remember-archaeology-is-not-a-treasure-hunt/ http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/remember-archaeology-is-not-a-treasure-hunt/#comments Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:29:44 +0000 sherri http://www.lifeandland.org/?p=174

By Gordon Franz

Introduction

The headline of the Science Section of the New York Times for Tuesday, September 28, 2004 read, “Solving a Riddle Written in Silver.” I recognized the picture underneath the headline right away. It was a portion of a silver amulet that was discovered in Jerusalem in 1979. The article described the scholarly debate concerning the date assigned to the amulets by the excavator and his team in the latest issue of the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. They claim that these two objects contain the two oldest Biblical text ever discovered to date. Unfortunately the BASOR article is very technical. It discusses the style of the letters and how this is used to date the amulets. This, however, is important to answer the critics who have suggested the amulets were not as old as the excavator claims they were. This article will not deal with the technical aspects of the debate, as important as they are, but rather, I would like to take you behind the scenes and share some of the human interest stories relating to the discovery, unrolling, announcement and publication of these two amulets.

Monday morning, July 30, 1979 is as clear in my mind as if it were yesterday. It was about 6 AM when I arrived at the excavations below the St. Andrew’s Scottish Presbyterian Church, a site that would later be known as Ketef Hinnom, “the shoulder of Hinnom”.

The director of the excavation, Gabriel Barkay, known to his students and friends as Goby, asked me, “Gordon, how energetic are you?” I replied, smiling, “As energetic as a 25 year old person could be.” “Good,” he said, “I want you to clean out that cave over there with three junior high Israeli students.” I was up to the challenge. As I headed for the cave, Goby confided, “By the way, the cave might be loaded. But remember, archaeology is NOT a treasure hunt.” Thus began one of the most interesting weeks of my life.

This was one of the first archaeological excavations I ever worked on and now I was an area supervisor of three junior high Israeli students. I was about to receive a crash course with on the job training in Methodology of Archaeological Excavations 101, also known as, how to excavate a burial cave when you don’t know what you are doing. Fortunately, I was a quick learner and Goby was a great teacher.

The Burial Cave

The repository, the place where the bones and any burial gifts for the dead were deposited after the flesh had decayed, measured 3.69 meters long, by 2 meters wide. The ceiling stood 2.23 meters from the floor. The ceiling had collapsed which suggested to Goby that there might be a sealed layer underneath with archaeological artifacts.

As we began to work, I realized three problems. First, there was a lack of light. We were dependent upon the sunlight or its reflection that came through the 51 cm by 61 cm door of the repository that stood about a meter an a half above us. Once our eyes adjusted to the darker cave we could see fairly well. Second, there was a communication problem. I did not speak any Hebrew and the Israelis did not speak any English. Third, the three junior high students were just that, junior high students.

Goby gave them instructions in Hebrew to clean around any objects they found and leave them in situ so they could be measured, described, drawn and photographed in their original location. Do you think these junior highers listened to Goby or me? At first they would dig little pits until they found something and then hold it up and say, “Tireh ma matzati!” (Translation: “Look what I found!”). Frustration was setting in very quickly.

Goby instructed me to divide the cave into six quadrants and excavate one or two at a time. I put a string across the top of the ceiling of the repository and leveled it with a line level. This was our datum line. Using tape measures and a plumb line, I was able to draw an outline of the cave, then plot and draw many of the pieces that were uncovered. This was a learning experience for me. Goby stressed the importance of measuring all the objects from their lowest point. I am glad I listened to him because years later, it would prove very important in the dating of the amulets.

During one of our breaks the first morning, Goby said to me, “Gordon, I want you to find me an inscription. If you do, I’ll give you a party.” I laughed because I knew from his Archaeology of Jerusalem classes that inscriptions in Jerusalem are very rare. Nevertheless, I half jokingly said, “I’ll find you an inscription on the last day and in the last square.” Little did I know how prophetic that statement would be.

By Tuesday afternoon we had realized just how important this cave was, so we replaced the junior high students with adults from the Institute for Holy Land Studies across the valley on Mt. Zion. Late in the afternoon we had run out of boxes and bags to put our “special finds” in, so Goby and I went shopping for these items. We could not get these items from the Department of Antiquities because they were temporarily closed due to a police investigation.

We had already found bronze and silver objects that had corroded. I asked Goby if there was a chance of finding any gold objects. He answered in the affirmative and mentioned that a burial cave in the Silwan Necropolis across from the City of David had an inscription that mentioned there was no silver or gold buried in the cave and concluded with a curse on anyone who opened it (Avigad 1953: 143). I did not like that last line. Seeing the corroded objects that we had found, I asked Goby what gold would look like when it was uncovered. He said, “Don’t worry, you’ll recognize it when you see it.” How true that was, the next day I found a gold earring that looked like it was made the day before.

We were afraid that if certain elements in the population from the nearby neighborhoods found out about the jewelry objects they would visit the site at night and clean the place out. Since the site was out in the open and people were coming and going, we had to speak in code. Silver objects were called “gray matter,” gold was “lemon,” coins were “buttons,” and bones were called “Napoleons” (as in Bone-apart).

Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday were normal eight-hour days, but time was of the essence. Thursday we worked from 5:30 in the morning until 5:30 at night, 12 hours. Friday we worked from 5:30 in the morning until 9:30 at night, 16 hours. While Goby and I were sifting in the late afternoon, two individuals with black hats and black coats were walking down the Hebron road on their way to the Western Wall for Shabbat prayers. They saw us and we saw them. Goby remarked to me with a serious tone in his voice, “We have to finish tomorrow because if we don’t they will be back Sunday morning with their friends to protest our excavations.” Thanks to Rev. Tom Houston, the pastor of St. Andrews, we were able to use an electrical outlet above the cave. Jim Monson, a professor at the Institute of Holy Land Studies, provided a light bulb and electrical cord so we were able to work into the night.

Saturday morning, August 4, we began work at 6 AM with the help of students and staff of the Institute. We divided into two groups with one excavating inside the cave, and the other outside sifting for the small finds that might have been missed by those in the cave. I was running between the two groups recording and drawing the objects. Earl Hagar was photographing the finds as they were uncovered.

About mid morning, Judy Hadley, an archaeology student at Wheaton College (now a professor at Villanova University) brushed aside some dirt to reveal a rolled up piece of silver. I described it in my journal as a “silver roll” and recorded it as object 31 from Area D, located at a level of 188 cm and then drew it on my plan. It was given basket number 481. Later, it would be called Ketef Hinnom amulet I. Goby suspected it might have an inscription on it, but it first had to be cleaned and unrolled and that would take time. We finished cleaning out the dirt from the cave at 1 AM Sunday morning. It had been a 19-hour marathon day!

