bi
ical A rcaeol2
A Publication of the American Schools of Oriental Research
The
Legacy
Volume 47 Number 2
of Mari
st June 1984
In Memoryof GeorgesDossin (1896-1983)
Biblical t Archaeolg A Publication of the American Schools of Oriental Research
Volume 47 Number 2
The Palace of Zimri-Lim at Mari Marie-Henriette Gates
June 1984
70
A marvel of its time or just one palace among many?In considering this question, the author describes the palace and summarizes the excavations that have been conducted there. Literary Sources for the History of Palestine and Syria
Page70
The Mari Archives Dennis Pardee and Jonathan T Glass
88
More than 20,000 tablets have been discoveredat Mari (TellHariri).This article supplies a bibliographic overview of what has been learned from them to date.
Mari, the Bible, and the Northwest Semitic World Andre Lemaire
101
The Maritexts, when viewed in the propercontext, can help us understandthe oldest traditions of the Bible.
Page88
Thoughts of Zimri-Lim JackM. Sasson
110
A scholar who has been immersed in the study of the Mari texts for twenty years presents an imaginative portraitof the last king to occupy the famous palace. This unique work also providesextensive supporting information, including many texts translatedinto English for the first time.
Page 101
The Flood Judah Goldin
125
A poem
Page 110
Departments Fromthe Editor'sDesk Letterto the Readers Introducingthe Authors BookReviews BooksReceived
67 68 69 123 128
Biblical Archaeologist is published with the financial assistance of the Endowment for Biblical Research, Boston (formerlyZion ResearchFoundation), a nonsectarian foundation for the study of the Bible and the history of the Christian Church.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
65
Biblical
Archaeologist
CyprusAmerican Archaeological ResearchInstitute in Nicosia, Cyprus welcomes scholars and interested visit.ing laymen. Facilities and programsinclude: Researchlibrary Scholars'residence Annual researchappointments Study collections Informalsummer seminars Periodiclectures Guided site visits Vehicle and equipment rental
Editor Eric M. Meyers Associate Editor JamesW. Flanagan ManagingEditor Martin Wilcox Assistant to the Editor KarenS. Hoglund
BookReviewEditor PeterB.Machinist EditorialCommittee LloydR. Bailey
Carole Fontaine VolkmarFritz LawrenceT. Geraty David M. Gunn A. T. Kraabel BaruchA. Levine Carol L. Meyers JackSasson JohnWilkinson Art Director LindaHuff EditorialAssistant Melanie Arrowood SubscriptionsManager Harini Kumar Sales Advertising AllanE. ShubertCompany 198AllendaleRoad Kingof Prussia,PA19406 215-265-0648
Forfurtherinformationcontact CAARI(41King Paul St., Nicosia, Cyprus)or: ASORAdministrativeOffices 4243 SpruceStreet Philadelphia,PA 19104 Tel: (215)222-4643
0
r
Biblical Archaeologist (ISSN 0006-0895) is published quarterly (March, June, September, December) by the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR),a nonprofit, nonsectarian educational organization with administrative offices at 4243 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Subscription orders and all business correspondence should be sent to ASOR Subscription Services, 4243 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Annual subscription rates: $16 in the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada; $18 foreign. Special annual subscription rates for students and retired faculty: $10 in the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada; $12 foreign. (To qualify for student or retired faculty rates, send a copy of a document that verifies your current status.) Current single issues: $5 in the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada; $6 foreign. Students and retired faculty: $4 in the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada; $5 foreign. Members of ASOR automatically receive Biblical Archaeologist as one of their annual membership benefits. Article proposals, manuscripts, letters to the editor, and all other editorial correspondence should be sent to the Editor, Biblical Archaeologist, ASOR Publications Office, Box HM, Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706. Unsolicited manuscripts must be accompanied by a self-addressed, stamped envelope bearing the proper return postage. Foreign contributors should furnish international reply coupons. Books for review should be sent to Dr. Peter B. Machinist, Department of Oriental Studies, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721. Composition by ProType,Inc., Chapel Hill, NC. Printed by Fisher-HarrisonCorporation, Durham, NC. Second-class postage paid at Philadelphia, PA 19104 and additional offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to ASOR Subscription Services, 4243 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Copyright Q 1984 by the American Schools of Oriental Research. 0•4? esOF
66
IN THE NEXT BA "The Corinth that Saint Paul Saw" by Jerome Murphy-O'Connor. Using information from the literatureof the time and from extensive excavations, the author recreates the first-century city that was such an important part of the Pauline mission.
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE
1984
AmericanCenterof OrientalResearch in Amman, Jordan
I
c OF
A*
welcomes visiting scholars and interestedlaymen. Programsinclude: Archaeologyclasses Lecturesand seminars Guidedsite visits A researchlibrary Studycollections Annual appointments Scholars'residence Vehicleand equipmentrental Liaisonwith local officials Rescuearchaeology Forfurtherinformationcontact: ASORAdministrativeOffices 4243 SpruceStreet Philadelphia,PA 19104 Tel:(215)222-4643
From
the
Editor's
Desk
seventiethanniversary of the IsraelExplo-
TIhe ration Society was celebrated this
April in with a on biblical archaeJerusalem congress The was in a event ology. congress significant the history of Near Eastern scholarship for a number of reasons. First and foremost it demonstrated Israel's preeminencein this field of scholarshiptoday;the society's seventy continuous years of exploration, excavation, and historical reporting are clearly bearing fruit in 1984. Second,it indicated the enormous interest in and support for biblical archaeologyboth within Israel and without. Most sessions were attended by more than a thousand people. A stunning arrayof scholarsfromIsrael,America,and Europepresented papersthat were for the most part concerned with the topics of interest to the student of Old Testamentand Semitics. Post-exilicsubjectswere covered primarily in the sessions on the Qumran scrolls, and to some extent in the sessions on the archaeology of Jerusalem.Problemsin the Persian,Greek,Roman,Byzantine, and Islamic periods were not included even though biblical archaeologistsin the Albrighttraditionhave long embraced such an inclusive chronological range for the discipline. The exclusion of these later periods from serious historicaland archaeologicalanalysiswas in many ways the greatestdisappointmentof the congress.The emphasis was clearly on the period of Israelite origins and Israelitebeginnings in the land. It seems to me, however, that if the discipline is to continue to grow,it will have to embrace the later periods also. The congress looked mainly to Americans, especially ASOR president James Sauer, second vice president William Dever, and programchairman James Muhly, to view pertinent archaeologicaldevelopmentselsewhere in the eastern and western Mediterranean world, and especially to areaseast of the JordanRiver.Whatwas most telling in this dialogue was the unanimous feeling that scholarly discourse must ignore modem political boundaries and that all of the specific scholarly issues raised
could benefit greatly from the availabilityof a largerpool of evidence. In the closing meeting of the academic sessions JosephAviram,longtime secretaryof the IsraelExploration Society, recognized ASOR as the society's older sister. ASOR,now in its eighty-fifthyearof continuous presence in Jerusalem,and with historical roots which extend into the first half of the nineteenth century, recognizes the unique role it has to playin fosteringan open discussion of the intellectual issues that continue to preoccupya large segment of western humanistic and social-scientific scholarship for which the Bible and Near East are so important. In response to the felt need at the congress for a continuing discussion on matters of chronology and nomenclature, James Sauer announced ASOR's willingness to host a follow-up meeting in the near future. Whateverthe outcome of this initiative, it is quite evident that the congressmarks a watershedin twentieth-century scholarship.As the torch passes to a new generation, we look forwardto many more years of discovery and even greaterunderstanding.
Eric M. Meyers Editor
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
67
and WestSemitic gods createdexcitement that is difficult to re-create or evoke today; and it is fair to state that to American biblical scholarship would neverhave insisted on setting Abrahamin the Middle BronzeAge were it not for Mr. Dossin's publications. Mr. Dossin taught Greek archaeology and Western on issueof BiblicalArchaeologist focuses Asiatic art in Liege,and it was not until afterthe warthat he came to occupy the Assyriologist's chair there. In Mari.It is especially fitting, therefore,that the editor and editorial boardshould dedicate it to Brussels,however,he had alreadyrevealedthe mysteriesof that wonderful discipline to a generation of Belgian Georges Dossin, who for many years was the chief epigraphistfor the excavation team working there. scholars,a generationthat is itself now readyto makeroom When Mr.Dossin diedlast December,Assyriologylost one for its maturing students. of its mastersandthree generationsof cuneiformistswere Appreciatingthe depth with which he pursued the reconstruction of ancient civilizations, his students and deprived of a vital link with the forefathers of the friendsorganized,in 1977, the FondationAssyriologique discipline. Mr.Dossin beganhis careeras a classical philologist, GeorgesDossin, a tribute to the master that is singularly an avocation for which he neverlost interest;but early in appropriate, since Mr. Dossin, together with Jean his studies he succumbed to the lures of the East,andpur- Nougayrol, had helped launch in 1950 what today is sued Assyriology with J.Prickartzin Liege. Parisand its Assyriology'sforemostassociation (which annually sponsors the elegant Rencontre Assyriologique Internaeminent cuneiformists soon beckoned, and Mr. Dossin continued his work with V. Scheil, Charles Fossey,and, tionale). And it is also appropriatethat the first and most above all, with the peerless Frangois Thureau-Dangin, recently published supplement of the Fondation'sjournal with whom he became especially close. A specialist in the Akkadica, should be the attractive and modestly priced Recueil GeorgesDossin, a volume that collects some of Old Babylonianperiod, Mr. Dossin was ready when, in site of excavated what to be the Mr.Dossin'smost seminal Maristudies and that includes Andre Parrot 1933, proved Mari. Within a few years of its discovery,Mari had sur- a detailed bibliographyof his work. These lines arewritten by someone who, althoughhe renderedan enormous number of cuneiform documents, had but fleeting personalglimpses of him, came veryearly and their publication became an urgent matter. As chief epigraphistof the equipe he was ableto publishin 1938and in his own studies to appreciate Mr. Dossin's exacting 1939 remarkableoverviewsand syntheses of the archive's scholarshipand to learn fromhis wisdom and good sense. I have admiredhis passionate commitment to a demandcontents. The waronly slightly slowed the pace of publication, ing enterpriseandhaverecognizedthat his legacywill long with Mr. Dossin yearly and regularly offering an avid be with us. His lettersto me, warm,courteous,yet, despite audience a rich harvest of documents, unmatched in its the octogenarian'shand, sure, brimming with vigor, and detail of life at a majorSyro-Mesopotamiancity-state.Par- generouswith observations,must certainlybe reflectiveof ticularlyamongbiblical scholars,his revelationsregarding the man. Requiescat in pace. prophets, West Semitic personal names, Benyaminite nomads, census-taking,Palestinian place names, rituals, JackM. Sasson
Letter
the
Readers
This
Incised shell figures depicting dignitaries led by a man carryinga standard. These figures, along with others, weremosaic inlays of a panel called the "standardof Mari"found in the Templeof Is'tar.It is often comparedto similar "standards" from Ur and Kish. The figuresare approximately 11centimetershigh and arenow in the Aleppo Museum and the Louvre. Photographis used courtesyMission archeologiquede Mari.
68
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Jonathan T Glass JackM. Sasson
Introducing the
Authors
Marie-Henriette Gates is Assistant Professorof Archaeology in the Classics Department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She has participatedin excavationsin Italy, Turkey,and Iran and she is currently the field director of the excavations at Gritille, part of the salvageprojectin the Lower EuphratesBasin in southeasternTurkey.Dennis Pardeeis Associate Professorin the Department of Near EasternLanguages and Civilizations at the University of Chicago. He has published numerous articles and reviews, and in 1980-81 he was a Fulbright Senior Lecturerat Aleppo University, during which time he also worked on collating Ugaritic tablets in Aleppo, Damascus, and Paris. Jonathan T. Glass is a student in the Graduate Programin Religion at Duke University. An Episcopal priest, FatherGlass received his A.B. in Greek and Latin from BrownUniversity and his M.Div. from Berkeley/YaleDivinity School, where he held the Day and Watson fellowships. FatherGlass writes, "Iwas assigned the Maridocuments in the Old Testament seminar this past fall, and it was love at first sight." Andre Lemaire is a well-known Frenchepigrapher.He studied under Roland de Vauxat the Ecole Biblique et Arch0ologique in Jerusalem,and he has excavatedat Tell Keisanand Lachish. His many publications include the recent work Les ecoles et la formation de la Bible dans l'ancien Israel, which appearedin 1981 as number 39 in the series Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis (Fribourg,Editions Universitaires).JudahGoldin is Professorof Oriental Studies and Postbiblical Hebrew Literature at the University of Pennsylvania and teaches Midrash whereverhe may be: In 1983-84 he is the Albert A. List Visiting Professorof Jewish Studies at the HarvardDivinity School. He has written several books. His favoriteis The Song at the Sea (the Midrashon Exodus 15) and he insists that the Song is at the sea, not of, although Scriptureelsewhere does not object to the sea making sounds, even loud ones. But not in Exodus15! He is rathercranky about that. Occasionally he writes poems. Jack M. Sasson is Professor of Religion at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and is Adjunct Professorof Religion at Duke University. Born in Aleppo, Syria, he grew up in Lebanon and came to the United States as a teenager.He received his Ph.D. from Brandeis University in 1966. Having recently completed an eight-yearstint as Editorfor the Ancient
0
0 04
Marie-HenrietteGates
Judah Goldin
Near East of the Journalof the American Oriental Society,he currentlyserves on many editorialboards.Dr. Sasson spent last year in Jerusalemat the Institute of AdvancedStudies. He has published widely, especially on Mari, and among his writings is a commentary on the Book of Ruth published in 1979 by Johns Hopkins University Press.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
69
The
Palace
of
at Mari Zimri-Lim
BYMARIE-HENRIETTE GATES
ToZimri-Lim communicate the following: thus says yourbrotherHammurabi(ofYamhad):1 The king of Ugarit has written me as follows: "Showme the palaceof Zimri-Lim! I wish to see it." With this same courier I am sendingon his man. (TabletfromZimri-Lim'sarchives, translatedby GeorgesDossin, 1937) Zimri-Lim'spalacewas certainlyfamous everywhereas one of the marvelsof its time (Parrot1974:113). This buildingis not ... the gem of the Orient, ratherone palaceon a parwith many others (Margueron1982:380).
three quotations given above represent changing attitudes toward a building which, after decades of excavation in the Middle East, remains one of the richest sources of archival, historical, and architectural documentation discovered at a single site. The palace of Zimri-Lim at Mari, which deservedly draws its modern name from its last royal resident, has now passed through three stages of investigation: The first can be assigned to the ancient Ugaritic emissary; the second, to Andr6 Parrot's intensive excavations there from 1935 to 1938; the third has evolved from Parrot'spublications in a variety of attempts by scholars to analyze, interpret, and reinterpret
T•he
70
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Statueof a goddess with a flowing vase. This nearly life-size, stone statue (1.42 meters high) was found brokenin severalpieces; its inlaid eyes had been gouged out, and its nose was badly damaged-yet it has become one of the most famous examples of Marl art. The woman's massive headdress with two horns identifies her as a goddess, as does the vase that she carries. A channel drilled inside the body of the statue would originally have been connected to a tank, permitting water to flow from the goddess' vase. The statue is now in the Aleppo Museum. Photographsfrom Mari by Andr6 Parrot,Editions Ides et Calendes, CHNeuchotel, Switzerland, and Mission archeologiquede Mari, tome 70.
his finds. While we can only surmise the reactions of the Ugaritic emissary, both Parrot'sexcavations and subsequent studies provide inexhaustible questions for discussion.
The UgariticVisitor
The Ugaritic emissary who traveled to Mari in the early seventeenth cenobserved a multistoried tury B.C.E.2
building of well over 260 rooms at ground level. Why he chose to visit Mari is unknown; perhapshe was on a grandtour of architectural marvels including the palaces of Zimri-Lim's rivals in other cities.3 If scale is considered, certainly contemporary palaces closer to the traveler'shome were more modest, as were the territories they controlled (forexample Niqme-pa'spalace at Alalab). Perhapsthe decoration of the palace had arousedhis ruler'scuriosity, and he hoped to imitate these in his own residence. Whateverthe reason for the visitor's trip, he certainly was given a reception that put him at a distinct advantageto his modem successors, for when he was taken through the main gate and into the first and largest court (131),his guide surely identified the building units rising high aroundthem. No doubt the shrine of ITtarof the Palace, the Court of the Palms, the king's throne room, the banquet hall, and the royal apartments were pointed out during the palace tour. When the palace, and indeed all of Mari, fell victim a few years later to the final confrontation between Zimri-Lim and his former ally Hammurabi of Babylon, it fell silent for nearly four thousand years. Today the visitor to the remains of Zimri-Lim'spalace must piece together evidence found throughout the building in an attempt to match ancient activities with specific locations.
Parrot's Excavations The palace that Parrotbegan excavating in 1933 was, in essence, Zimri-Lim's;that is, it was the palace at its final stage of occupation. The fire set by Hammurabi'ssoldiers to destroy the building ironically helped preserve it for later study by baking the bricks and causing the upper stories to collapse and fill the lower rooms, thereby protecting the wall stumps from erosion: The walls in the southwest are preservedover 4 meters high. Parrotuncovered this enormous complex over a period of five seasons. Whereashis excavating techniques reflect the unrefined methodology common during the 1930s, he achieved striking success
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
71
The to
fire
destroy
set
the preserve
Aerial view of the palace at Marl. Photois used courtesy Mission grapharchuologique de Mari.
72
Hammurabi's soldiers
by
ironically
building it
for
later
helped
study.
in clearing its entire preservedarea (morethan 6 acres)with fairly systematic care.His final reporton the palace, its paintings, and its contents appearedin 1958. It is remarkablydetailed:Each room is presented in turn with a plan and summary of the finds. The building's units, as he saw them, emerge one after the other. Parrothesitated rarely in his interpretations,identifying and labeling the functions of most of the rooms. He always admiredtheir refinement, ornamentation, and rich contents. But the palace Parrot presented in his excavationreportis a monolithic one. He barely consideredthe possibility of a long history for the building or was simply not interested in investigating it. Thus the modern visitor was first introducedto the palace at Mari as solely belonging to Zimri-Lim. Parrot'sprogressinto ZimriLim'spalace did not begin, like the Ugaritic emissary's,at the north gate. Instead,he first descended into the small court unit in the southwest areaof the complex (court 1) and from there advanceddue north across a series of rooms organized aroundrectangularcourtyards.4His investigations, therefore,followed a route precisely contraryto that of his ancient predecessor:Starting from the residential wings he moved into the majorofficial block (court 106 and rooms 64-65-66), then on to the largest courtyardof the palace (131),then to the main entrance building to its north, and finally to the rooms and shrines to its south. The building was immediately identified as a palace from the
for the ceilings and roofs. Suites of rooms in the northwest quadrant were unusually well finished with plasteredplinths and polychrome bands painted along the upperparts of the walls. Considerableattention had been lavished on water supply, properdrainage(also fromupper stories), and bathrooms.Finally, tablets recoveredfrom the first days of excavation confirmed that the building and its residents were closely bound to the cultural and political history of Mesopotamia in the early
monumental character of the walls. They were built of heavy, carefully plastered sun-dried brick, with little or no structural timber used except
meters, and indeed served as the central nexus for the entire eastern half of the complex. It is difficult to assess the quality
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
second millennium B.C.E.5
Our route through the palace should not, however,follow the excavator'sbut ratherthe sequence published in his final reportand, no doubt, that followed by the palace inhabitants duringthe time of ZimriLim. There is only one firmly recognized entrance-to the north from the pavedstreet that runs along the complex'sfortified outer wall (Parrot 1958a: 7-19).6 It leads into a
vestibule (156)with, perhaps,a sentry box, then into a largeopen court (154)where, accordingto Parrot, guardsor visitors killed time by playing the boardgames scratched into the pavement. In the final stage of the palace, the doorwaysconnecting this court to the rooms to the east (Parrot'stwelve-roomhostel for foreign couriers and merchants)and the rooms to the west (Parrot's postdestruction residence)had been filled in (Margueron1982:figure 148).One could enter these rooms only by proceedingsouth into the huge courtyard131.This courtyard was the largest in the palace, measuring approximately48 by 32.5
North
of the reportsconcerning precise finds from these rooms in the northeastern quadrantof the palace. The "hostel"(rooms 158-167) was filled with domestic debris that may well obscure its original function. Forinstance, from bathroom 153, two letters to Yahidun-Lim and thirty account tablets were associated with crockeryand a grindstone (Parrot 1958a: 19);more tablets and large jarswere found in the putative kitchen unit (rooms 165-167); and large jarsand a heap of bitumen obstructed the door of room 152, an area where one would expect evidence of heavy traffic into court 131.Here, as elsewhere in the palace, pillage and collapsed superstructuresconfuse the original furnishings of the rooms; one cannot, given the pace of Parrot'sexcavations,expect much more. Even court 131 is enigmatic. Parrotnoted that a largeand fairly regularareain the middle of the court was strippedof paving bricks. Although he acknowledgedthis may have been the result of accidental preservation,he also proposedthat the areamay never have been paved but was ratherplanted with date palms; the Mari archives referto a "Courtof the Palms"(Parrot1958a: 57). Parrotfurthersuggested that the narrowroom (132)that opens to the south onto court 131by a semicircularflight of steps was the king's audience chamber,which had a brick podium at the back for his throne (Parrot1958a:63-66). A large number of wall-painting fragments were recoveredfrom the southwestern end of this room. When reconstructed,they form a very large composition of at least five registers, with scenes drawnfrom myth, religion, and secular themes. Thus in terms of decoration, access, and even plan, room 132 wasquite distinct from the others opening onto court 131;the latters'contents suggest they functioned as storerooms or archives,and in one case (room 130)as a converted passageway.
I?I "" " "-
"Chariot Gate"
•'i : ,•
S25
152 24
;5
?f7-_
13
64
32
a
210
65
S150
2-
r~r
14, .
P\
:"-
'?
1,
r .?-
Tworepresentationsof the palace at Mari. One is the palace plan, after Mission archeologiquede Mari, tome 68, foldout. The other is an artist's reconstructionof Zimri-Lim'spalace, used courtesy of Histoire et Archdologie,February1984, issue number 80, page 38.
q
'
,,, >"
.
b
g -r
N
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
73
Figural ings were
wall
paint-
only
recovered but five rooms, was found one
in
situ.
in
Paintingfragment and drawingof a partial life-size figurefrom court 106. The figure is wearing an elaborate garment and has a daggerin his belt. Height is 44 centimeters. Mission archeologique de Mari, tome 69, plate XXI, 2 and figure35.
74
By Zimri-Lim'stime, one could reach the inner official section of the palace from court 131by a single door in the northwest corner.It led through a dogleg corridor(114and 112)to the main entrance of court 106, which was also the main entrance on the central axis of the palace'smajorofficial block. At first glance, this unit appearsto be the result of a unified architecturalprogram:Court 106 and rooms 64, 65, and 66 to its south could have been built at one time. Parrotidentified room 106 as an open forecourt,room 64 as an antechamber,and rooms 65 and 66 as the palace'sthrone room and temple (Parrot1958a:78). These rooms were indeed the most monumental in the palace. Court 106- half the size of court 131but quadrangularin plan-was decoratedwith paintings. The famous "Investitureof ZimriLim"panel, found in situ on the court'ssouth wall just west of the door,was one of a series of panels (as can be judgedfrom the extension west of the upperpainted borderParrot1958b:plate A). It is very different stylistically from the much largersacrificial procession scene that was found in fragmentscollapsed at the base of the same wall's eastern half. More largefigures painted in the same style were discoveredon fragmentsin the southeast and southwest cornersof this court.7They include a life-size figure with a daggerin his belt, a second figure in front of an architectural background,a largehand graspinga mass of hair in the Egyptianfashion, two goats in heraldic pose nibbling a sacredtree, and hundredsof other fragmentssuggesting a lively and ambitious composition. Unlike the "Investiture" scene, which was on a thin film of mud plaster painted set directly on the brickwork,the fallen fragmentswere painted on a thick and carefully preparedcoating of gypsum (Parrot 1958b: 17-18; 1958a: 86-87). Finally, a red and blue geometric band decorated the other
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
painting fragments - .131
64
mural
65
6
Two drawingsof fragmentarypaintings discoveredin court 106. One shows a large hand graspinga mass of hair. This pose mimics the traditional Egyptian scene of a pharaoh conqueringhis enemy by grasping the enemy's hair in one hand and raising a mace in his other, ready to strike the final blow Height is 23 centimeters; length is 33 centimeters. The other drawingreconstructs part of a now fragmentarypainting with two goats heraldically flanking a sacred tree. Height is 43 centimeters; length is 31 centimeters. Mission archeologique de Mari, tome 69, figures36 and 23.
32 32
Wall
Paintings
Palace
the
from at
Mari
Above: Reconstructionof the wall painting from room 132. Below: Fragmentfrom the original mural showing a warrior.Mission arch6ologiquede Mari, tome 69, plates XVII and XX, 2.
F
fromfiveroomswithinZimri-Lim's iguralwallpaintingswererecovered palace at Mari.Unfortunatelyonly fourcompositions were restorable.
Inroom132(Parrot's "audience hall")numerousfragmentsfroma com-
position of at least five registershad collapsed along the southwestern cornerof the west wall. It was restoredto a height of at least 2.8 meters anda width of 3.35 meters,thus representinga composition of considerablesize. The two majorregistersillustratetwo cult scenes (offeringsmade to deities)framed by mythological creatures.Above and below this double panel are smaller stridingmen with bundles (bootyfromwar?)on their backs and a man pierced by arrows.The colors in the painting are red, gray,brown, black, yellow, and white. The figuresareoutlined with a thick black line. Twoseparatecompositions were found at the south end of court 106.The first, consisting of a number of fragmentsfound in the debris,was on a larger scale than the painting from room 132. Restorable fragments show a multiregisterscheme with men leading sacrificialanimals in a procession;in frontof them stridesa much largerfigurerepresentedlife-size.This procession scene is, however,only one of what appearsto be a wide varietyof themes. The colors arethe same as in the room 132 painting but without yellow. Strikinglydifferentin style andwith a farbroaderrangeof colors(including
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
75
blue andgreen)is the second composition fromcourt 106, called the "Investiture" panel. This is the only figural wall painting discovered by Parrotin situ. It was foundon the south wall of court 106immediatelyto the west of the doorwayleading into room 64. Like the paintings from room 132, it consists of two / registers depicting a king who is invested with powerby the goddessIstarin the presence of other deities. The scene is framedby mythical animals and palm trees. Finally, very fragmentary paintings were recoveredfrom debris (probablythe result of the collapse of an upper story) in room 220. They seem to fall stylistically into two groups:one with life-size figures(from a royal hunt?) resembling the procession scene from court 106, and another with figures similar to those in the upper register in room 132. Parrotnoticed that there were two superimposed paintings on at least one fragment (Parrot1958b:87, note 31). As in the "Investiture" painting, blue appearsfrequentlyas a backgroundcolor. There is no indication that these fragmentsbelonged to a scene with registers. I would sort these fourcompositions (actuallyfive, counting the two from room 220) into two generalcategories:The first groupincludes the procession scene from court 106 and the largerfigures from room 220; the second group includes the religious scene from room 132 and the "Investiture"panel from court 106plus a few figuresfromroom 220 (see,forexample,Parrot1958b:plate XXIII).Parrotalso divided his paintings into these two groups (Parrot1958b:
76
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Above: Fragmentof a sacrificial scene discovered in court 106. Approximate height is 80 centimeters. de Mari, tome 69, plate VI. Mission archtologique Below: "Investiture of the king of Mari." Original wall painting found in situ on the south wall of court 106. Mission arch ologique de Mari, tome 69, plate VIII.
107-08) and remarkedon the strong connections between the religious scene in room 132andMesopotamianartof the ThirdDynasty of Ur at the end of the third millennium B.C.E.
Moortgat'sdatingof the wall paintingsis more ambitious.The stylistic and iconographicfeaturesof the threereconstructedpaintings(excludingthose from room 220) presentedhim with precise chronological correlations.The homed tiaras of the deities shown in the "Investiture"scene are painted in profile, a technique which he thinks can firstbe datedby the Hammurabistele (setup in the king'sthirty-thirdor thirty-fifthyear,which coincides with the last months of the Maripalace).In contrast, the deities portrayedin room 132 have frontal tiaraswhich, in conjunction with the entire composition, point to an artistic traditionpracticedseveralhundredyearsearlierduringthe ThirdDynasty of Ur. As forthe largestridingfigurein the processionscene fromcourt 106,Moortgat convincinglycompareshis garmentto that wornby Sam'i-Adadon a stone relief found at Mardin in southeastern Turkey.Thus the paintings at Mari would extend overthree precise periods:the Third Dynasty of Ur, the Assyrian interregnum, and the last years of Zimri-Lim'sreign. Moortgat'sarguments can be countered with archaeological,ratherthan stylistic or iconographical,observations.First,concerning the composition in "audiencehall"andMargueron's room 132 (Parrot's chapel),Parrotis not specific in describingthe findspotof these fragments,but it appearsfromthe excavation photographsthat they correspondto the rearof the room along the west wall (Parrot1958a:64, figure63; and 1958b:71, figure56),preciselywhere one finds a blocked doorway.The paintings must belong to a phase when the room, and indeedthe entire sector,underwentconsiderablemodifications-modifications that cannot be dated,but which must havetakenplace some time long afterthe originalconstruction of this room. Second,andmore significantly,these paintings, like the ones from room 220 and the "Investiture"scene, were painted on a thin mud plaster applieddirectly onto the brick wall. In contrast,the procession scene fromcourt 106was painted on a thick gypsum plaster, which was also used for the east, south, and west walls of that same court. Parrotdescribedthis plaster technique in some detail, since it was exceptional in the palace. The brick wall was firstcoatedwith a thin layerof mud and then with a second, much thicker layer of mud that was scoredso that the outer,plaster layer would adhere securely
Above: The southern wall and doorway of court 106. The "Investitureof the king" painting was found on the wall to the right of the doorway Photograph fromMariby Andrt Parrot,EditionsIdes et Calendes, CH-Neuchditel, Switzerland. Below: Copies and drawingof the "Investiture"scene from court 106. Mission arch6o-
logiquede Mari,tome
69, plates XI; XII, 2; and XIIH,2.