Sunday and Monday we continued sifting the material that was excavated after dark on Saturday. Sifting is best done in daylight so we took the dirt from each quadrant and placed them in labeled buckets, boxes, trays or whatever containers we could find so the dirt could be sifted in daylight. A second silver roll came up in the sifting during one of the afternoons. It would become known as Ketef Hinnom amulet II.

Monday, in one of the last buckets to be sifted, a seal was discovered. Using his son’s Play-doh, Goby made an impression of the seal and it revealed the name “Paltah”. Unbeknownst to us, this was only the first inscription.

A summary of the excavation has been published in preliminary form, but not a final excavation report (Franz 1986; Barkay 1994).

Opening the Scrolls

The two silver amulets were given an initial cleaning at the labs of Tel Aviv University. Museums in England and Germany were given the opportunity to unroll the objects, but declined because they were afraid of damaging the fragile objects. Three years after their discovery, the delicate job of opening them was finally entrusted to Joseph “Dodo” Shenhav of the Israel Museum. Under his able direction, the amulets were successfully unrolled during the fall of 1982 (Rasovsky, Bigelajzen and Shenhav 1992: 192-194).

On one Friday morning, Dr. Yaakov Meshorer, the curator of the numismatics section of the Israel Museum, looked at one of the amulets under a microscope. He recognized the paleo-Hebrew writing. He tried to call Goby but because Goby had just moved he did not have a phone in his apartment. Yaakov left a message with Goby’s wife saying “Urgent, call Yaakov.” In Israel, when somebody gets a message like that it usually means that someone died and the funeral is that day. When Goby finally got the message he quickly called Dr. Meshorer who conveyed the good news about the writing on one of the amulets. Unfortunately for Goby, it was Friday afternoon and the museum labs would be closed until Sunday morning, so he had to wait until then to view the inscription.

That Friday night I took some students from the Institute to their homes after Shabbat dinner and vespers. Since I was in the neighborhood, I decided to stop by Goby’s new apartment to see his succa (booth made of branches for the Jewish holiday Succoth) that his family had on their porch. He said with excitement in his voice, “Gordon, I have good news for you. One of the scrolls was opened and it has the word yod – hey – vav – hey on it.” My Hebrew still wasn’t that good, but I recognized the spelling right away. It was the name of the Lord, YHWH. This was the first time the Lord’s name was found in an archaeological context in Jerusalem.

Goby entrusted the drawing of the two scrolls to one of his graduate students from the Institute, Bill J. Wilson. He would take the scrolls from my room, because I had them under lock and key, to the Israel Museum in order to draw each and every line he could see using an electronic microscope, the best in Israel at the time. It was a painstaking job, but Bill did an outstanding job of recovering and drawing 90% of the inscription but it still did not make sense.

The First Public Announcement

The first public announcement of this discovery was on Sunday afternoon, January 9, 1983, at a public lecture at the Rockefeller Museum sponsored by the Albright Institute and Hebrew Union College. These lectures usually last from three until four in the afternoon. As it turned out, this lecture was hosted and moderated by Professor Avraham Biran, the doyen of Israeli archaeology. There was a bit of irony in this setup. Avraham Biran is notorious for going over his allotted time when he presents a paper at professional meetings. Of course, no moderator would have the heart to stop an enthusiastic Dr. Biran in the middle of an exciting presentation, much to the consternation of the presenter that follows him! On the other hand, when he is moderating a session, he is famous for stopping a presenter in mid sentence if the person went over his or her allotted time.

Before the lecture to a packed auditorium, Goby told Dr. Biran about the two amulets and he would announce the discovery that afternoon. When he was introduced, Dr. Biran told the audience that Goby had an important discovery to announce.

The lecture started promptly on time (vintage Biran). Bill Wilson and I were sitting in the second row, right behind Dr. Biran. We were amused to see him sitting on the edge of his seat with excitement as each slide was put up on the screen showing a different discovery. Goby started his lecture with the topography of the site, then he talked about the Byzantine church and monastic complex. He moved on to the Roman burials and finally the Iron Age burial caves. I looked at my watch and it was five minutes to four and Goby had not started to talk about Cave 25. I thought to myself, “Biran is going to yank Goby off the stage even before he has time to reveal the amulets.” At 4 PM Goby finally got around to talking about Cave 25 and proceeded to talk about each discovery in the cave for another 15 minutes. Finally, the last five minutes he dropped the “bombshell” about the amulets and the Name of the Lord appearing in an archaeological excavation in Jerusalem for the first time. With that, Goby finished and the audience broke out in a thunderous applause. Avraham Biran was beside himself with excitement and publicly congratulated Goby on his “sensational” discovery.

After Goby talked with his colleagues and friends, I had a chance to speak with him. I said, “Goby, knowing Biran’s habit of cutting people off in mid sentence, did you deliberately go overtime?” He gave me a devilish grin and said, “Yes.” To this day, Goby is the only person known to have gone overtime during a session moderated by Professor Biran and gotten away with it.

The Oldest Biblical Texts

In 1986, the Israel Museum wanted to have a “display of the month” devoted to the excavations at Ketef Hinnom. In preparation for the exhibit, Adi Yardeni of the Israel Museum redrew the amulets. One morning she had a chance conversation with a religious colleague at the museum. She mentioned she was drawing a text with the name of the LORD written three times on it. He replied, “Three times? Maybe it’s the priestly blessing.” When Yardeni returned to her work, she tried to read the passage of Numbers 6:24-26 into the inscription. Much to her amazement, it worked. Thus, the first Biblical inscription from the First Temple period was deciphered (Rabinovich 1986: 16, 17).

When the exhibition opened at the Israel Museum in June of 1986, the announcement of the two oldest Biblical texts was made. The next day it was in every newspaper in America.

On Saturday, June 21, 1986, I was attending a church picnic in New Jersey. One of the elderly gentleman from church asked if I had heard about an important Biblical discovery in Israel. I asked him questions about it, but he was vague on the details. He just remembered it was the oldest Biblical text ever discovered. He promised to bring the article from the paper to church the next day.