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
,,
77
(Parrot1958a:86-89 and figures 90 and 91). If one examines the excavation photographs(especially1958b:figures46 and 51),one can readilymakeout the thin mud plasteron which the "Investiture" scene was paintedin contrastto the of white over both a thickermud layerand the fine plasterapplied patches bright mud plaster. The presence of both the procession scene fragments and the in-situ "Investiture" painting can be explained in only one fashion:The "Investiture" an is earlierdecorationthatwas laterplasteredoverandthe life-sizepropainting cession scene andotherswerepaintedon top of it. This coveringlayerof plaster protectedthe "Investiture" panel from the fate that the others suffered.Parrot attemptedto reconcilehis difficulties in locating the originalplacementof the procession figuresby setting them 3 meters abovethe floor level of the court (Parrot1937:334).In fact,the sacrificialprocessionscene was in the same place as the "Investiture" painting but was separatedby 0.25 meter of plaster. I will not at this point attemptto re-sortthe chronologicalparallelsforthe wall paintingsat Mari,for such a study would requirea carefulreexamination of all of Moortgat'sarguments.I will only underline the implications of this scene can discoveryconcerningthe paintings in court 106:If the "Investiture" be firmly linked to the iconographyof Hammurabi'sthirty-thirdor thirty-fifth regnalyear,who then commissioned the processionfriezes in the Court of the Palms? Marie-HenrietteGates
Tbp:Drawingof a painting fragmentfrom room 220. This large figureis similar to those in the procession scene from court 106. The significance of the quadrangularobject to the left of the figureis unknown and the man's face and hairstyle are hypothetically reconstructed. Height of reconstructionis 65 centimeters; length is 52 centimeters. Middle and bottom: Photographsand drawingsof painting fragmentsfound in the debris of room 220. The man preservedfrom the waist up, holds a horn in his raised hand. Parrotidentified the damaged figure to the left as a dignitary on the basis of the elaborategarment and pendant that he wears. Height is 40 centimeters;lengthis 54 centimeters.Missionarch(ologique de Mari, tome 69, plate XXIIIand figure 66.
78
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
* 106
:*
*
ead *
podium
aIdess tue h 6
hLc
.
65
-
6
1shrin
This large podium, with an imitation marble surface and steps on either side, was prominently located against the center of the southern wall of room 64. Mission archeologiquede Mari, tome 69, plate XV 1.
The
point built
podium
large an
focal
outer
limestone imitate
of
room
of
brick
coating
64
a
was
but
painted
with to
marble.
walls of court 106 at a height of 2 meters from the floor. South of this court, which was bright from sunlight and decoration, there were two rectangularhalls whose lengths (east-west) were equal to the width of the court. The focal point of the first hall (room64), was a largepodium set against the south wall opposite the 106-64 doorway.It was built of brick but had an outer limestone casing that was painted to imitate marble. Decorative wooden paneling once protected the wall behind the podium. Parrot reflected little on the function of this podium and, indeed, on the entire room:He concentrated ratheron the fine statue of the goddess with a flowing vase found in severalfragments beside the podium. (The statue'shead was discoveredin the basin in court 106-Parrot 1959: 5-11.) He was especially eagerto place the king's throne on the socle found against the west wall of the
to give an idea of the original installation. At the foot of the steps lay a basalt statue of I'tup-ilum, an early governor('akkanakku) of Mari known for his lavish gifts to the Istar temple. Aroundhim were three stone bases for small statues (presumably tossed down from the platform duringthe pillage), as opposed to the two brick and bitumen-coated bases still in place on either side of the stairway.Like these bases, the steps were exceptionally well coated with bitumen: The rituals performed in the shrine must have involved an unusual amount of liquid. Parrotimagined that this entire unit enragedthe invadersso much that they set fire to largelogs draggedinto the center of the rooms (Parrot 1958a: 111-44). Most likely Parrot's burnedlogs were, in fact, the collapsed beams from the roofs of both rooms and servedultimately the same purpose. If this official section (rooms furthest room in the series - room 106, 64, 65, and 66) was isolated in 65. Fromhis throne, the king could terms of accessibility from the thus look across the room-almost eastern half of the palace (atleast at 28 meters long-to the platform groundlevel), the opposite is true of situated at the top of a low flight of its relation to the western wing, for steps in room 66. Parrotinterpreted it is linked directly by rooms 106, 64, this platform, no doubt correctly,as and 65. Here the scale was domestic, a shrine. It had sufferedfrom the with the rooms arrangedneatly in generalpillage, but enough remained standardMesopotamianfashion
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Statue of Igtup-ilum found in room 65. The inscription on his shoulder identifies this man as a governor or sakkanakkuof Mari during the early second millennium B.C.E.Height is 1.52
meters. The statue is now in the Aleppo Museum. Photographs from Mari by Andrg Parrot,Editions Ides et Calendes, CHNeuchiatel,Switzerland.
79
Terra-cottamolds in the shape of fish. The molds are approximately30 centimeters long. Photographis used courtesy Mission archeologique de Mari.
31
i
.IL.
r
106
1 orvinnivyJt "
105
80
Ab.
-6
4
o
6
these workshops, and thus in the southeast quadrantof the palace, a sequence of pavedrooms led from court 131to a pair of halls (rooms 149/150and 210)where Parrot recognized the second cult center of the palace. The fragmentarystatues of formerMari rulers Laasgaanand Idi-ilum found here suggest an installation comparableto the religious platform (66)at the east end of the throne room. These are the only two areasin the palace that housed statuaryat the time of discovery;we can thus be quite certain that the Mari statuaryrecovered in Babylon(a statue of the sakkanakku Puzur-Istar- see also Sollberger1967)originally stood in one of these two sanctuaries. Perhapsthe horns of divinity on Puzur-I'tar'scap qualified him-to the illiterate Babyloniansoldier- as a god to be cartedhome as an ultimate symbol of victory.The deities large ovens, and a staircase all of these shrines, whom Parrottencrammed into too small a space, intatively identified as IStar/Inannain dicating they were not contemporoom 210 (on the basis of the inscriprary.8The debrisfrom this unit, tion on the statue of Laasgaan)and including jars,assortedpottery,a Anunit in 149/150(Parrot1958a: largenumber of terra-cottamolds used for breador cheese, and 273), have disappearedlike virtually all Mesopotamian cult statues, the tablets,9was rich and perplexing.It is thus too variedto providea reason- victims of systematic deportations. This religious sector was on able interpretation.Finally,Parrot claimed to have discoveredthe only higher groundthan court 131 and the official royalhalls 64 and 65 to the Mesopotamian scribal school, in rooms 24 and 25, which were outeast. Rooms led up to the fitted with benches. southeastern shrines through a seThe southernmost preserved quence of well-pavedstaircases.In unit of small rooms, placed on either 1966 and subsequent seasons Parrot's side of a narrowcorridorand opening excavations in this higher sector uncoveredearlierversions of the palace onto a court at the east end, was inthe as Parrot from the EarlyDynastic ("prepalace terpretedby From 86 to Sargonic")period.The discoveryof magazines (rooms 105).
arounda succession of four courts. The northernmostblock, which is centered aroundcourt 31, is the largest in terms of area,size, and number of dependent rooms. It is here that Parrotidentified the royal apartments,for the carefulpreparation of the walls, the painted bands in most of the rooms similar to court 106'sgeometric decoration, and the numerous bathrooms implied a degreeof comfort and luxury distinct from the other sectors in the palace (Parrot1958a: 161-85). Due west of court 106, a second unit aroundcourt 15 and a third unit aroundcourt 1 were assigned to the palace officials and, perhaps,to the queen'sentouragesince tablets of the queen'scorrespondencewere discovered here. West of throne room 65 is a smaller unit whose purpose is unclear:Its central court (70)contained a superbfloor mosaic, two
these one could reach the otherwise isolated group of rooms behind and south of court 131 and the "audience hall" 132-a direct route of some significance, since Parrot placed the palace workshops here. Architecturally, these are structured around room 220, where more wall-painting fragments in the style of the large procession frieze in court 106 were found (Parrot 1958b: 83-106). East of
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
these earlier versions of the palace would now support a major revision in understanding the sequence of construction for Zimri-Lim's residence. Parrot'spublications suggested that the building of the palace began in the west wing and then expanded east with the construction of the official block (rooms 106, 64, and 65) and culminated in the building of the Court of the Palms (131), the
132
.
*I
religious sanctuaries just discussed, and the workshops located in between (Parrot1958a:6; 1974: 139-40). Parrotthought the earliest builders at Mariwere the governors contemporarywith the Third Dynasty of Ur but he was hardlyconcerned with charting the building accomplishments of their successors. He believed his role as excavatorwas to revealto the scholarly community the palace at the time of its destruction- a "jewelbox"studded with gems (Parrot1958a:342).
stal
220
a
.
210
Above right: Drawingof the damaged statuette of Laasgaanwhich was found in a box in room 149. Height is 19.5 centimeters. The statuette is now in the Aleppo Museum. Drawingis reproducedfrom Mission archdologiquede Marn,tome 70. figure10.
Thmviewsof the
steatitestatuette
of Idi-.lum,
norof Man. overHighft is 41.5centimetas. The statuette is now in the Louvm.Drw
hn Mission inp arereproduced uarh6oogique deMan,tome70. guzs13and14.
New Workand Interpretations Parrot'sfinal reportwas met with some criticism and recently has been the basis for severalsystematic studies. These mark the third phase in the investigation of the palace-a phase characterizedby efforts to interpretParrot'sfindings beyond the conclusions he made in his publications. The most significant of these studies have proceededalong two fronts: The first is an effort to articulate the chronological evolution of the building (Moortgat1964; Margueron1982);the second is interested in redefiningthe functions of the palace'ssectors (Margueron 1982)or ascribingto them functions referredto in the Mariarchives (AlKhalesi 1978).The results of these analyses are uneven but always provocative. It is to Parrot'scredit that he providedsuch detailed evidence that now others can reworkhis original interpretations. If Parrotpuzzled little overthe chronological sequence of the palace at Mari,others have closely scrutinized it. Moortgat (1964)was the first to present an influential argument for a precise building history when he reassignedthe three major wall-painting compositions to three distinct periods.Accordingto Moortgatthe panel from the "audience hall" 132 belonged to the Ur III/Gudeaperiod, the sacrificial procession painting was the productof the Assyrian interregnum,and only the "Investiture" panel dated to the
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
81
reign of Zimri-Lim.His proposalsare based on iconographicparallels ratherthan style and they are elegant, concise, and convincing. Despite some faint protests (for example Ellis 1975:85 and AlKhalesi 1978:2, 63-65), a majority of commentators have relied, at least to some extent, on Moortgat's reconstruction.10It even underlies the chronological scheme proposed by Margueron,who recently has produced an exhaustive reappraisalof Zimri-Lim'spalace in the context of monumental Mesopotamian secular architectureduringthe BronzeAge (Margueron1982:377). Margueron's conclusions, like his methods, are in almost all instances at odds with Parrot's.There emerges from his study a somewhat differentpalace in which Zimri-Limwas merely the final occupant and not an influential builder (Margueron1982:376-78; 378, note 1).It is to this version of the palace that we will now turn. In the course of his examination of Mesopotamianpalatial architecture, Marguerondecided that by analyzing associations between rooms he could appraisemost accurately the coherence of units within a building. He thus examined at Marithe trafficpatternswithin room blocks identified by Parrot,and concluded that not only were the blocks misidentified but they had undergoneconsiderableremodeling. He could chart the remodeling from obstructeddoorways;however,it was difficult to determine precisely when the remodeling had been done. The western wing of the palace was subject to the most reorganization, but even the major official roomsthe "audience hall" 132 and sanctuary 66" -had been affected (Margueron 1982: figure 148). Margueron also attempted to provide conclusive evidence for superstructures over certain parts of the palace. He relied heavily on the height of preserved walls, correctly assuming that the collapsed superstructures were responsible for
82
Identifications of the Rooms in Zimri-Lim'sPalace ITwo RoomNumber(s) AndreParrot JeanMargueron
antechamber throneroom shrine
24 and25 northwestroomblock around31 64 65 66
magazines
86 to 105
workshops -
roomblocksouthof 131 secondstoryabove roomssouthof 131 131 132 149/150 210
scribalschool royalapartments
Courtof the Palms audiencehall shrine shrine
magazines administrative rooms shrine throneroom roomconnecting 65 and68 housingforminor personnelorslaves magazines royalapartments
chapel shrine
Room 24 at the palace of Mari. This room was originally identified by Andrg Parrotas a scribal school with rows of benches for the students. Tobday, other scholarspreferto identify it as one of the palace magazines where variousgoods would have been stored.Photographfrom Mari by Andr6 Parrot,Editions Ides et Calendes, CH-Neuchatel, Switzerland.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
preservingthe lower story from erosion (Margueron1982: 19 and 306). While Parrotdid not recordthe stratigraphicsequence of deposits in the rooms he excavated,Margueron drew attention to anomalies such as finding tablets in unexpected areas like hallways and courts and discoveringpainting fragments in room 220 high in the fill (Margueron 1982:291).Margueronbelieved these features were as convincing as the rareramps and staircases for evidence of a second story. Finally,Margueronestablished a hierarchyfor his room blocks according to the preceptthat plans closest to the Mesopotamian model (rooms organizedarounda court and strict orthogonality) indicate a more recent construction than units showing extensive remodeling and walls askew (as in the areaof the entrance gate and court 131).12The palace's building sequence would therefore appearto have evolved from east to west, and its sectors take on very different functions from those assigned by Parrot. Margueron'sstudy (which is as long as Parrot'sfinal publication) agreeswith Parrotonly on the identification of room 65 as the throne room (Margueron1982:354) and of the southeastern unit abovethe third-millennium palaces as a sanctuary-but with a shrine in room 210 only (Margueron1982: 334). While he discounts the platform at the farend of the throne room (66)as a furtherchapel,13he would set a cult statue on the brick podium in Parrot's"audiencehall" 13214 and would put the statue of the goddess with a flowing vase on the painted podium in room 64 that Parrot thought was a throne dais.'5 Margueron refutes Parrot's identification of the room block south of court 131 as a workshop and of rooms 24 and 25 as the scribal school. Both, he rightly suggests, were magazines that were part of the economic activities of the palace (Margueron 1982:335-39 and 345). The royal
:.: •
. .
..
•
. .. .
W,
I
2 Ur II
32
/
Lower levels destroyed when this section was built
? Nthe 0
m
to
"Entrance
sanctuary
Final building phase?
20.m
Above: Major building phases of the palace as identified by JeanMargueron.Wallsshowing remodeling are circled. After Margueron1982, figure 248. Below: Jean Margueron'splan indicating highly controlled trafficroutes between the major sectors of the palace. After Margueron1982, figure 247.
Housingforhighofficials
Receptionwing
C
0
.
King's house•i
N
Temple
Palace storerooms/
workshops
0 10 20 m .... ......Business traffic ...Temple
access
Majortrafficroutes
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
83
Tro views of court XXVIIin the preSargonic-1level of the palace's southeastern religioussector.Photographsareused courtesy Mission archeologique de Mari.
84
apartmentshe shifts from the northwest block aroundcourt 31 to a second story abovethe magazines south of court 131.This identification is supportedby the readyaccess to this sector via a staircase (81) behind the throne room as well as the fragmentarywall paintings in the debris of room 220 (Margueron 1982:364-65). Parrot'smagazinesthe row of rooms running along the preservedsouthwest limit of the palace-become housing for the minor personnel or slaves of the king, as does the tawdryset of rooms immediately to the west of the north gate (Margueron1982:340-42). This organizationof the palace takes on a very differentpattern from that presentedby Parrot.Margueron rearrangesthe main axes of the complex into a southern and northern plan: He puts the "king'shouse"to the south, its northernboundary coinciding with the south walls of courts 131 and 106;it includes the administrativequartersdirectly west of this line (that is, the rooms organizedaroundcourts 1 and 70). The northernhalf of the palace mirrorsthe principles of the king's house, with the groundfloor serving as administrativerooms and the upper story or stories as residential quartersfor the largenumber of official personnel of the king (Margueron1982:366). The north gate, court 131,and its directly associated rooms remain the reception wing. In conjunction with this reorganizationof the room functions, Margueronproposesa new
blocks immediately west of 65. The palace then expandednorth (Parrot's royalapartmentsand the north gate). In a fourth stage, court 131was truncated along its western side for the construction of court 106 and antechamber64- a bold undertaking of Sam'i-Adadand his sonwhich was shortly followed by the final addition of the wing south of chapel 132 and the slave quarters south of the throne room (Margueron1982:377-78). Thus identified, the apparenthomogeneity of the entire western half of the palace would disintegrate;it would be the result of monumental remodeling ratherthan an organic architecturaldevelopment. While Margueron'sscheme adheresto the conclusions drawn from his very close reexaminationof architecturalfeatures in the palace, it nonetheless skirts certain categories of evidence that one might reasonablyconsult as further chronological indices. Epigraphic evidence is rarebut it does exist. The door socket from the first room inside the north gate (156)indeed offers little help since the king, EnimDagan, whose name is inscribed on it, has yet to find his place in the Mari sequence (Margueron1982:213
scheme for the evolution toward this final stage of the palace, which he thinks was reached during the Assyrian Yasmah-Adad's tenure (Margueron 1982: 378, note 652). Margueron believes the earliest version of the palace was constructed in the southeastern religious area. The large court 131, chapel 132 with its wall paintings (Moortgat's Ur III attribution), and throne room 65 were added next, along with the room
Zimri-Lim's name throughout the palace (they are the only stamped bricks found in situ) to repairs as well (Margueron 1982: 370 and 378, note 652). One might stress, however, the epigraphical finds that do give fixed chronological points: a fragmentary impression with the name of Yahdun-Lim recovered from a lower floor in court 131 (Parrot 1964: 98) or-in the southeast stratigraphic probes that may well be
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
and 373).16 One might mention,
however,a discardedtablet giving the name of Zimri-Lim'sofficial Zaziya, which servedas rubblein the pivot-stone casing for the door to corridor 152 nearby(Parrot1958a:15).It may representno more than a repair; Margueronwould indeed ascribe the frequent stampedbricks bearing
)r3
p,.".1
N
'4 pl
r
D
C3
Drawings by Constance Spriesterbach
Above: Reconstruction of the chapel (room 66) by YasinAl-Khalesi. Reproducedfrom The Court of the Palms: A Functional Interpretationof the Mari Palace,plate VI, courtesy of Undena Publications. Right: Life-size diorite statue of Puzur-Igtarof Mari. This statue was discoveredin the museum of Nebuchadrezzar'spalace at Babylon (604-562 B.C.E.) along with a second identical statue whose head is lost. The inscription on the hem of the statue's skirt mentions Puzur-Igtar,'akkanakku of Mari, and his brotherthe priest Milaga. The horns on Puzur-Igtar'scap signify deification. Horned caps were usually limited to divine representations in Mesopotamian art but they do occur on depictions of kings duringthe Ur III period. The body of this statue is now in the Archaeological Museum of Istanbul; its head is in the Berlin Museum.
under the final floor of rooms 220 and 221 that are at the core of Margueron'slatest building phase three floors dated by tablets to Yahdun-Lim,Sumu-Yamam,and the Third Dynasty of Ur (Parrot1967:4). I would agreethat the accumulation of floors in throne room 65 (Parrot 1958a: 124, figure 132)implies a long history for this room but I would hesitate to reconstruct a development for the entire palace without comparablestratigraphicprobes elsewhere in the complex. Finally,a building sequence relying in any way on the wall paintings can readily be demonstratedas tendentious. It remains for Margueronto test his premises: He has resumed excavations at Mari since 1979. Marguerondeliberatelyavoided correlatingtextual referencesfrom the Mari archives to specific sectors of the palace (Margueron1982:330). He was forced,however,to tackle Parrot'sidentification of court 131 as
the "Courtof the Palms"and was thus drawninto consideringa location for the associated papai1um/shrine(Margueron1982: 360-63). The identification of rooms mentioned in the Mari texts involves yet anotherbranchof scholarship in this third phase of investigations of Zimri-Lim'spalace, and one that should, given patience and alertness, provemost fruitful. In a recent bold study,YasinAl-Khalesihas attempted to demonstrate that the Court of the Palms should be located in court 106 and that the palms in its title refernot to real trees but ratherto the date palms that frame the "Investiture"painting (Al-Khalesi1978: 10).7 He would place the "sealedoil storehouse,"mentioned in another text (ARMTIX.9)as a dependent of the Court of the Palms, in room 116 on the court'ssoutheastern side. This room was filled with largejars still in situ. Furtherreferencesto railings and "prancinglamassfis"
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
85
(dLAMA.HI.A raqidfitum: ARMT XIII.6) could also be reconciled with this court (or with court 131Margueron 1982: 360-63). The roofed pap~l3um/shrine would thus become the chapel 66.18 It is for this chapel (room 66) that Al-Khalesi offers a most daring reconstruction based on the ceremony that he thinks took place there, and which he suggests was illustrated and commemorated by the "Investiture"painting. He transposes the five figures of the panel's upper register-the king, the goddess Istar, and three attendant deities - onto the chapel platform as statues (AlKhalesi 1978: 37-43). The two goddesses with flowing vases depicted in the lower register would find their places as statues set on the bitumencoated bases that stand on either side of the steps leading up to the platform. He cites, among other evidence, the statue of such a goddess found at the base of the podium in room 64, drain or water conduits necessary for water to flow from the statues' vases at the east end of throne room 65, and - for the platform statues - the three bases discovered by Parrot. (Al-Khalesi's drawing is incorrect here for the statues stand directly on the platform-Al-Khalesi 1978: plate VI.) There is no place for IJtup-ilum's statue in this scheme, for he could hardly be the deity on the far right of the painting's upper register. The statue of Puzur-IJtar, to pursue this issue further, might have been a better candidate because of the horns on his cap. In fact, any number of valid objections might be raised to what at present should be recognized as too sensational a reconstruction. Nonetheless, it is precisely along these lines of investigation that one can hope to progress beyond the bare architectural plan of the palace to a structure that functions as a threedimensional entity. Was Zimri-Lim's palace, as Parrot believed, one of the marvels of its time or was it merely a palace
86
among many as Margueron asserts?
The issue will only be resolvedby
the discovery of comparable Mesopotamian structures, especially
Sam'i-Adad'sown palace at Tell Leilan.
Notes 'Dossin published this tablet more completely in Ugaritica I (Schaeffer 1939: 16, note 1)than in his preliminary article two yearsearlier (Dossin 1937:74) and demonstratedthat the Hammurabi in question is the rulerof Aleppo- not Babylonor Kurda. 2Thetraditionalhigh-middle-low chronological system forthe FirstDynasty of Babylonis invalid (Reinerand Pingree 1974:25) and should no longer be used. Foradapteddates for Hammurabiof Babylon,see Gates 1981: 36-37: late eighteenth throughthe first quarterof the seventeenth century B.C.E. 3Unfortunatelylittle is known of Mesopotamianpalaces contemporary with Zimri-Lim's.The Old Babylonian monuments at Babylonhave been destroyedboth by later energetic kings of the seventh and sixth centuries B.C.E.and by a high water-table.At present Sam'iAdad'spalace has not been found, although it could be at the site of Tell Leilan,which is currentlybeing excavatedby H. Weiss. 4Thenumberingsystem for the rooms of the palace indicates the orderin which they were discoveredby Parrot. sDuring the third and early second millennia Mari'stemples were consistently West Syrianin plan;however, the secular architectureand art were closely linked to southern Mesopotamia- a sure indication of Mari's cultural and political aspirations. 6Therearetwo other possible entrances:Parrot's"chariotgate"in the northeast cornerof the palace, and a service entrance in the southeast located near the temples (Margueron1982:283 and 334). Since the mound is badly eroded on this side, one cannot be certain of the palace'slayout here. 7Exactfindspots for the fragments arenot given in the excavationreport.I suspect that the field notes with this information were lost (alongwith the actual fragments)when the excavation house was destroyedduringthe war (Parrot1958b:18-19).
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
8Margueron (1982: 251-53) discusses
the problemsof this court in greatdetail but does not suggest what seems to be the likeliest explanation:The oven in the southeast cornerwas used first and then abandoned;a wall anda staircasewerebuilt overit (thus creatinga small room, number 77, at the east end of truncatedcourt 70);and a second oven was set up in the middle of the now smaller court 70. 91twould be interestingto know whether any of these tablets had been bakedin antiquity and whether these ovens were used forbakingbread(Parrot found two quems - Parrot1958a:234) or forbaking tablets (asat UgaritSchaeffer1962:31-33). It should be noted that most of the tablets here were found in room 71 and had fallen from an upperstory. l0Themost recent example is the work of M.-L.Buhl (1982). 11Theplatformand flight of steps leading up to the sanctuarywere built into what was originally a room (66)connecting the throne room to corridor68 (Margueron1982:228). 12Parrot's "hostel"to the east of the main entrancegate would then become the exception that confirms the rule. Margueronconsiders that this plan arounda court evolvedafterconsiderable modifications (Margueron1982:220-21). 13Thepresence of statues in room 66, however,links the platformthere to room 210 in the southeast, which Margueronagreeswas a cella. Statues were not found elsewhere in the palace. Moreover,the plan of this platformis strikingly similar to those in Assyrian cellas known from later periods (forexample the thirteenth century B.C.E.Istar Templeat ASlur).Can this be an Assyrian installation in the throne room at Mari? 14Margueron arguesthat the platform is made of brick, as is used in temple architecture,and not stone, as is used in the throne room (Margueron1982: 332). The podium does not, however, resemble at all the podia in contemporaryor earliertemples at Mari. IsMargueronuses the same argument for the podium in room 64 (that it is made of brick)as for the podium in room 132. He concedes that the statue of the goddesswith a flowing vase must originallyhave been installed elsewhere, since there is no water supplied to the podium to activate the flowing
mechanism of her vase. He further miens de lAge du Bronze,volume I underlines the narrownessof the (text)and volume II (plates).Series: Institut FranqaisdArch'ologie du podium, which would make it difficult ProcheOrient. Bibliothequearto sit gracefullyon a chair set upon it. cheologique et historique 107. Paris: Finally,he remarksthat the painted Paul Geuthner. decoration of the podium shows no sign Moortgat,A. of wear (Margueron1982:356-58). I 1964 Die Wandgemildeim Palastezu would point out that there is no evidence Mariund ihre Historische Einordthat the statue was not linked up to a nung. BaghdaderMitteilungen3: water supply,that the unmarredsurface 68-74. of the podium may be the result of the Parrot,A. 1937 Lesfouilles de Mari,troisieme camthrone being placed on a rug, that without the rug the statue also would pagne (Hiver1935-1936). Syria 18: 54-84. have left a mark on the platform,and 1958a Lepalais: Architecture.Series:Misthat the steps on either side of the sion archdologiquede Mari2. Inpodium were surely functional. The stitut FrangaisdArcheologiede problem of identifying the function of Beyrouth.Bibliothbquearch6olothis room cannot be resolvedgiven the gique et historique68. Paris:Paul present evidence. Geuthner. 1958b Lepalais: Peinturesmurales. Series: 16Margueron (followingKupper) Mission archdologiquede Mari2. Inplaces Enim-Daganearly in the sequence stitut FrangaisdArchdologiede of kings at Mari.Parrottentatively puts him at the end (Parrot1974: 180). Beyrouth.Bibliothhquearch6ologique et historique69. Paris:Paul 17Thetexts mentioning the Court of Geuthner. the Palms date both from the Assyrian 1959 Lepalais: Documents et interregnumand Zimri-Lim'sreign.They monuments. Series:Mission arare all listed by Al-Khalesi(1978:6-9). chsologique de Mari2. Institut FranS18Margueron (1982:362) prefersto qais dArcheologiede Beyrouth. identify room 64 with its podium as the Bibliothequearcheologiqueet shrine; since he identifies "audiencehall" historique 70. Paris:PaulGeuthner. 132 as a chapel, it could also be the 1964 Lebassin de Iahdun-Lim.Baghdader Mitteilungen 3: 96-99. papaihumfor a Court of the Palms 1967 Lesfouilles de Mari,seizieme camsituated in court 131.
Bibliography Al-Khalesi, Y.M. 1978 The Courtof the Palms:A Functional Interpretationof the Mari Palace. Series:Bibliotheca Mesopotamica8. Malibu,CA: Undena Publications. Buhl,M.-L. 1982 Un sceau de Zimrilim. Syria59: 93-100. Dossin, G. 1937 P. 74 in Lesfouilles de Mari, troisieme campagne(Hiver 1935-1936)by A. Parrot.Syria 18: 54-84. Ellis, R. S. 1975 Reviewof TheArt of Ancient Mesopotamiaby A. Moortgat.Journal of the American Oriental Society 95: 81-94. Gates, M. -H. 1981 Alalakh Levels VIand V:A ChronologicalReassessment. Series: Syro-MesopotamianStudies 4/2. Malibu,CA:Undena Publications. Margueron,J. 1982 Recherchessur les palais misopota-
pagne (Printemps1966).Syria44: 1-26. 1974 Mari,capitale fabuleuse. Paris: Payot. Reiner,E., and Pingree,D. 1975 BPO I: The VenusTabletsof Ammisaduqa. Series:Bibliotheca Mesopotamica2/1.Malibu,CA: Undena Publications. Schaeffer,C. E A., and others 1939 UgariticaI. Series:Mission de Ras Shamra3. Haut-commissariatde la R6publiqueFranqaiseen Syrieet au Liban,Servicedes Antiquitds Bibliothequearcheologiqueet historique31. Paris:PaulGeuthner. 1962 UgariticaIV Series:Mission de Ras Shamra15.Institut FrangaisdArcheologie de Beyrouth.Bibliothhque archdologiqueet historique 74. Paris: Paul Geuthner. Sollberger,E. 1967 LostInscriptionsfromMari.Pp. 103-07 in La Civilisation de Mari, edited by J.-R.Kupper.Series: Bibliothequede la Facultede Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universit6 de Lidge182. RencontreAssyriologique Internationale15.Paris:Les Belles Lettres.