The next day he showed me the article. I got the shock of my life. As I was reading the article I began to realize, “This is the excavation I worked on. Those amulets were in my room. I’ve held them in my hand!” That afternoon I entertained the preacher for the day, Mr. T. Ernest Wilson, a retired missionary from Angola. In the course of our conversation he asked me if I knew anything about this discovery. I smiled and said, “Would you like to see a drawing of it?” At this point the drawings had not been published and Bill Wilson and I were the only ones in America that had a drawing of the amulets.

The Publication of the Texts

Archaeological protocol gives the right of publication in a timely fashion to the director of the excavation or to someone designated by the excavator. Goby has always been a thorough and meticulous scholar and will only publish something after he has completely studied the issue.

When I was in graduate school (1986-87) I was invited to give a paper on the amulets at the Southeast Regional Evangelical Theological Society meeting in Columbia, SC. I called Goby to ask his permission to give the paper. He hesitated at first, but then asked, “Will the people in the audience be theologians or archaeologists?” I replied, “Theologians.” He said, “Fine, go ahead and give the paper.” I appreciated Goby giving me permission because he still had not published the amulets in a technical fashion. The first article in Hebrew was in 1989 (Barkay 1989) and then translated and published in English in 1992 (Barkay 1992).

A Description of the Amulets

The larger amulet, Ketef Hinnom I, was 27.5 mm wide, with a diameter of 11 mm. In the center was a hole 2 mm in diameter, used to thread a string through in order to wear around the neck. When unrolled, the plaque measured 97 mm long and 27 mm wide. The weight of the object was 7.6 grams.

This amulet was almost pure silver. The metal analysis showed a 99% silver content and a 1% copper. These plaques might be the beaten (hammered) silver brought from Tarshish mentioned in Jeremiah 10:9.

The letters were incised on the plaques. Jeremiah, a contemporary of these amulets, describes how the writing was possibly done, “with a pen of iron, with a point of diamond” (17:1, NKJV).

At the top of the amulet is a group of letters that at first did not make sense. After re-photographing the amulets in 1994, the group of letters became readable (Barkay, Lundberg, Vaughn, Zuckerman, Zuckerman 2003). With more letters, the text became more understandable. The first fourteen lines read, “…]YHW … the grea[t ... who keeps] the covenant and [G}raciousness toward those who love [him] and those who keep [His commandments ... ...]. The Eternal? [...]. [the?] blessing more than any [sna]re and more than Evil. For redemption is in Him. For YHWH is our restorer [and] rock” (Barkay, Lundberg, Vaughn and Zuckerman 2004: 61). It was observed that the “substance of the reading for lines 2-7 is reasonably secure because these lines fit, at least loosely, a biblical parallel attested to in Dan. 9:4 and Neh. 1:5 (with a similar reading in Deut. 7:9)” (2004:55).

The end of the amulet has part of the priestly blessing. The last portion of it, however, was lost when the scroll was unrolled.

The smaller amulet, Ketef Hinnom II, is 11.5 mm wide and 5.5 mm in diameter in a rolled up position. Unrolled, it is 39.2 mm long and 11 mm wide. Unfortunately, the bottom third was missing. The priestly blessing on it says, “The LORD bless you and keep you; The LORD make His face to shine upon you, and give you peace.” The passage in Numbers 6:24-26 upon which it is based has fifteen words in it. The scribe of the amulet left out five words in order to create a shorter blessing. And we thought the Reader’s Digest Bible was a modern invention!

The Dating of the Amulets

The burial cave in which the amulets were found was carved in the mid-seventh century BC. The pottery assemblage comes from three discernable periods. The first period is the end of the Iron Age. This pottery style parallels the pottery from Lachish, Level II, and the City of David, Level X. These levels are dated to the end of the Judean Monarchy, or 587 BC. The second period is the Babylonian period when most of the Judeans were in captivity in Babylon. The prophet Jeremiah mentions people who remained behind after the Babylonians carried away, or killed, most of the Judeans (Jer. 41:5; 39:10). The third period represented was the Hellenistic period. The few finds from this period were confined to the area around the entrance of the repository of the burial cave.

Based on the style of the letters, or paleography, Goby dated the amulets to the late seventh century BC, or very early sixth century BC (Barkay 1992). Several scholars challenged this date and argued that it was much later, during the Hellenistic period. One of the reasons was the existence of the eight Hellenistic pottery pieces in the cave.

The importance of careful records cannot be overestimated. Goby had to go back and look at the journal that I kept and the plan of the burial cave with the objects plotted on them. It was observed that the average depth of the deposits in the repository was 65 cm deep. The Ketef Hinnom I amulet was found 7 cm above the floor. This demonstrated that the amulet was one of the earliest objects thrown into the repository. Ketef Hinnom II was found in Area A, the back quadrant. Goby observed that this was also one of the earliest deposits.

On paleographic grounds, these two inscriptions should be dated to the end of the seventh century BC. This fits well with the corresponding archaeological data as well as historical considerations. Clearly these are the two oldest Biblical texts found to date. They predate the Dead Sea Scrolls by at least 400 years.

Implication for Biblical Studies

There is at least one important implication for Biblical studies. According to the critical scholars, Numbers 6:23-27 should be attributed to the so-called “P source” which is generally dated to the Post-Exilic, or Persian Period. It is obvious that we now have two examples of this text that were written prior to the Babylonian captivity. This makes it impossible to assume that the Priestly Benediction was crystallized during the Post-Exilic period.

A word of caution is in order. These amulets cannot be used to prove when the priestly blessing was originally composed, or even who wrote it. The only thing they can tell us is that at the end of the seventh century BC the priestly blessing existed. We have to turn to the Bible to find out that Aaron, the brother of Moses, first gave the blessing and Moses wrote it down sometime during the last half of the 15^th century BC.

Conclusion

These amulets were worn around the neck to protect the wearer from evil or to surround themselves with the name of the Lord for protection. We observe the same phenomenon today when people wear religious objects, hoping that God would be gracious to them and protect them. It seems that the Biblical passages are added on at the end of a “prayer request” for protection from some evil person or calamity, or for blessing in the wearer’s life.

These two silver objects with Scripture verses on them could be the forerunner to the phylacteries of the later periods. It is interesting, Torah instructed the people to “wear the Word of God.” In Exodus 13:9,16 it says, “And it shall serve as a sign to you on your hand, and as a reminder on your forehead, that the law of the LORD may be in your mouth” (NKJV, cf. also Deut. 6:8; 11:18; Prov. 6:21; 1:9: 3:3, 22; 7:3).

The people literally wore the Word of God. The LORD gave this injunction in order to keep the Word of God constantly before His people, that they might learn it and obey it.

Even today this is still a good practice. In memorizing the Word of God, a poster or picture with a Scripture verse on it is helpful. But more important than wearing the Word of God, or hanging it on our wall, is to have it abiding in our hearts. King David declared, “Thy Word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against Thee” (Ps. 119:11 NKJV).

Bibliography

Avigad, Nahman
1953 The Epitaph of a Royal steward from Siloam Village. Israel Exploration Journal 3: 137-152.

Barkay, Gabriel
1989 The Priestly Benediction of the Ketef Hinnom Plaques. Cathedra 52: 37-76 (Hebrew).

______1992 The Priestly Benediction on Silver Plaques from Ketef Hinnom in Jerusalem. Tel Aviv 19: 139-192.

______1994Excavations at Ketef Hinnom in Jerusalem. Pp. 85-106 in Ancient Jerusalem Revealed. Edited by H. Geva. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Barkay, Gabriel; Lundberg, Marilyn; Vaughn, Andrew; and Zuckerman, Bruce
2004 The Amulets from Ketef Hinnom: A New Edition and Evaluation. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 334: 41-71.

Barkay, Gabriel; Lundberg, Marilyn; Vaughn, Andrew; Zuckerman, Bruce; Zuckerman, Kenneth
2003 The Challenge of Ketef Hinnom. Near Eastern Archaeology 66: 162-171.

Franz, Gordon
1986 The Excavations at St. Andrews Church in Jerusalem. Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin 27: 5-24.

Rabinovich, Abraham
1986 Word for Word. The Jerusalem Post International Edition. August 9, pages 16,17.

Rasovsky, Marima; Bigelajzen, David; and Shenhav, Dodo
1992 Cleaning and Unrolling the Silver Plaques. Tel Aviv 19: 192-194.

]]> http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/remember-archaeology-is-not-a-treasure-hunt/feed/ 0 http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/is-mount-sinai-in-saudi-arabia/ http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/is-mount-sinai-in-saudi-arabia/#comments Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:22:26 +0000 sherri http://www.lifeandland.org/?p=169

By Gordon Franz

[Disclaimer: If there are any similarities in this discussion between Ashurbanipal II and his Assyrian troops and Saddam Hussein and the Republican guards, it is purely coincidental. Having said that, it is my position Saddam Hussein is not discussed in the Book of Nahum, nor are automobiles on the LA Freeway (cf. Nahum 2:3)!]

If I mentioned the city Nineveh, what would come to your mind? Most likely you would say Jonah. We’ve all heard the story about Jonah being swallowed by the great fish and then going to Nineveh to preach against the city. His message was short and to the point, “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.” The city, from the king to the dogcatcher, repented. Have you ever wondered what happened to Nineveh after that? The short prophetic book of Nahum tells us “the rest of the story.”

During the summer of 2002, I had the privilege of spending three days in the British Museum in London. Wow, what an experience! I have been studying and teaching archaeology for over twenty-five years and never had the opportunity to see the many objects on display in the museum that have Biblical connections

The main interest of my visit was the objects in the Assyrian Rooms, especially the rooms containing the bas-reliefs of Ashurbanipal II (ruled 668-631 BC), the last great king of Assyria. Several years ago I taught the book of Nahum at my home church. I endeavored to illustrate my messages with archaeological discoveries relating to the text. In my studies, I was surprised at the number of references to objects in the British Museum. When I first visited the rooms with the reliefs, I was not disappointed. With the book of Nahum opened before me, most of the word pictures in the book could be illustrated, in one way or another, from the reliefs of Ashurbanipal II. In this article we will visit the galleries associated with the book of Nahum and visualize the “rest of the story.”

The Date of the Book of Nahum

Scholars have long debated the date of the book of Nahum. A wide range of dates has been suggested, from the 8^th century BC (Feinberg 1951:126,148) to the Maccabean period, early 2^nd century BC (Haupt). Yet the book gives us internal chronological parameters in order to date the book. Nahum describes the conquest of Thebes (No-Amon) by Ashurbanipal II in 663 BC as a past event, thus the book could not have been written before that date. The entire book is a prediction of the fall of the city of Nineveh in 612 BC. Thus, the book was written somewhere between 663 and 612 BC.

A case can be made for the proclamation of the message, and writing of the book, about 650 BC. If this is the correct date, the Spirit of God used this book to put King Manasseh into a position where he could come to faith and to bring Judah back to the LORD. Up until this point in the reign of King Manasseh, the kingdom, led by the king, was “more evil than the nations whom the LORD had destroyed before the children of Israel” (2 Chron. 33:9). The LORD sent seers (prophets) to speak to the nation, but the nation would not listen to the Word of God (33:10, 18). While not named, one of the seers was probably Nahum. His vision concerning the total destruction of Nineveh would be seen by the Assyrian overlords as fomenting rebellion and insurrection, and possibly seen as support for Shamash-shum-ukin, the king of Babylon, in his current civil war with his brother Ashurbanipal II. If a copy of the book of Nahum fell into the hands of the Assyrian intelligence community, King Manasseh would have had to give account for this book. The Biblical records state, “the LORD brought upon them [Judah] the captains of the army of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh with hooks, bound him with bronze fetters, and carried him off to Babylon” (2 Chron. 33:11). This event would have transpired in 648 BC, the year that Ashurbanipal II temporarily ruled Babylon after he eliminated his brother as a result of the four-year civil war (Rainey 1993: 160).

Dragging someone off with hooks in their nose would be in keeping with Ashurbanipal’s character. In the excavations of Sam’al (Zincirli) a stela was found with Esarhaddon holding two leashes attached to the nose-rings of Baal of Tyre and Usanahuru, a crown prince of Egypt. Flanking the stela, watching intently, is Esarhaddon’s son, Ashurbanipal on the left and his brother Samas-sumu-ukin on the right. Ashurbanipal observed his fathers brutality and followed his example (Parpola and Watanabe 1988:20, 21).

During Manasseh’s interrogation by Ashurbanipal II (and it must have been a brutal one, the text uses the word “afflicted”), he “implored the LORD his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed to Him; and He received His entreaty, heard his supplication, and brought him back to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the LORD was God” (2 Chron. 33:12,13).