ASORAwardsforStudyin the MiddleEast1985-86 The American Schools of Oriental Researchis offeringover$170,000 in research,study,and travelgrantsfor the 1985-86 academicyearand the summer of 1985.Awardsareavailableto undergraduates,graduatestudents, seminarians,and postdoctoralscholars. Awardsofferopportunitiesfor humanistic study in the Middle East fromprehistoricthroughIslamic times. Recipientsparticipatein the stimulating scholarly community of the AlbrightInstitute in Jerusalem,the AmericanCenter of OrientalResearch in Amman, or the CyprusAmerican ArchaeologicalResearchInstitute in Nicosia. Awardsinclude: National Endowmentforthe Humanities Post-DoctoralResearch Fellowships,stipendsup to $25,000, in Jerusalemand Amman (pending receiptof funds from NEH) Annual Professorshipsin Jerusalem, Amman, and Nicosia, with roomand-boardbenefits KressFellowshipin Art History,in Jerusalem,with room-and-board benefits and stipendup to $2,700 BartonFellowshipin Jerusalem,with room-and-board benefits and stipend up to $2,000 Shell Fellowshipin Amman, with stipendup to $6,000 MesopotamianFellowship,with stipend up to $5,000 AlbrightFellowship,with stipend up to $5,000 EndowmentforBiblical Research (formerlyZRF)summer study and travelgrants,with stipendsof $1,000 and $1,500 Honoraryawardsin Jerusalem,
Amman,andNicosia Applicationdeadlinefor most awardsis November 1984.Fordetails and application information,write: ASORAdministrativeOffice 4243 SpruceStreet Philadelphia,PA 19104 Tel. (215)222-4643
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
VSOFo0
Q)Pn A I?ti 44
."
,
87
Literary Sources for the History of Palestine and Syria
The Manr Archives by Dennis Pardee updatedand revisedbyJonathanT Glass'
MI 04 all?Y
fV
o(o 00.5~) 00
ott :. 51?.
o?
009
0
4bi~ ~?:00
0
%,b 04 :S%4%.
lb
o.
wa 4 0.0. 0. .0 o.0I0- ; 00 ~ 0.?P ? 0% V10 0 069. 0 0 0 4IM 0?,00
Mari,
theancientcitythatonceoccupiedthe
mound that now goes by the name Tell Hariri, is located on the right bank of the EuphratesRiver in Syria, about ten miles north of the Iraqifrontier.Its importanceforthe history of SyriaandPalestinelies not so much in its location as in its inhabitants at the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E.:Their native languageis closely relatedto the family from which the Hebrew of the Old Testament sprang (termed the Northwest Semitic group of languages by linguists),andthus when we tracethe languageandhistory of the inhabitants of Mari,we are studying one branchof the (linguistic) family tree of the later West Semitic peoples. Archaeology The first campaign at Tell Hariri was carriedout by the French under Andr6Parrotduring the winter months of
88
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
1933-34; it was reportedin the journalSyria(Parrot1935). Since that firstsession, preliminaryreportsof twenty more campaignshavebeen publishedin that journal,the twentyfirst appearing in 1975 in Syria 52. Also, several comprehensive reports have appeared (Parrot1956, 1958a, 1958b, 1959, 1967, 1968).Parrothimself has summed up the finds, both archaeologicaland epigraphic,with a good bibliography(Parrot1974).Workat the site was suspended in 1975but was resumedagainin 1979underthe direction of JeanMargueron,and two preliminaryreportshavebeen published, of the twenty-second and twenty-third campaigns (Margueron1982a, 1983). The most spectacular finds fall into two categories: texts and architecture.To date more than 20,000 tablets havebeen found, as well as inscriptions on stone, cylinder seals, jewelry,and so on in far smaller number.The contents of the tablets are the main topic of this report. As to the architecturaldiscoveries,the most astonish-
ing was that of a series of superimposedpalaces stretching overa period of at least a thousand yearsfrom early in the third millennium B.C.E. (Early Dynastic II-III or preSargonicin archaeological/historicalterms)to earlyin the second millennium B.C.E. (the Old Babylonianperiod).The earliest palace (Pre-Sargonic II)is, of course,the deepest in the mound and is now the least exposed. Nonetheless, several large rooms of the sacred portion of this palace, complete with altarsandlibationpits, havebeen completely excavated,as havealso severalof the surroundingrooms and corridors. The plan of the laterpalace(Pre-Sargonic I)is the same as the earlier,with walls, altars,andso on all superimposed overa periodof severalhundredyears.The possibility of a III"palace raisedby Parrot(1972:291)is now "Pre-Sargonic confirmed by Margueron(1982b:87-88). In additionto the pre-Sargonic palaces,severaltemples of these periodshavebeen found (thoseof I'tar,Istarat,and Ninni-Zaza have been described in reportsnoted above). The most striking epigraphicfinds of these early periods are short references to Ansud (also written Ansub and Hanusu), king of Mari, and to Mesannepada,king of Ur, discussed in Syria 42 (Parrot1965a: 23; 1965b: 220-25). These kings are presented in the Sumerian king list as founders of dynasties in Mari and Ur, but before Parrot's finds only Mesannepadawas known from contemporary sources. (The Sumerianking list itself dates from a later period and its historical value is now called into doubtMichalowski 1983.)The inscriptionsof Ansud prove,first, that he existed in the EarlyDynastic periodas king of Mari, and,second,that he was roughlycontemporarywith Mesannepada (showing that the dynasties that appearin the Sumerianking list as successivewereoften contemporarya situationanalogousto the judgesof the Bibleforwhom contemporaneityis not statedbut likely in severalcases). The latest palace,which lay closest to the surfaceand which was thus excavatedfirst,was that of the Old Babylonian period (early second millennium). It received its greatestexpansion in the time of its last king, Zimri-Lim, when it coveredeight acresand comprisedapproximately 300 rooms, complete with throne rooms, audience chambers, schools, bakeries, wine cellars, archives, bathrooms, and lavatories ("inside plumbing" in 1800 This is the palace treated by Parrot, as noted above. B.C.E.!). Recent publications have offered a "functional interpretation" of this palace (Al-Khalesi 1978) and have suggested different functions for individual rooms (Margueron 1982). It was in this palace that most of the 20,000 tablets were found, particularly in rooms 5, 110, 111,and 115. Room 115 was reexcavated in 1972 and another hundred tablets were found (Birot 1973). There is now a journal devoted primarily to the study of all aspects of the finds at Mari: Mari: Annales de Recherches Interdisciplinaires (acronym: MARI; Paris: tditions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1982- ).
t~40 Ali,
12:'-.
In 1965 this inscribed bead was found among a rich cache of objects in court XXVIof the pre-Sargonicpalace at Mari. It is made of lapis lazuli and is inscribed with seven lines of cuneiform which includes the name Mesannepada, the founder of the FirstDynasty of Ur. The transcriptionwas made by GeorgesDossin. The photographis used courtesy of Mission archologique de Mari and the drawingis from Mari capitale fabuleuse by Andr6 Parrot(Paris:Payot,1974).
This bathroom excavatedfrom room 7 of the palace at Mari has a toilet and two terra-cottatubs. Photographis from Mari by Andr6 Parrot,Editions Ides et Calendes, CH-Neuchactel,Switzerland.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
89
The Texts Of the more than 20,000 texts excavatedto date, slightly more than one-fourthhavebeen publishedofficially.They are appearingin two parallel series: the first containing only hand copies of the tablets themselves (in the series Textescun6iformesdu Louvre,since 1976in the new series Textes cundiformes de Mari), the second containing transliterations of the Akkadian signs into Roman charactersand a French translation, usually with some formof commentaryand/orglossary.Bothseries go by the name Archivesroyalesde Mari.As a convention,the hand copies areusually abbreviatedARM and the accompanying volumes of transliterations and translations ARMT. The publication dates of correspondingvolumes vary,so a givenvolumemayhaveappearedin ARMTbut not in ARM. The ARMTseries contains severalvolumes designed as technical aids to the study of the texts. ARMT 17/1contains a listing of all texts published, including those published outside of the official series (ARMHC), up to 1974.ARMT 16/1providesa subsequentlisting up to 1978 (ARMT16/1,1979:ix). Recently,texts havebeen published by Dossin (1981)and studied by Malamat (1983). About thirty percentof the publishedtexts areletters. The rest areeconomic, administrative,andjuridicaltexts. (Themain collections arenoted at the end of this article.) It should be noted also that English translations of Mari texts may occasionally be found in the Englishlanguagearticles cited in this report.The standardcollection of ancient Near Easterntexts in English translation contains relatively few texts from Mari (Pritchard1969: 482-83, 556-57, 623-25, 628-32). A selected number of texts relating to prophetic manifestations at Mari are available in one collection, Ancient Near Eastern Religious Texts (Beyerlin1978: 122-28). Twocollections may be cited that contain English translations of letters from Mari (Oppenheim 1967: 96-110 and Lass~ e 1963: 46-77). Virtuallyall of the texts of the Old Babylonianperiod are in Akkadian.It is clear,however,that the languageof the native populationhas many featuresin common with the later Northwest Semitic languages. (In other words, there was a standard,official languageused for business correspondenceand probablyalso utilized by the higher class of society for speech, andthere was a native, popular language spoken by the lower classes.) These Northwest Semitic features show up in propernames (forexample native Yabni-Addu as opposedto AkkadianIbni-Addu)and in a few words that are used in a non-Akkadiansense or that arenot Akkadianat all, as well as in some sentences that betrayNorthwest Semitic syntax. The texts arewritten on rectangularor squaretablets, fatterin the middlethan at the sides,madeof unbakedclay. Because the tablets were not originally baked hard, they tend to be in a veryfragilecondition when unearthed.The excavatorshavedevelopedtechniquesforbakingandclean-
90
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
The
of
Earliest
the
The
Name
Mention
"Canaan"
withina quotation givenhereisembedded
letterwrittenby anofficialto Yasmah-Adad, a king of Mariwho precededZimri-Limto the throne.Theletter,publishedbyGeorgesDossin in 1973("UnementiondeCanaaneens dansunelettrede Mari,"Syria50:277-82),is not in the bestconditionand its contextis dim.All we cansayis thatits authorwasin a Mesopotamian town,Rahisum,andwascontemplating takinghostileactionagainstunspecificopponents. habbatum u kinahnu ThievesandCanaanites
ina Rahisimwasib arein Rahisum. ninuu ununittattal Wejustfaceeachother. This referenceto Canaan(ites) in the texts foundat Mariis the earliestbyat leastfourcenturies,sincewe are to awaittheAmamadocuments(fourteenth-thirteenth cenandthe commemorative inscriptionof Idrimi turiesB.C.E.) latethirteenthcenturyB.C.E.) beforewe meetwith (probably variationson thewritingof thisname.Previousliterature onthesubject-welloverviewed bydeVauxin 1968("Le Pays de Canaan,"Journalof the American Oriental Society
88:23-30)-allows us to arrange ourinformation intotwo distinctcategories,which seem to belongtogetheronly because of phonologicalcoincidences:There is (1) kinah(h)u (once kinahhina), which occurs in Nuzi and
refersto theshadeofared/purple imdyethatwasprobably reflectsHurrianportedfromtheWest.Thistermprobably izingAkkadian uqnu(Ugaritic 'iqnu,Greekx6avos),a term thatis itselfobscurein originsandwhichrefersto a bluish
stone (see B. Landsberger,"OberFarberim sumerischakkadischen,"Journalof CuneiformStudies 21: 139-73).
Andthereis (2)kinahni,the designationforCanaanthat wasusedin the LateBronzeAge. Thecuneiformkinahnu/kinahnim usedin the letter recovered fromMariis closestin writingto theLateBronze Agecitationsthatwererecorded bythescribesofByblosand to Canaan.Their Tyre- thatis,bythosewhowere"native" colleagueswhowrotefromMitanniandKassiteBabylon, on the otherhand,seem to preferthe spellingkinahhi. the scribewhowasapparently for Sharruma, responsible tellingthestoryofIdrimiofAlalah,writeskin'anim,thus displayingcloserconnectionwith the Canaaniterather than with the Syro-Mesopotamian usage. We could also note, but leave undeveloped,the very suggestiveconnection between habbTitumand kinahnu/ kinahnim. It will be recalled that the sumerogramfor habbatumis frequentlygivenas SA.GAZ,andthat SA.GAZ is itself often used for Habiru.The last, of course, is the ethnicon that has led many to retrojecta documentable history for the Hebrewsinto the late second millennium B.C.E.
JackM. Sasson
ing the tablets shortly after discovery in orderto prevent furtherdecay. There is a small group of pre-Sargonictablets from Mari,discoveredbetween 1954and 1980,which havemany points in common with the Ebla texts. These are to be published by J.-M.Durandand D. Charpin(Charpin1982; preliminarypublication of two: M. Lambert1970,Nos. 2, 8). I. J.Gelb has pointed out the importance of the early Mari texts (including the post-Ur III texts) for the understandingof the Eblacivilization (Gelb 1977, 1981). History The best historicalsurveyis that by J.-R.Kupper(1973).An older treatment is that of FrancoMichelini Tocci (1960). In respectto the historicalinformationsuppliedby the texts, the letters providefirsthandinformation and are of more intrinsic value than royalinscriptions because they deal with real-lifesituations and lack the propagandistic bombast of documents intended forpublic consumption. The deriving of historical information from letters is not without its difficulties, however.First,they were written to and from individuals who, of course, knew what they werewritingaboutandwho, thus, didnot botherto provide all the details the modern reader would like to have; second, though there is less propagandisticexaggeration anddeviationfromthe facts than in, say,the laterAssyrian royal inscriptions, we are nonetheless never sure when someone writing to the king, forexample,was embroidering on the truth; and, third, not enough letters have come down throughthe nearly 3,000 yearssince they werewritten to fill all the gaps in our information, and those that have come down areoften fragmentary,with exasperating lacunae. The economic, administrative,andjuridicaltexts provide the raw material for assessing the manner in which goods and services wereexchangedandthe legal traditions regulatingsuch exchanges;they also give information on other aspects of social intercourse. An example of how these texts can be used for reconstructingpolitical history is providedin the section below on the history of neighboring areas. The Maritexts, coupled with informationfromother Mesopotamiansources,revealthe following outline of the political history of Mari in the early second millennium: (1) There was a local dynasty in which the royal names Yaggid-Lim and Yahdun-Lim occur. This would be dated before about 1815 B.C.E.according to the so-called "middle chronology." (E. F. Campbell, 1961, has provided bibliographies concerning the various chronologies that have been in Mari, suggested.) (2)Then there was a period of foreignnirule with the king of Assyria, Samli-Adad, taking control of the Mari region and putting his son Yasmali-Adadon the throne of Mari itself (until about 1780 B.C.E.). (3) Subsequently the local dynasty regained ascendancy, with Zimri-Lim, son of Yahdun-Lim, retaking the throne of Mari. In this last-
S1 11
* .
. .
•
L64
Topphotograph: Court IV of the pre-Sargonic-1palace. In the backgroundis a low platform with stairs and the base of a wood pillar. Bottom photograph: The western corridorthat borders the sacredprecinct of the pre-Sargonicpalace at Mari. Photographsare used courtesy Mission archeologique de Mari.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
91
The
of
Problem
Chronologyin Mesopotamia
Ancient
T
recorded Hammurabidefeatedthe armyof Assyria,but we cannot he culturesof ancientMesopotamia
their history in terms of a succession of events or names of various rulers and officials. Thus, the erection of a building might be dated to "year6 of king so-and-so"or a contract might indicate that it was written in "the year king so-and-sodefeated the king of Babylon."By carefullystudying these records, scholars have been able to piece together a relative order of events; however, using this information alone, it is not possible to translate such an orderinto equivalent calendaryears. Fortunately, ancient scribes would occasionally recordsignificant astronomicalevents, andby using contemporaryknowledge of the time it takes for planets or stars to move in their orbits, one can deduce when the events occurred. For example, an inscription from the tenth year of the Assyrian king Aiur-danIIIrefersto an eclipse of the sun, andby astronomicalcalculationsit can be determined that this eclipse must have occurred on June 15, 763 B.C.E.Since a complete sequence of events in the reigns of the various Assyrian and Babyloniankings goingback to the reignof the Assyrianking Adad-nirariII (911-891B.C.E.)is known, an absolute chronologyin calendar years for Mesopotamia in the first millennium B.C.E. has been firmly established. When attemptingto go back furtherin time than the first millennium, however,one encountersproblems.For a varietyof reasons,only partialrecordsin the last half of the second millennium B.C.E. have been preserved.Consequently, it is not possible to simply extend the absolute dates of the firstmillennium furtherback into the second millennium. If one wishes to date an event in the reignof the Babylonianking Hammurabi, one of the most importantfiguresof his day,there is only a relativesequence of events to work from with no absolute way to translate these events into calendaryears.It is known, forexample, that in the thirty-sixthandthirty-eighthyearsof his reign,
connect these events with our own calendar. A solution to this dilemma may be available in a series of astronomicaltexts that recordthe movements of the planet Venusduringthe reignof the Babylonianking Ammi-zaduqa,who ruled about ninety-fouryears after Hammurabi.In the tablet forthe sixth yearof such observations,it is notedthat a conjunctionoccurred,with Venus appearingon the horizon just priorto sunrise duringthe dateof a new moon. Sincethe regularmovementsof Venus and the moon areknown, as well as the time of sunrise,it can be calculatedwhen this conjunctionoccurred.Unfortunately, this conjunction is a periodic occurrence,and happens in cycles frequentenough to give three possible dates.If these dates areused, the firstyearof Hammurabi can be set at 1848, 1792, or 1736 B.C.E. Working with a
myriad of other materials, scholars usually pick one of these yearsas best fitting the patternof evidence,andconstructa chronologyaccordingly.Thus, therearehigh (1848 B.C.E. = Hammurabi,year 1), middle (1792 B.C.E. = Hammurabi,year 1)and low (1736 B.C.E. = Hammurabi,year 1) chronologies for the second millennium B.C.E. in Mesopotamia. Scholars are trying to resolve this ambiguity in chronology through a variety of methods, and it may be that an absolute chronology for Mesopotamia in the second millennium will eventually be established. Radiocarbondating has been used in an effort to resolve the issue, but the possible variance in even such exact methods has not providedthe precise point in time requiredfor an absolute chronology.Until a breakthrough occursthat will determinewithout questionthe exactdate of some event in the first half of the second millennium, scholars will have to continue to strugglewith the high, middle, and low chronologicalsystems for this period. JonathanT. Glass
Glyptic cylinder seal impression with the name of Idi-ilum, a governorof Mari. The so-called presentationscene is the focus of this cylinder seal which dates to the beginningof the second millennium B.C.E.Length is 27 cen-
timeters. Photographfrom Mari by Andr6 Parrot,Editions Ides et Calendes, CH-Neuchatel, Switzerland.
92
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE
1984
mentioned enterprise,Zimri-Limwas aidedby his father- mention of Laishprovidingthe name of one of its leading citizens is indeed a real "plum."Malamat has recently in-law, Yarim-Lim(notice the -Lim name), ruler of the Syriankingdom of Yamhad(Aleppo).(4)Finally,Mariwas publicized another document that relatedthe robberyof destroyedby the famous Hammurabiof Babylonin the lat- precious metals and stones at Emar,a town on the great ter'sthirty-fifth regnalyear (about 1757 B.C.E). bend of the Euphrates,from a caravanout of Hazorbound for Mari (Malamat1983: 170).The letter bearswitness to Beyond this brief historical outline, there is a vast amount of information in these letters about the ad- both the scope of trade and the complexity of relations ministration of Mari and its dependent towns and about between several states, as Zimri-Lim must appeal to his Mari'srelationships with other towns and nations of the father-in-lawYarim-Limof Yamhad,underwhose control time. Emarlies, for restitution. History of neighboringareas.The Maritexts areextremeKupperhas recently offered a broad study of Mari's relations with its neighbors in this period (Kupper1982). ly useful in establishing the history and geography of northern Mesopotamia, but for the student of Syro- Social history.These texts also providematerial for many Palestinianhistory the referencesto the westerncountries years of study into the social aspects of the early Semitic are perhapsof paramount interest. We have alreadyseen peopleswho lived in andaroundMari.Some aspectsof this that Zimri-Limwas marriedto the daughterof Yarim-Lim, social history have already been treated-for example, king of Yambadin northwestern Syria. His predecessor, nomadism (Kupper1957;Matthews 1978;Rowton 1967); Yasmah-Adadof the Assyrianregency,was also marriedto military structures (Sasson 1969;Matthews 1981);tribal a Syrianprincess,the daughterof It'i-Adad,king of Qatna, organization (Malamat 1962; Muntingh 1974); and the another town located in west-central Syria (which would position of women (Batto1974;Romer 1971;Durandand indicate a rivalry between two of the major political Margueron1980)-but much remainsto be done, especialcenters in Syria). ly as more texts are published. The kind of informationwe can expect fromthe Mari Linguistic history.Though the Maritexts are consistenttexts is well illustratedby an economic document that was ly written in good Akkadian (for a grammar of Mari published by GeorgesDossin (1970)and which is adapted Akkadian, see Finet 1956), there is enough information here from another article (Malamat 1971:34). frompropernames andnon-Akkadianwordsto outline the 10minastin (for)Sumu-Erah linguistic structureof the languagespokenby the Semites at Muzunnum; from the west who were then inhabiting the Mariregion. 8 /3 minastin (forfWari-taldu I. J.Gelb first published a short grammarof this language at Laish; (Gelb 1958), then followed it some years later with his 30 minastin (for)Ibni-Adad, kingof Hazor. Computer-aidedAnalysis ofAmorite (1980),which is to be Comptroller: Add[...]at Hazazar, followed by a companion grammar.Forthe moment, see forthe firsttime; the brief introduction to the Amorite language in E. E. 20 minastin (for)Amud-pi-El, Knudsen's review of Gelb's Computer-aidedAnalysis of 20 minastin (for)Ibni-Adad, Amorite (Knudsen1982). [forthe]secondtime; The term Amorite was derived from the Akkadian minas tin for the Caphtorite, [x] word for the west, amurru,and was often used to referto I [+ ?minas]tin forthe dragoman, those groups who were entering Mesopotamia from the [xminastin for]the Carian(?), west. The term is somewhat incorrect,however,because it [atUg]arit; 20 (?)[minastin forIb]ni-Adad forthe thirdtime; probablywas originallya place name or tribalname of very limited applicabilityandnot a genericterm forNorthwest This short document mentions shipments of tin to Semites as a whole and because it was never used by the two well-known places in Palestine (Hazor,located about inhabitants of Mari to describe themselves. (The word ten miles north of the sea of Galilee, andLaish,the ancient appearsonly rarelyin the texts as a designation of a small name of Dan, located at the northern extremity of Israel near Mt. Hermon); two less well-known places (Muzunnum and Hazazar; for their location see Astour 1973: 73-75); Amud-pi-El, then king of Qatna; the city of Ugarit, on the northern coast of Syria; and a Caphtorite (Cretan). Malamat has called the reference to Wari-Taldu,"the plum for the Palestinologist" (Malamat 1971a: 35). It is certainly of extreme interest to find an important personage of Laish in northern Palestine bearing a name that must be identified as Hurrian, especially at so early a period.2 Also, references to the cities of Palestine are so rare that a
tribal subdivision or as the name of a land with multiple kings to the west of Qatna-Dossin 1957: 37-38.) As regards the vocabulary of Amorite, Abraham Malamat has frequently referred to the non-Akkadian words or meanings found in the Mari texts (Malamat 1962, 1971, 1979). Some examples of such non-Akkadian words or meanings are gayum, a term for a tribal subgroup, related to Hebrew g6y ("nation");ummatum, another tribal term, related to Hebrew 'ummii (also meaning "nation";and rarely, as at Mari, meaning a tribal unit; compare Genesis 25:16 and Numbers 25:15-Malamat 1979); hamqum,
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
93
relatedto Hebrewcemeq ("valley"); andIhiglum, relatedto Hebrewcegel ("calf"; Edzard1964). Religious history. Both nonliterary sources (such as the altarsof earth illustratedby Malamat 1974b:14, figure 6) and literarysources provideinformation of great interest forthe religioushistoryof the earlyNorthwestSemites.For instance, the appearanceof deities well known from later Syro-Palestiniansources shows that these deities had a long background(forexample, Dagan, god of grain, and Haddu/Hadad/Addu/Adad, storm-god). Of greatestinterest,however,is the series of texts containing referencesto prophetismamongthe inhabitantsof Mari and neighboring towns (as far south as Sipparin Babylonia).To date, twenty-eight Mari texts have been discovered that contain references to communications from persons claiming to have dreamsor direct messages fromdeities. These messagesaredirectedfromthe deity to a thirdparty,usually the king. Beforethe appearanceof the Maritexts, induced divine guidanceby variousdivination practices (forexample, liver divination or the interpretation of smoke patterns,oil patterns on water,or the flight of birds)was well known from Mesopotamian sources.3 The "message-dream" was also known, though it was not common (Oppenheim 1956: 193-206; Sasson 1983).The modality of the Mari dream messages, however,and the phenomenon of immediately perceived prophetic messagesareforall practicalpurposesunparalleledoutside of the OldTestament.This holds truefroman examination of Northwest Semitic sources (Ross1970)and of the more literaryprophecies from Mesopotamiansources (Hunger and Kaufman 1975). As would be expected,this new source of materialfor comparisonwith the Old Testamenthas elicited a flood of response. Severalbooks have been devotedto the subject (most notably Ellermeier 1968;Noort 1977;and Schmitt 1982), and some helpful reviews of these books have appeared (Walters1970;Heintz 1971;Sasson 1980).In addition, several articles skillfully cover the main issues, notably two by J.E Craghan(1974, 1975)which also contain a numberof useful bibliographicalreferences.Herbert B. Huffmon has attempted to place Mariprophecyin the context of general ancient Near Eastern prophecy (Huffmon 1976). Many of the Mari prophecy texts are available in English translation (Pritchard 1969; Beyerlin 1978); one that has been published in a French translation by Georges Dossin (1966) may be offered here as an example. This text
is unique because it is the only letter to date that was written by a prophet himself, all the others having been conveyed by an intermediary. It is not complete, but the sections provided by the editor are given below (translated by the author from the French): Speak thus to Zimri-Lim:thus (says)the apilumprophet [literally "the answerer (of question)"]of Shamash[the sun-god].Thus says Shamash,lordof
94
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
thecountry:"Pleasesendimmediatelyto me in Sippar,in orderthatprosperitycontinue[literally"for life"],thethroneintendedformysplendidresidence, as well as yourdaughterwhom I alreadyhaverequestedof you. ... Now,as concernsHammurabi, he hasspokencriminallyagainstyou. kingofKurda, Butwhenhe attacks,youwill be victorious;thereafteryouareto relievethe landof its indebtedness. Igrantyouthe wholeland.Whenyoutakethe city, youareto declareamnestyfromdebts. This text revealstwo of the main concernsof the Mariprophetic messages: first, proper care of the deities, their temples, andthe temple services;and, second,promisesof military success (orthreats of defeat in other cases). The main concern of most researcherswith a backgroundin the Old Testamenthas been that of comparing the Mari materials to the Old Testament prophets.This researchhas dealt with matters of form, factual content, and sociological considerations:Do the Mariprophetsuse the same type of languageas the biblicalprophets?Do they talk about the same things? Do they fill the same role in society? The answersto all three questions areyes andno. Old Testament form-criticsimmediately picked out the formula"x-deityhas sent me,"so similar to many such statements in the Bible. The main thrust of Ellermeier's book, however,has been to show that there are too many variationsin formulaeat Marito say that the "messengerformula"was primary. The content of the letters shows many points of comparison with the Old Testament. A repeated announcement to Zimri-Lim that he would be victorious overBabylonis reminiscent of biblical oraclesof the same type; unfortunately,the Maripredictionprovedincorrect since Hammurabiof Babyloneventually destroyedMari (compare 2 Chronicles 18). One immediately misses, however,the strongmoralemphases of the Bibleprophets. In this respect,the letter cited aboveis typical of the preoccupations of the Mariprophets.As for the role playedby these prophets,it seems to be quite comparableto that of the Israeliteprophetsunderunresponsivekings. Jeremiah, for example, was heardbut only occasionally heeded and he thus had no real impact on the political events of his time. J.S. Holladay (1970)has chartedthe development of Israelite prophets from court prophets (as at Mari) to populist prophets (that is, their message was directed to the people rather than primarily to the king). It is also worthy of note that A. Marzal has concluded that "apodictic"and "casuistic" forms of law coexist at Mari. He argues that the subject matter and the setting-in-life are not the factors that finally determine the selection of one formulation over another (Marzal 1971: 509). The very large place that some of the Israelite prophets assume in our thinking today is mainly because their literary creations, often of very high quality, have come down to us, and we must be careful in comparing the role of the Mari prophets with that of the Old Testament
prophets.There are severalreasons for caution. First,we have very little evidence about the response accordedthe messages of the Mariprophets.Second,we haveno literary production from the Mari prophets that is in any way comparable to that of the Israelite prophets. (The Mari prophecies are derivedfrom "epistolaryarchives,written in the heat of the moment, so to speak"-Sasson 1980:129.)Third,the propheticbooks, as they exist in the canonical Old Testament, extend for several centuries with widely varying political conditions, whereas the prophetic materials from Mari are taken from the same periodof history,which seems to havebeen one of general crisis. Rather than seeing "prophecy" as a unitary phenomenon that respondsto any number of situations, Noort (1977:92) arguesthat "prophecyat Mariwas unified only as it, in many different forms, sought to respond to one experiential reality."Fourth, it is now a matter of debatewhether we can groupall of the materials we have been used to terming prophetic at Mari together in an evaluationof prophecy.Cases havebeenmaderecentlythat dreamsshouldbe examinedseparatelyfromthe deliveryof prophecy(forinstance,Nakata1982:143-44).Wecan, at the least, say that the choice by the god of Israelof prophets between himself and his people was not a new and unfamiliarmode of communication.