Upon his return to Jerusalem, Manasseh began building projects in the city as well as elsewhere in Judah and removed the idols and altars he had placed in the Temple (2 Chron. 33:14-15). “He also repaired the altar of the LORD, sacrificed peace offerings and thanks offerings on it, and commanded Judah to serve the LORD God of Israel” (33:16). This activity was in accord with what Nahum had challenged the people to do. “Behold, on the mountains the feet of him who brings good tidings, who proclaims peace! O Judah, keep your appointed feast, perform your vows. For the wicked one shall no more pass through you; he is utterly cut off” (1:15). The challenge was for Judeans to renew their pilgrimages to Jerusalem for the thrice-yearly feasts of Pesach (Passover), Shav’uot (Pentecost) and Succoth (Tabernacles) (Ex. 23:14-17; 34:22-24; Deut. 16:16, 17). There was also a command for the remnant that faithfully prayed to the Lord desiring to bring the nation back to Biblical worship and to bring the king to the Lord. They were to perform the vow they had made to the Lord. The Bible records a half-hearted attempt to return to Biblical worship. “Nevertheless, the people still sacrificed on the high places, but only to the LORD their God” (2 Chron. 33:17). The only true place of worship was the Temple in Jerusalem, not the high places.

Nahum prophesied the destruction of Nineveh, the capital of the sole superpower, at the zenith of Assyria’s power and glory. He boldly proclaimed a message that was not popular, nor “politically correct.” In fact, most Judeans would think his prediction of the downfall of Nineveh was impossible.

The Reliefs From Ashurbanipal’s Palace in the British Museum

Ashurbanipal II reigned in Nineveh from 668-631 BC. At the beginning of his reign he lived in Sennacherib’s “palace without rival.” Ashurbanipal refurbished the palace about 650 BC. In Room XXXIII, he placed his own wall reliefs. Ashurbanipal’s other major construction project was the North Palace for the crown prince (Russell 1999: 154).

Nahum was from Elkosh (Nah. 1:1). Some scholars have suggested Elkosk was located at the village of Al-Qush, 25 miles north of modern day Mosul, a city that is across the Tigres River from Nineveh. These scholars take this position because: (1) the names are similar, (2) the local Christian tradition holds that Nahum was from there and his tomb was there, and (3) Nahum’s writings show his familiarity with the city of Nineveh. Some speculate that Nahum was an Israelite captive who lived in the area and was an eyewitness to the city.

There is, however, another possibility. Elkosh was in southern Judah and Nahum was part of the Judean emissary that brought the yearly tribute from King Manasseh to Nineveh. While in Nineveh, he would have observed the broad roads (Nah. 2:4), walls (Nah. 2:5), gates (Nah. 2:6), temples and idols (1:14), and its vast wealth (2:9). I’m sure the minister of propaganda would have shown him the wall reliefs in Ashurbanipal’s residence. These reliefs were intended “as propaganda to impress, intimidate and instigate by representing the might of Assyrian power and the harsh punishment of rebels” (Comelius 1989: 56). Or as Esarhaddon would say, “For the gaze of all my foes, to the end of days, I set it [stela] up” (Luckenbill 1989: II: 227).

Let us examine the reliefs found on the walls of Ashurbanipal’s palace and see how they illustrate the word-pictures used by Nahum in his book.

Blasphemy against Assur (Nahum 1:14)

In 650 BC, Nahum would have seen the newly opened Room XXXIII in the Southwest Palace of Nineveh (Sennacherib’s “palace without rival”) with the reliefs depicting the campaign against Teumman of Elam and Dunanu of Gambula in 653 BC. One particular relief would have caught his attention (WA 124802, Slab 4). On it, a pair of Elamite captives is being depicted as having their tongues pulled out and being flayed. The caption above stated, “Mr. (blank) and Mr. (blank) spoke great insults against Assur, the god, my creator. Their tongues I tore out, their skins I flayed” (Russell 1999: 180; Gerardi 1988: 31). These two individuals are identified in Ashurbanipal’s annals as Mannu-ki-ahhe and Nabu-usalli (Russell 1999: 163).

It was with great boldness that Nahum proclaimed, “The LORD has given a command concerning you [the king of Assyria]: ‘Your name shall be perpetuated no longer. Out of the house of your gods I will cut off the carved image and molded image. I will dig your grave, for you are vile’” (1:14). These words were a direct attack on Assur and the rest of the Assyrian deities, as well as the king. Yet Nahum boldly proclaimed the message God gave him, in spite of the potential threat to his life!

Chariots, Not Volkswagens! (Nahum 2:3,4)

The second chapter of Nahum describes the fall of the city of Nineveh to the Babylonians and Medes in 612 BC. He describes in detail the shields, chariots and spears of the Assyrian foes. While we do not have any contemporary Babylonian reliefs of their chariots, there are Assyrian reliefs of Assyrian chariots riding furiously. These chariots are depicted on the reliefs of the Assyrians attacking the Arabs.

Nahum mentions the broad roads of Nineveh. Ashurbanipal’s grandfather, Sennacherib, was the one who improved the streets of Nineveh. In the “Bellino cylinder” he boasts, “I (Sennacherib) widened its (Nineveh’s) squares, made bright the avenues and streets and caused them to shine like the day” (1:61).

In the context of the book, Nahum sees a vision of chariots in the streets of Nineveh, not Volkswagens, as some prophecy teachers have speculated!

Take the Booty and Run! (Nahum 2:9,10)

Nineveh was the Fort Knox of mid-7^th century BC Mesopotamia. On every Assyrian campaign they always removed the silver, gold and precious stones and other items from the cities that they sacked. When they bragged about the booty that was taken, silver and gold always topped the list. As an example, after the fall of No-Amon (Thebes), Ashurbanipal bragged that he took: “Silver, gold, precious stones, the goods of his palace, all there was, brightly colored and linen garments, great horses, the people, male and female, two tall obelisks. … I removed from their positions and carried them off to Assyria. Heavy plunder, and countless, I carried away from Ni’ (Thebes)” (ARAB II: 296, para. 778). There are also reliefs of Assyrian scribes writing down the booty that was taken from other cities.

In Nahum’s vision he saw someone say, “Take spoil of silver! Take spoil of gold! There is no end of treasure, or wealth of every desirable prize. She is empty, desolate and waste!” (2:9,10a). The Babylonian Chronicles (BM 21.901) described the spoils taken from Nineveh by the Babylonians and the Medes in these terms: “Great quantities of spoil from the city, beyond counting, they carried off” (ARAB II: 420, para. 1178).

One of the excavators of Nineveh has commented, that there has been very little gold and silver found in the ruins of the city. The Medes and Babylonians “cleaned house” after they conquered the city, just like Nahum predicted.

Diodorus, a Greek historian from Sicily, writing in the 1^st century BC, described the final hours of the king of Nineveh, Sardanapallus, in these words: “In order that he might not fall into the hands of the enemy, he built and enormous pyre in his palace, heaped upon it all his gold and silver as well as every article of the royal wardrobe, and then … he consigned [his concubines and eunuchs] and himself and his palace to the flame” (Book 2. 27:2; LCL 1:441). Unfortunately the Babylonian account is broken at this point. It says, “On that day Sin-shar-ishkun, king of Assyria, fled from the city (?) …” (ARAB II: 420; para. 1178).

If Diodorus is correct, the king of Assyria tried to take his wealth with him. At best, the gold and silver melted and were collected later. The Bible is clear that people cannot take their wealth with them to the afterlife, but it can be sent on ahead. The Lord Jesus admonishes His disciples to “lay up for themselves treasures in heaven” (Matt. 619-21).

The Lion Hunt (Nahum 2:11-13)

David Dorsey, in his outstanding book, The Literary Structure of the Old Testament (1999:301-305), places the lion’s den verses (2:11-13) at the center of the book’s chiastic structure. In commenting on the pattern of the structure he says, “This progression underscores the certainty of Nineveh’s fall: Yahweh’s prophet not only believes that it will happen; he composes dirges as though it has already happened. The placement of the eulogy over the ‘lion’s den’ in the book’s highlighted central position reinforces this sense of certainty” (1999:304, italics mine).

Nahum used the lion and lion hunt motifs that both the Judeans and Assyrians would have been well familiar. The Assyrians had a long history of depicting their king and warriors as mighty lions or great lion hunters (Johnston 2001:296-301). The Bible also depicts the Assyrian warriors as roaring lions (Isa. 5:29) and Yahweh as a lion who will tear up His prey and carry it off to His lair (Hosea 5:14, 15; 13:7, 8; Johnston 2001:294, 295).

According to Ashurbanipal’s annals, at the beginning of his reign, two deities, Adad and Ea blessed the land of Assyria with plenty of rain. This rain caused the forests to thrive and the reeds in the marshes to flourish. This blessing resulted in a population explosion among the lions. They exerted their influence in the hills and on the plain by attacking herds of cattle, flocks of sheep and people. Many were killed (ARAB II: 363, para. 935). Ashurbanipal II, following in the footsteps of his predecessors, took charge of the lion hunts in order to control the lion population (ARAB II: 392, para. 1025).

Ashurbanipal also engaged in lion hunting as a sport. Apparently lions were captured alive and put in cages in the king’s garden in Nineveh and used for staged lion hunts (Weissert 1997:339-358). One relief that was found in the North Palace at Nineveh and had apparently fallen into Room S from a second floor had three panels depicting a lion hunt. On the top panel, a lion is released from a cage and Ashurbanipal is shooting him with arrows. The central panel is interesting because it shows the bravery of the king. On the right side of the panel, soldiers are distracting a lion. On the left side, Ashurbanipal sneaks up and grabs the lion by the tail as he rears to his hind legs. [I dare anybody to try this stunt at a zoo today!] The inscription above says, “I, Ashurbanipal, king of the universe, king of Assyria, in my lordly sport I seized a lion of the plain by his tail and at the command of Urta, Nergal, the gods, my allies, I smashed his skull with the club of my hand” (ARAB II: 391, para. 1023). The king attributes his bravery to the deities. Dr. J. E. Reade, one of the keepers of the Western Asiatic Antiquities at the British Museum has observed, “It is notable that much of the lion’s tail has been chipped away, so that the lion has been, as it were, set loose; this defacement was probably the action, at once humorous and symbolic, of some enemy soldier busy ransacking the palace in 612 B.C.” (Curtis and Reade 1995:87). On the lower panel, Ashurbanipal is pouring out a wine libation over the carcasses of four lions. In the inscription above, the king boasts of his power by saying, “I, Ashurbanipal, king of the universe, king of Assyria, whom Assur and Ninlil have endowed with surpassing might. The lions which I slew, – the terrible bow of Ishtar, lady of battle, I aimed at them. I brought an offering, I poured out wine over them” (ARAB II: 392, para. 1021). The king attributes his mighty power to the gods, Assur and Ninlil.

In contrast, Ashurbanipal boasts that kings and lions are powerless before him. At the beginning of one of his annals (Cylinder F) he states, “Among men, kings, and among the beasts, lions (?) were powerless before my bow. I know (the art) of waging battle and combat. … A valiant hero, beloved of Assur and Ishtar, of royal lineage, am I” (ARAB II: 347, para. 896). Ashurbanipal has tied his lion hunting and military conquests together in one statement.

In the vision of Nahum concerning Nineveh, Nahum asks a rhetorical question, “Where is the dwelling of the lions, and the feeding place of the young lions, where the lion walked, the lioness and lion’s cub, and no one made them afraid?” (2:11). He sees Nineveh as a lions den that has been destroyed and the lions are gone. The “prey” in verse 12 is apparently the booty that the Assyrians have taken from all the cities they conquered in recent memory. In verse 13, the LORD states directly, “Behold, I am against you. I will burn your chariots in smoke, and the sword shall devour your young lions; I will cut off your prey from the earth, and the voice of your messenger shall be heard no more.” The phrase “the sword shall devour your young lions” draws our attention to another relief showing Ashurbanipal thrusting a sword through a lion. The inscription associate with this relief says, “I, Ashurbanipal, king of the universe, king of Assyria, in my lordly sport, they let a fierce lion of the plain out of the cage and on foot … I stabbed him later with my iron girdle dagger and he died” (ARAB II: 392, para. 1024).

The book of Nahum sets forth an ironic reversal of the Assyrian usage of the lion motif. Dr. Gordon Johnston has observed, “The extended lion metaphor in Nahum 2:11-13 includes the two major varieties of the Neo-Assyrian lion motif: the depiction of the Assyrian king and his warriors as mighty lions, and the royal lion hunt theme. While the Assyrians kept these two motifs separate, Nahum dovetailed the two, but in doing so he also reversed their original significance. While the Assyrian warriors loved to depict themselves as mighty lions hunting their prey, Nahum pictured them as lions that would be hunted down. The Assyrian kings also boasted that they were mighty hunters in royal lion hunts; Nahum pictured them as the lion being hunted in the lion hunt. By these reversals Nahum created an unexpected twist on Assyrian usage. According to Nahum the Assyrians were like lions, to be sure; however, not in the way that they depicted themselves: rather than being like lions on the prowl for prey, the hunters would become the hunted!” (2001: 304).