Andrg Parrot'sdiscovery in January1934 of this stone statue with the ancient site of confirmedthe identification of Tell Harfri the statue's right shoulder Mari. An inscription on the back of and arm identify the man as Lamgi-Mari,pre-Sargonicking of Mari. The statue's elaborate hairstyle is a traditional sign of kingship in Mesopotamia- the wavy hair is parted in the middle, a braid encircles the head and is held in place by a diadem, while the remaining hair is bound into a chignon at the back of the head. The statue of Lamgi-Mariis 27.2 centimeters high and is now in the Aleppo Museum. Mission archdologique de Mari, tome 65, plates XXV and XXVI.
Mari and the Bible Much has, of course, been written in the last fifty years aboutthe importanceof Mariforthe Bible.Wehavealready seen how valuablethe Maritexts areforreconstructingthe political history of Palestine and Syriain the early second millennium B.C.E.,for establishing the prehistory of the NorthwestSemitic languages,andfortracingan earlyform of prophetism. We enter upon a different level of use of these texts, however, with certain interpretations of biblical chronologyin which the patriarchsof Genesis aredatedto the same generalperiod as the Mari documents. There is little, unfortunately,beyondcomparisonof propernames (of persons and places) to link these texts with the patriarchs (Lemaire 1984). Closer and more numerous links of a social nature, such as marriage and family customs, are discernible, in fact, with the texts from another and later site - fifteenth-century Nuzi. Thomas L.Thompson (1974)has shown that the proper names and social customs fromboth MariandNuzi that have been comparedwith the patriarchalnarrativesfind parallels from periods ranging from 2000 to 500 B.C.E.He
holds that without a specific link between the patriarchal narrativesand extrabiblicaltexts, we have no sure way of dating the patriarchsor even, accordingto him, of asserting their existence. The argumentis based on silence. No monument, for example, has yet mentioned Abrahamby name. And it is, as is any argumentfromsilence, subjectto revision if new data appear.In the present case, however,
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
95
even if Abrahamwas a historicalpersonage,the chances of findinga contemporaryreferenceto him aresmall indeed. One must, nonetheless,give heed to Thompson'sargument: A historian dealing with the history of SyriaPalestine in the early second millennium cannot assert that the patriarchs were historical personages, simply becausethe Bibleis the only documentthat refersto them. One of the dicta of historical researchis testis unus testis nullus, "onewitness is no witness at all." It is possible, however,to arguethat the patriarchsmay well have been historical personagesbecause so much of the rest of the Bible has been provedtrue by the historical and archaeological researchof the last century.This is essentially the approachof the "Albrightschool"of historians,who follow the methodology of the late William FoxwellAlbright,for many yearsthe dean of American biblical archaeologists. Theirposition is typifiedby JohnBrightin his A Historyof Israel (1981). Otherhistorians,such as Thompson (1974,1978)and also JohnVanSeters(1975,1983),remainmuch more skeptical about projectingthe historicity of those sections of the Bible that reportthe royaland exilic periodsback into the patriarchalperiod. Froma strictly evidential point of view, we must await further discoveries to elucidate the early second millennium B.C.E. It appears that the discoveries at Tell Mardikh (Ebla),west of Mari in Syria, just now being reported in detail, will provide further evidence forpersonalandgeographicnames mentioned in the HebrewBible.These discoverieshavebroughtto light materials from around 2500 B.C.E., several hundred years beforethe main Mariarchivesandthe traditionaldatingof the patriarchs.Earlyreportsthat stressedthe closeness of the Ebla culture with Hebrew culture have provento be exaggerated(Vigand1984).Howeverthat may be, Mariand Ebla have taught us much, and we have every reason to believe that the soil of the Fertile Crescent has much to teach us yet. Notes 1This paper is an updated version of an article by the same title that originally appeared in Andrews University Seminary Studies 15 (1977), pages 189-203. Glass has prepared the revision and Pardee has seen and approved it. 2Kupper(1973) provides a good discussion of the Hurrians at the beginning of the second millennium. 3For the distinction between divination and prophecy, see Herbert Huffmon (1968: especially 102-03).
Publication of the MariTexts
ARM 1 (TCL22),G. Dossin, Lettres(Paris:PaulGeuthner,1946,reprinted, 1967) = ARMT 1, Correspondancede Sam'i-Addu et de ses fils (Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1950). ARM2 (TCL23),C.-EJean,Lettres(Paris:PaulGeuthner,1942,reprinted, 1973) = ARMT 2, Lettres diverses (Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1950). ARM 3 (TCL24), J.-R. Kupper,Lettres(Paris:Paul Geuthner, 1948) =
96
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
ARMT 3, Correspondancede Kibri-Dagangouverneurde Terqa (Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1950). ARM4 (TCL25),G. Dossin, Lettres(Paris:PaulGeuthner,1951)= ARMT 4, Correspondancede Sam'i-Addu (Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1951).
ARM5 (TCL26),G. Dossin, Lettres(Paris:PaulGeuthner,1951)= ARMT 5, Correspondancede Iasmah-Addu(Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1952).
ARM 6 (TCL27), J.-R. Kupper,Lettres(Paris:Paul Geuthner, 1953) = ARMT6, Correspondancede Bahdi-Limprdfetdu palais de Mari (Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1954). ARM 7 (TCL28), J.Bottdro,Textesadministratifs de la salle 110(Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1956) = ARMT 7, Textes 6conomiques et administratifs (Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1957). ARM8 (TCL29),G. Boyer,Textesjuridiqueset administratifs(Paris:Paul Geuthner,1957)= ARMT8, Textesjuridiques(Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1958). ARM9 (TCL30),M:Birot,Textesadministratifsde la salle 5 (Paris:Paul Geuthner,1960) = ARMT9, Textesadministratifs de la salle 5 du palais (Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1960). ARM 10 (TCL31), G. Dossin, La correspondancefiminine (Paris:Paul fiminine (Paris:Paul Geuthner,1967)= ARMT10,Correspondance Geuthner, 1978). (ARM11has not appeared.) ARMT 11,M. L. Burke,Textesadministratifs de la salle 111du palais (Paris:PaulGeuthner, 1963). (ARM12 has not appeared.) ARMT 12,M. Birot,Textesadministratifs de la salle 5 du palais (2?me partie)(Paris:PaulGeuthner, 1964). (ARM13 has not appeared.) ARMT 13,G. Dossin, J.Bottdro,M. Birot,M. L. Burke,J.-R.Kupper,and A. Finet, Textesdivers (Paris:PaulGeuthner, 1964). ARM 14 (TCM 1), M. Birot, Lettresde Yaqqim-Addu,gouverneurde Sagartitum(Paris:Paul Geuthner, 1976) = ARMT 14 (Paris:Paul Geuthner, 1974). ARMT15,J.BottdroandA. Finet,Ripertoireanalytique des tomes I a V (sign list, glossary,etc., for volumes 1-5; contains no new texts so thereis no corresponding ARMvolume)(Paris:Imprimerienationale, 1954). ARMT16/1,M. Birot,J.-R.Kupper,O. Rouault,R pertoireanalytique(2e volume):TomesI-XIV,XVIII.Premierepartie:Noms propres(Paris: PaulGeuthner, 1979). ARMT 17/1, J.-G. Heintz, Index documentaire des textes de Mari. Fascicule1:Liste/Codagedes textes.Indexdes ouvragesde rifdrence (Paris:PaulGeuthner, 1975). ARM 18 (TCM2), 0. Rouault,Mukanni'um: Lettreset documents administratifs(Paris:PaulGeuthner,1976)= ARMT18,Mukannilum: L'administration et l'6conomic palatiales i Mari (Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1977). ARM 19 (TCM3), H. Limet, Textesadministratifs de l'dpoquedes Sakkanakku (Paris:Paul Geuthner, 1976) = ARMT 19 (Paris:Paul Geuthner, 1976). ARM 20 (TCM4), G. Dossin, Correspondanced'Tttzr-Asdu (hasnot yet appeared). ARM 21 (TCM5), J.-M.Durand,Textesadministratifsdes salles 134 et 160dupalais de Mari(Paris:PaulGeuthner,1982)= ARMT21 (Paris: PaulGeuthner, 1983). ARMT 22, J.-K.Kupper,Documents administratifs de la salle 135 du palais de Mari (Paris:Association pour la Diffusion de la Penste Frangaise,1983).
Bibliography Al-Khalesi,Y.M. 1978 The Courtof the Palms:A FunctionalInterpretationof the Mari Palace. Series:BibliothecaMesopotamica8. Malibu,
CA:Undena Publications. Anbar[Bernstein],M. 1973 Ladebut du regnede Sam'i-Adadler. Israel Oriental Studies 3: 1-33. 1975 "AspectMoral"dans un discoursproph6tiquede Mari. UgaritForschungen7: 517-18. Astour,M. C. 1973 Note toponymiqueAla tablette A.1270 de Mari.Revue dAssyriologie et dArchdologieOrientale 67: 73-75. Batto,B.F 1974 Studies on Womenat Mari.Baltimore:The JohnsHopkins University Press. 1980 LandTenureandWomenat Mari.Journalof the Economic and Social History of the Orient 23: 209-39. Beyerlin,W, editor 1978 Ancient Near EasternReligious TextsRelating to the Old Testament,in collaborationwith H. Brunner,H. Schm6kel, C. Kiihne,K.-H. Bernhardt,and E. Lipifiski.Philadelphia: Westminster. Birot,M. 1973 Nouvelles d6couvertes6pigraphiquesau palais de Mari(Salle 115).Syria50: 1-12. 1978 Donneds nouvelles sur la chronologiedu rtgne de ZimriLim. Syria55: 333-43. Bright,J. 1981 A History of Israel, thirdedition. Philadelphia:Westminster. Campbell,E. E, Jr. 1961 The Ancient Near East:ChronologicalBibliographyand Charts.Pp.214-24 in The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of William FoxwellAlbright,edited by G. E. Wright.GardenCity, NY:Doubleday. Cazelles, H. 1967 Mariet l'Ancien Testament.Pp. 73-90 in La Civilisation de Mari,edited by J.-R.Kupper.Series:Bibliothequede la Facult6de Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universit6de Liege 182. RencontreAssyriologiqueInternationale15. Paris:Les Belles Lettres. Charpin,D. 1982 Mariet le calendrierd'Ebla.Revue dAssyriologie et d'ArchdologieOrientale 76: 1-6. Craghan,J.E 1974 The ARMX"Prophetic"Texts:Their Media, Style and Structure. The Journalof the Ancient Near EasternSociety of Columbia University6: 39-57. 1975 Mariand its Prophets.The Contributionsof Marito the Understandingof BiblicalProphecy.Biblical Theology Bulletin 5: 32-55. Dossin, G. 1948 Une rvd4lationdu dieu DaganATerqa.Revue dAssyriologie et dArchdologieOrientale 42: 125-34. 1957 Kengen,paysde Canaan.Rivista degli Studi Orientali 32: 35-39. 1966 Surle proph~tismea Mari.Pp. 77-86 in La divination en Mdsopotamieancienne et dans le rigions voisines. Series: Bibliothequedes Centresd'Etudessup~rieuressp~cialis~s. Travauxdu Centre d'EtudesSup~rieures d'Histoire specialis6 des Religions de Strasbourg.RencontreAssyriologiqueInternationale 14. Paris:PressesUniversitairesde France. 1970 Laroutede l'tain en M~sopotamieau temps de Zimri-Lim. RevuedAssyriologie et d'ArchdologieOrientale 64: 97-106. 1983 Secretsd'Etat... Akkadica 25: 1-7. Durand,J.-M. 1982 In vino veritas.RevuedAssyriologie et dArchdologieOrientale 76: 43-50. Durand,J.-M.,and Margueron,J. 1980 Laquestion du HaremRoyaldans le palais de Mari.Journal
des Savants (Octobre-D6cembre): 253-80. Edzard,D. O. 1964 Mariund Aramaer?Zeitschrift fiirAssyriologie und vorderasiatischeArchidologie56: 142-49. Ellermeier,E 1968 Prophetiein Mari und Israel. Series:Theologische und OrientalistischeArbeiten 1. Herzberg:VerlagErwinJungfer. Fensham,F.C. 1975 Gen. XXXIVand Mari.Journalof Northwest Semitic Languages4: 87-90. Finet, A. 1956 L'Accadiendes lettres de Mari.In coll. Mdmoiresde l'Acad6mieRoyalede Belgique,Classe des Lettreset des Sciences Moraleset Politiques,2e sdrie,tome 51, fasc. 1. Brussels:Palaisdes Acad6mies. 1968/ LaPolitique d'expansionau temps de Hammu-Rapide 1972 Babylone.Annuairede l'Institut de Philologie et d'Histoire Orientales et Slaves 20: 223-46. 1972 LesuharifmAMari.Pp.65-72 in Gesellschaftsklassen im Alten Zweistromland. Series:BayerischeAkademieder Wissenschaften,Philosophisch-historischeKlasse:Abhandlungen, neue Folge75. RencontreAssyriologiqueInternationale 18. Gates, M. -H. 1984 The Palaceof Zimri-Limat Mari.Biblical Archaeologist 47 (this issue). Gelb, I. J. 1958 Lalingua degli Amoriti. Pp. 143-64 in Rendicontidella AccademiaNazionale dei Lincei,Classe di Scienze morali, storichee filologiche, ser. 8, vol. 13. 1977 Thoughtsabout Ebla:A PreliminaryEvaluation,March 1977. Series:Syro-MesopotamianStudies 1/1.Malibu,CA: Undena Publications. 1981 Eblaand the Kish Civilization. Pp.9-73 in Lalingua di Ebla. Atti del ConvengoInternazionale(Napoli, 21-23 aprile 1980).Series:Istituto UniversitarioOrientale.Seminariodi Studi Asiatici. SeriesMinor 14.Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale. Gelb, I. J.,Bartels,J.,Vance,S.-M., and Whiting,R. M. 1980 Computer-aidedAnalysis of Amorite. Series:Assyriological Studies 21. Chicago:The OrientalInstitute of the University of Chicago. Hayes,J.H. 1967 Prophetismat Mariand Old TestamentParallels.Anglican TheologicalReview 49:397-409. Heintz, J.-G. 1969 Oraclesprophetiqueset "guerresainte"selon les archives royalesde Mariet lAncien Testament.Supplementsto Vetus Testamentum17: 112-38. 1971 Prophetiein Mariund Israel.Biblica 52: 543-55. 1972 Langageprophdtiqueet "stylede cour"selon Archives Royalesde MariX et l'Ancien Testament.Semitica 22: 5-12. 1975 Index documentairedes textes de Mari. Series:ARMT 17/1. Paris:PaulGeuthner. 1977 Lesprophetiesakkadiennes.Pp. 71-87 in L'Apocalyptique. Series:ttudes d'histoiredes religions3. Paris:PaulGeuthner. Holladay,J.S., Jr. 1970 AssyrianStatecraftand the Prophetsof Israel.Harvard Theological Review 63: 29-51. Huffmon,H. B. 1968 Prophecyin the MariLetters.The Biblical Archaeologist31: 101-24. 1976 The Originsof Prophecy.Pp. 171-86 in Magnalia Dei: The MightyActs of God. Essays on the Bible and Archaeologyin Memoryof G. Ernest Wright,edited by E M. Cross,W.E. Lemke,and P D. Miller, Jr.GardenCity, NY:Doubleday.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
97
Hunger,H., andKaufman,S. A. 1975 A New AkkadianProphecyText.Journalof the American Oriental Society 95: 371-75. Knudsen,E. E. 1982 An Analysis of Amorite.A ReviewArticle. Journalof CuneiformStudies 34: 1-18. Kupper,J.-R. 1957 Lesnomades en Mdsopotamieau temps des rois de Mari. Series:Bibliothequede la Facult6de Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universit6de Liege 142. Paris:Les Belles Lettres. 1973 NorthernMesopotamiaand Syria.Pp. 1-41 in The CambridgeAncient History,thirdedition, volume 2/1, edited by I. E. S. Edwards,C. J.Gadd,N. G. L. Hammond,and E. Sollberger.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press. 1976 L'Inscriptiondu "disque" de Yahdun-Lim.Pp.299-303 in CuneiformStudies in Honorof Samuel Noah Kramer,edited by B.L. Eichler.Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament25. Butzon & Bercker/NeukirchenKevelaer/Neukirchen-Vluyn: er Verlag. 1978 LesHourritesa Mari.RevueHittite et Asianique 36: 117-28. 1982 Marientre la M6sopotamieet la Syriedu nordAl'dpoque Pp. 173-85 in Mdsopotamienund seine Paldo-Babylonienne. Nachbaren.Politische und kulturelle Wechselbeziehungen im Alten Vorderasienvom 4. bis 1. Jahrtausendv. Chr.Edited by H.-J.Nissen and J.Renger.Series:BerlinerBeitrige zum VorderenOrient vol. 1, parts 1 and 2. Berlin:Dietrich Reimer Verlag. Lassoe, J. 1963 Peopleof Ancient Assyria: TheirInscriptionsand Correspondence,translatedby E S. Leigh-Browne.London: Routledge& KeganPaul. Lambert,M. 1970 Textesde Mari- Dix-huitieme campagne- 1969.Syria47: 245-60. Lambert,W.G. 1967 The Languageof Mari.Pp.29-38 in La Civilisation de Mari, edited by J.-R.Kupper.Series:Bibliothequede la Facultdde Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universitdde Liege 182. Rencontre AssyriologiqueInternationale15. Paris:LesBelles Lettres. Lemaire,A. 1984 Mari,the Bible,and the Northwest Semitic World.Biblical Archaeologist 47 (this issue). Lewy,H. 1967 The Chronologyof the MariTexts.Pp. 13-28 in La Civilisation de Mari,edited by J.-R.Kupper.Series:Bibliothequede la Facultede Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universitdde Liege 182. RencontreAssyriologiqueInternationale15. Paris:Les Belles Lettres. Limet,H. 1975 Observationssur la grammairedes anciennes tablettes de Mari.Syria52: 37-52. 1976 Lepanthdonde Maria l'dpoquedes 'akkanaku. Orientalia 45: 87-93. Malamat,A. 1962 Mariandthe Bible:Some Patternsof TribalOrganizationand Institutions. Journalof the American Oriental Society 82: 143-50. 1966 PropheticRevelationsin New Documents fromMariand the Bible. Supplementsto VetusTestamentum 15:207-27. 1971a Syro-PalestinianDestinations in a MariTin Inventory.Israel ExplorationJournal21:31-38. 1971b Mari.The Biblical Archaeologist34: 2-22. 1979 Ummatum in Old BabylonianTextsand Its Ugariticand BiblicalCounterparts.Ugarit-Forschungen11:527-36. 1980a Mariand the Bible, A Collection of Studies, second edition. Jerusalem:HebrewUniversity.