Nahum was keenly aware of the culture that he was writing to and was able to effectively use it to convey a powerful message from the Lord.

Nineveh, a Bloody City (Nahum 3:1)

Nahum pronounced “woe to the bloody city (of Nineveh)” (3:1). The city and the Assyrian Empire had a well-earned reputation for being bloody. Just a casual glance at the reliefs in the British Museum from the palaces of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal show the “gory and bloodcurdling history as we know it” (Bleibtreu 1991:52). There are reliefs with people being impaled, decapitated, flayed, tongues pulled out, making people grind the bones of their dead ancestors, even vultures plucking out the eyes of the dead!

One panel graphically shows the disrespect for human life. On it, a commander is presenting a bracelet to an Assyrian soldier who had decapitated the five or six heads at his feet. There are two scribes behind him recording the event. This bracelet, perhaps a medal of valor, is worth five or six lives! In Assyrian thinking, life was cheap.

Countless Corpse (Nahum 3:3)

There is an old adage that says, “What goes around, comes around.” The Bible would use an agricultural metaphor, “You reap what you sow” (cf. Gal. 6:7). This is true in the geo-political realm as well as the personal realm. The Assyrians, over their long history, were brutal and barbaric people. Yet there came a point in history where God said, “Enough is enough,” and He removed the offending party (Nahum 2:13; 3:4).

Nineveh fell in 612 BC, yet is wasn’t until the 1989 and 1990 seasons of the University of California, Berkeley excavations in the Halzi Gate that graphic evidence of the final battle of Nineveh was revealed. Upwards to 16 bodies were excavated in the gate, all slain (Stronach and Lumsden 1992: 227-233; Stronach 1997: 315-319). Archaeological excavations have vividly confirmed the words of the Biblical text. “Horsemen charge with bright sword and glittering spear. There is a multitude of slain, a great number of bodies, countless corpses – they stumble over the corpses” (Nahum 3:3).

The Fall of No-Amon (Thebes) (Nahum 3:8-11)

Nahum taunts the Assyrians for trusting in their fortifications for protection and security. Nineveh was a heavily fortified city, yet the Lord had decreed its demise.

He asked rhetorically, “Are you better than No-Amon (Thebes) that was situated by the (Nile) River, that had the waters around her, whose rampart was the sea, whose wall was the sea?” (3:8). No-Amon is the Egyptian word for “city of (the deity) Amon” commonly known today by its Greek name, Thebes.

Esarhaddon had taken Egypt on his second invasion in 671 BC. When he died, the Egyptians revolted and Ashurbanipal went to Egypt to put down this revolt. He cleared the Delta of the Cushites (Ethiopians) in 667/666 BC and the Cushite ruler, Taharqa fled to No-Amon. On Ashurbanipal’s first campaign against Egypt, he took 22 kings from the seacoast, with their armies, to help him fight the Egyptians. Ashurbanipal claims that he “made those kings with their forces (and) their ships accompany me by sea and by land” (Rainey 1993:157). One of those kings was Manasseh, king of Judah, with his army. On his second campaign, he went to No-Amon and defeated the city and razed it in 663 BC. There were Judeans in the Assyrian army that saw this event. When they heard or read the words of Nahum they would have been encouraged. The Assyrians were able to defeat a strong and impermeable No-Amon, and God would now fulfill His Word and Nineveh will fall.

Ashurbanipal had a relief of the fall of No-Amon. It is labeled “an Egyptian fortress” in the British Museum. Yadin cautiously states, “The crowning achievement of Ashurbanipal’s expeditionary force to Egypt was the capture and destruction of Thebes ‘of the hundred gates’ (the Egyptian capital during the XXVth Dynasty) in the year 663 BC. It is most probable that this is the event which the Assyrian artist depicted in such detail here in his portrayal of an attack on an Egyptian city” (1963:462). If this is the case, we have a very graphic illustration of the Biblical text. The top of the relief has the Assyrians besieging the city with ladders, soldiers undermining the walls and a soldier torching the gate. A close examination of the defenders reveals that there are two ethnic groups defending the city. One group with the Negroid features is the Ethiopians and the others are the Egyptians. Nahum said, “Ethiopia and Egypt were her strength. And it was boundless” (3:9a).

On the left of the relief, above the Nile River, are Ethiopian captives being taken out of No-Amon. A careful examination of these captives reveals chains on their ankles. Nahum prophesized, “Yet she was carried away, she went into captivity. … They cast lots for her honorable men, and all her great men were bound in chains” (3:10).

Another remarkable illustration of the Biblical text is the group of twelve Egyptians to the right side of the relief awaiting their fate on the banks of the Nile River. As I stared at the group I noticed three children. Two were seated on the donkey and one was on the shoulder of his father. I could not help but wonder if these children knew the fate that awaited them. The words of the prophet were, “Her young children also were dashed to pieces at the head of every street” (3:10). Thankfully the Assyrian artist did not have the audacity to carve this scene on the relief!

An interesting side note should be mentioned. Manasseh was with Ashurbanipal II when he conquered No-Amon, the city of the deity Amon, in 663 BC. That was the year that a son was born to him, the future king of Judah, Ammon. Apparently Manasseh named his son after the Egyptian deity Amon. This is consistent with Manasseh’s character of following after other gods. But why an Egyptian god and not an Assyrian one, I do not know.

The Fig Trees and the Forts (Nahum 3:12)

After asking Nineveh, “Are you better than No-Amon?” Nahum proceeds to describe the rapid fall of the cities and fortressed surrounding Nineveh. He says, “All your strongholds are fig trees with ripened figs: if they are shaken, they will fall into the mouth of the eater” (3:13). When the figs are ripe, they drop easily from the tree when shaken. This is a word-picture that the Ninevites knew from personal experience. Figs were common in Nineveh, as attested to by their appearance on reliefs.

A Locust at the Banquet (Nahum 3:15b-17)

One of the most pathetic reliefs in Ashurbanipal’s palace is one of a royal banquet that commemorated the defeat of the king’s most hated foe, Teumman, the king of Elam. On this relief, Ashurbanipal is reclining on a couch under a grape vine in his garden sipping wine with his consort. There are servants around them with fans, while other servants are bringing food and playing musical instruments. From Ashurbanipal’s vantage point on the couch he could gaze on the trophy head of the Elamite king hanging from a ring in the fir tree.

In a warped perversion of a Biblical description of peace, that of every man sitting under his vine and fig tree (Micah 4:1-4), this relief commemorated the cessation of war with the Elamites after nine years. Ashurbanipal attributes his victory to “the Assyrian pantheon, and in particular, the deities Ashur and Ishtar of Arbela. Thus the human head may be viewed as more than a memorial to a successful battle; it is symbolic of a major threat to the Assyrian throne, a threat that was decisively eliminated through divine might” (Albenda 1977:35). Yet Micah says that real peace will come when the nations go to the LORD’s House in Jerusalem and worship Him. Then “they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nations shall not lift up sword against nations, neither shall they learn war anymore” (Micah 4:3).

There is one detail in this relief that should not be missed. In the upper left hand corner is one locust sitting on top of a palm tree. To its right is a bird swooping down as if to catch it. One art historian describes the scene this way: “Related to this is the image of a locust alight upon an upper branch of a tree, a short distance from the severed head of Teumman. A bird sweeps down toward the insect as if to devour it. This apparently minor detail may have special meaning, for in the annals Ashurbanipal describes the Elamites as a ‘dense swarm of grasshoppers’ [ARAB II: 329, para. 855]. Within this context, the locust may signify the last vestige of a once dreadful enemy, now virtually eliminated” (Albenda 1977:31,32).

At the end of the book of Nahum we have another reversal of fortune. Instead of the Elamites being the locusts, the Assyrians are, and they are about to be eliminated! But Nahum does not describe the destructive aspects of the locust plague, but rather, the flight of the locusts after they have done their damage. In Nahum 3:17 he states, “Your commanders are like swarming locusts, and your generals like great grasshoppers, which camp in the hedges on a cold day; when the sun arises they flee away, and the place where they are is not known.”

One of the pioneer Israeli biologists, Prof. F. S. Bodenheimer, puts this aspect of Nahum’s mention of locusts in scientific terms. He describes his observations of the body temperature of the Desert Locusts (Schistocerca gregaria) in the fifth hopper stage thus, “Since dawn the locusts had been turning their bodies towards the rays of the sun to ‘drink’ the maximum of heat. Intensive migration set in only when the body temperature had reached about 40 degrees C. This utilization of sun radiation we called heliothermy” (1959:202). He attributes the first mention of heliothermy to Nahum (1959:201).

The Fall of Nineveh

Prior to the beginning of the 20^th century, commentators discussed the date for the fall of Nineveh. The possibilities for this event ranged from 716 to 709 BC. In 1923, C. J. Gadd published a tablet from Babylon in the possession of the British Museum. The tablet was called the “Babylonian Chronicles” (BM 21.901) and it covered the years 616-609 BC, or the 10^th to the 17^th year of Nabopolasser, king of Babylon. The annals place the fall of Nineveh in the 14^th year of his reign, the year 612 BC. This event provides the student of history with an absolute chronological peg for Biblical and Assyrian history.

Conclusions

We have journeyed through the halls of the British Museum in this article pointing out the reliefs and objects that help to illustrate the text of the small, yet important book, of Nahum. My hope is that this discussion has helped make the Biblical text “come alive” and has given the student of the Scriptures a more accurate visual aid to the Bible.

Bibliography

Albenda, P.
1977 Landscape Bas-Reliefs in the Bit Hilani of Ashurbanipal. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 225: 29-48.

Bleibtreu, E.
1991 Grisly Assyrian Record of Torture and Death. Biblical Archaeology Review 17/1:52-61,75.

Bodenheimer, F.
1959 A Biologist in Israel. Jerusalem: Biological Studies.

Comelius, I.
1989 The Image of Assyria: An Iconographic Approach by Way of a Study of Selected Material on the Theme of “Power and Propaganda” in the Neo-Assyrian Palace Reliefs. Old Testament Essays 2: 55-74.

Curtis, J., and Reade, J.
1995 Art and Empire. Treasures from Assyria in the British Museum. London: British Museum.

Diodorus Siculus
1998 Library of History. Book I-II.34. Vol. 1. Trans. C. Oldfather. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library.

Dorsey, D.
1999 The Literary Structure of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker.

Feinberg, C.
1951 Jonah, Micah and Nahum. The Major Messages of the Minor Prophets. New York: American Board of Missions to the Jews.

Gerardi, P.
1988 Epigraphs and Assyrian Palace Reliefs: The Development of the Epigraphic Text. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 40: 1-35.

Johnston, G.
2001 Nahum’s Rhetorical Allusions to the Neo-Assyrian Motif. Bibliotheca Sacra 158: 287-307.

Luckenbill, D. D.
1988 Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia. London: Histories and Mysteries of Man (ARAB).

Masters, P.
2000 A Tour of Biblical Evidence in the British Museum. Bible and Spade 13/2: 35-55.

Mitchell, T. C.
1988 The Bible in the British Museum. Interpreting the Evidence. London: British Museum.

Parpola, S., and Watanabe, K.
1988 Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty Oaths. State Archives of Assyria. Vol. 2. Helsinki: Helsinki University.

Rainey, A.
1993 Manasseh, King of Judah, in the whirlpool of the Seventh Century B.C.E. Pp. 147-164 in kinattutu sa darati. Raphael Kutscher Memorial Volume. A. Rainey, ed. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.

Russell, J.
1999 The Writing on the Wall. Studies in the Architectural Context of Late Assyrian Palace Inscriptions. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Stronach, D.
1997 Notes on the Fall of Nineveh. Pp. 307-324 in Assyria 1995. Eds. S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project.

Stronach, D., and Lumsden, S.
1992 UC Berkeley’s Excavations at Nineveh. Biblical Archaeologist 55/4: 227-233.

Ussishkin, D.
1982 The Siege of Lachish by Sennacherib. Tel Aviv: Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.

Weissert, E.
1997 Royal Hunt and Royal Triumph in a Prism Fragment of Ashurbanipal (82-5-22.2). Pp. 339-358 in Assyria 1995. S. Parpola and R. Whiting, eds. Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project.

Yadin, Y.
1963 The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands. Vol. 2. New York: McGraw-Hill.

]]> http://www.lifeandland.org/2009/02/is-mount-sinai-in-saudi-arabia/feed/ 0