98
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
1980b A MariProphecyand Nathan'sDynastic Oracle.Pp.68-82 in Prophecy,editedby J.A. Emerton.Series:Beiheft zur Zeitschrift fuirdie alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 150.Berlin: W.de Gruyter. 1982 "Silver,Gold and PreciousStones fromHazor."Tradeand Troublein a New MariDocument. Journalof JewishStudies 33: 71-79. 1983 "Silver,Gold, andPreciousStones fromHazor"in a New Mari Document. Biblical Archaeologist 46: 169-74. Margueron,J. 1982a Mari:Rapportprdliminairesur la campagnede 1979.Mari: Annales de RecherchesInterdisciplinaires1:9-30, plates 1-6. 1982b Recherchessur les palais misopotamiens de lAge du Bronze,volume I (text)and volume II (plates).Series:Institut Frangaisd'Archdologiedu ProcheOrient. Bibliothequearcheologiqueet historique 107. Paris:PaulGeuthner. 1983 Mari:Rapportpreliminairesur la campagnede 1980.Mari: Annales de RecherchesInterdisciplinaires2: 9-35. Marzal,A. 1971a MariClauses in "Casuistic"and "Apodictic" Styles. Catholic Biblical Quarterly33: 333-64; 492-509. 1971b The ProvincialGovernorat Mari:His Title andAppointment. Journalof Near EasternStudies 30: 186-217. 1976 Gleaningsfrom the Wisdomof Mari. Series:StudiaPohl 11. Rome:PontificalBiblicalInstitute. Matthews,V.H. 1978 PastoralNomadism in the MariKingdom(ca. 1830-1760 B.c.).Series:AmericanSchools of OrientalResearchDissertation Series3. Cambridge,MA:American Schools of Oriental Research. 1981 LegalAspects of Military Servicein Ancient Mesopotamia. Military Law Review 94: 135-51. Michalowski,P. 1983 Historyas Charter:Some Observationson the Sumerian KingList. Journalof the American Oriental Society 103: 237-48. Michelini Tocci,E 1960 La Sirianell'ethdi Mari. Studi Semitici 3. Rome:Universita di Roma. Millard,A. R. 1983 Assyriansand Arameans.Iraq45: 101-08. Moran,W.L. 1969 New EvidencefromMarion the History of Prophecy.Biblica 50: 15-56. 1978 Puppiesin Proverbs-From Sam'i-AdadI to Archilochus? EretzIsrael 14:32*-3 7*. Muntingh, L.M. 1974 AmoriteMarriedand FamilyLifeAccordingto the Mari Texts.Journalof Northwest Semitic Languages3: 50-70. Na'aman,N. 1981 East-WestDiplomatic Relationsin the Days of Zimrilim. RevuedAssyriologie et dArchdologieOrientale 75: 171-72. Nakata,I. 1982 TwoRemarkson the So-calledPropheticTextsfromMari. Acta Sumerologica4: 143-48. Noort, E. 1977 Untersuchungenzum Gottesbescheid in Mari; in der alttestamentlichen Die-"Marieprophetie" Forschung.Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament202. Kevelaer/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Butzon & Bercker/Neukirchener Verlag. Oppenheim,A. L. 1956 The Interpretationof Dreams in the Ancient Near East with a Translationof an Assyrian Dream-Book.Series:Transactions of the AmericanPhilosophical Society,n.s. 46/3.
1967 Lettersfrom Mesopotamia:Official, Business, and Private Letterson Clay tablets from TwoMillennia. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress. Parrot,A. 1935 Les fouilles de Mari.Premierecampagne(Hiver1933-34). Rapportprdliminaire.Syria 16: 1-28; 117-40. 1956 Le temple d'Ishtar.Series:Mission Archdologiquede Mari 1. Institut FrangaisdArchdologiede Beyrouth.Bibliothequearchdologiqueet historique65. Paris:PaulGeuthner. 1958a Lepalais: Architecture.Series:Mission Archdologiquede Mari 2. Institut FrancaisdArchdologiede Beyrouth. Bibliothequearchdologiqueet historique68. Paris:Paul Geuthner. 1958b Lepalais: Peinturesmurales. Series:Mission Archdologique de Mari2. Institut FrangaisdArchdologiede Beyrouth. Bibliothequearchdologiqueet historique69. Paris:Paul Geuthner. 1959 Lepalais: Documents et monuments. Series:Mission Archdologiquede Mari2. Institut FrancaisdArchdologiede Beyrouth.Bibliothequearchdologiqueet historique 70. Paris: PaulGeuthner. 1965a Lesfouilles de Mari.Quatorziemecampagne(Printemps 1964).Syria42: 1-24. 1965b Lesfouilles de Mari.Quinzieme campagne(Printemps1965). Syria42: 197-225. 1967 Les temples d'Ishtaratet de Nini-Zaza. Series:Mission Archdologiquede Mari3. Institut Frangaisd'Archeologiede Beyrouth.Bibliothequearchdologiqueet historique 86. Paris: PaulGeuthner. 1968 Le "trisor"d'Ur.Series:Mission Archdologiquede Mari4. Institut Francaisd'Archdologiede Beyrouth.Bibliothequearchdologiqueet historique87. Paris:PaulGeuthner. 1972 Lesfouilles de Mari.Vingtieme cainpagnede fouilles (Printemps1972).Syria49: 281-302. 1974 Mari,capitale fabuleuse. Paris:Payot. Petitjean,A., and Coppens,J. 1969 Mariet lAncien Testament.Pp.3-13 in De Maria Qumran. Series:BibliothecaEphemeridumTheologicarumLovaniensium 24. Gembloux/Paris:Duculot, Lethielleux. Pritchard,J.,editor 1969 Ancient Near EasternTextsRelating to the Old Testament, third edition with supplement. Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. R6mer,W.H. Ph. 1971 Frauenbriefeiiber Religion, Politik, und Privatlebenin Mari. Untersuchungenzu G. Dossin, ArchivesRoyalesde MariX (Paris1967).Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament12. Butzon & Bercker/NeukirchenKevelaer/Neukirchen-Vluyn: er Verlag. Ross, J.F. 1970 Prophecyin Hamath,Israel,and Mari.HarvardTheological Review 63: 1-28. Rowton,M. B. 1967 The PhysicalEnvironmentand the Problemof the Nomads. Pp. 109-121 in La Civilisation de Mari. Series:Bibliothhque de la Facult4de Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universitede Liege 182. RencontreAssyriologiqueInternationale15. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Sasson,J.M. 1969 The Military Establishments at Mari. Series:StudiaPohl 3. Rome:PontificalBiblicalInstitute. 1972 Some Comments on ArchiveKeepingat Mari.Iraq34: 55-67. 1980 TwoRecent Workson Mari.Archiv fir Orientforschung27: 127-35. 1982 An ApocalypticVision fromMari?:Speculationson ARM
X: 9. Mari:Annales de RecherchesInterdisciplinaires 1: 151-67. 1983 MariDreams.Journalof the American Oriental Society 103: 283-93. Schmitt, A. 1982 ProphetischerGottesbescheidin Mari und Israel:Eine Strukturuntersuchung.Series:Beitrdigezur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament6/14. Stuttgart:VerlagW. Kohlhammer. Speiser,E. A. 1958/ Census and Ritual Expiationsin Mariand Israel.Bulletin of 1967 the American Schools of Oriental Research 149:17-25. Reprintedwith short addendum:pp. 171-86 in Oriental and Biblical Studies. Collected Writingsof E.A. Speiser,edited and with an introductionby J.J.Finkelsteinand M. Greenberg.Philadelphia:University of PennsylvaniaPress. Thompson, T. L. 1974 TheHistoricity of the PatriarchalNarratives:The Quest for the Historical Abraham. Series:Beiheft zur Zeitschrift fior die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 133.Berlin: W.de Gruyter. 1978 A New Attempt to Date the PatriarchalNarratives.Journalof the American Oriental Society 98: 76-84. VanSeters,J. 1975 Abrahamin History and Tradition.New Haven:YaleUniversity Press. 1983 In Searchof History.Historiographyin the Ancient World and the Originsof Biblical History.New Haven:YaleUniversity Press. Vigan6,L. 1984 LiterarySourcesforthe History of Palestine and Syria:The EblaTablets.Biblical Archaeologist47: 6-16. Walters,S. B. 1970 Prophecyin MariandIsrael.Journalof Biblical Literature89: 78-81. Westenholz,A. 1978 Some Notes on the Orthographyand Grammarof the Recently PublishedTextsfrom Mari.Bibliotheca Orientalis 35: 160-69.
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research This prestigious quarterlyjournalpublishes papers that contribute to our understandingof the ancient Near East, including reportson recent archaeological work, articles that apply new methods and tools to archaeologicaland historical research,and reviews of pertinent books. Youcan subscribeby contacting ASOR SubscriptionServices, 4243 SpruceStreet, Philadelphia,PA 19104.Annual subscriptions for individuals are $35 in the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada($37 elsewhere); students and retiredfaculty receive a special rate of $27 in the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada ($29 elsewhere);institutional rates are $45 in the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada($50 elsewhere). For the latest in Near Easternhistory and archaeology, epigraphy,Semitic philology, biblical studies, and much more, readthe Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
99
Mari, the
Bible,
and
the
Northwest Semitic
World BYANDRELEMAIRE
Viewed
Mari
texts
can
understand oldest traditions the Bible. us
T•he
the
properly,
help the of
andpublicadiscovery
tion of tablets from Tell Hariri/Marihave deeply interested biblical scholars who were anxious to understandthe Bible in the context of the world in which it came into being-the world of the ancient Near East. As a biblical scholar,I should like, first, to review the majorparallels that have been drawnbetween the Mari tablets and the biblical texts; second, to reflect critically about the quality of these parallels and especially about the validity of the conclusions that have often been drawnfrom them; and, finally, to examine the ways in which these parallels may be better evaluatedand placed into the more general context of the Northwest Semitic world.
Gypsum statue of an offering-bearerfrom pre-SargonicMari. Height is approximately 23 centimeters. The statue is now in the Aleppo Museum.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
101
Parallelsbetweenthe MariTexts
andtheBiblicalTexts
It is virtually impossible to produce an exhaustive "stateof inquiry"regardingthe similarities noted between the Maritexts and the Bible, because such work is scattered throughout examinations of the Maridocuments. Wefind them when attention is drawnby means of a biblical referencethat corresponds to this or that word,literaryform, or social institution. These parallels are also found in studies that group them more systematically.A bibliographyof titles dealing with these parallels would comprise nearly ten pages. In the following, I shall mark out in a somewhat schematic fashion the geographical,linguistic, and ethnosociological parallels,placing particularemphasis on the phenomenon of "prophetism"at Mari.
Parallelsin geographical references.
Although the Bible does not mention the city of Mari, at least seven Mari texts make referenceto the city of Hazor,located in the upper Jordan valley.Hazor,as a number of articles by AbrahamMalamat have stressed, was the capital of an important kingdom that was more or less independent duringthe era in which the bulk of Mari texts was written that is, the nineteenth to eighteenth centuries B.C.E.Malamat and others have also found correspondencewith biblical texts in the mention of Laish, situated at the head of the Jordan,a city that came to be known duringthe Israeliteperiod as Dan (Malamat 1969, 1983;Yadin1972; Biran 1980a, 1980b). Besides the mention of the cities of Hazor and Laish, biblical scholars have also stressed the fact that the Mari texts refer several times to the cities of Harran and Nahor in the area of the upper Balikh basin of northern Mesopotamia. The names of these two cities are included in the patriarchal traditions of Genesis, especially as they refer to the ancestors or relatives of Abraham (Harran:Genesis 11:31-32,
102
12:4-5, 27:43, 28:10, 29:4; 1 Chronicles 2:46;Nahor: Genesis 11:22-29, 22:20-23, 24:10-47, 29:5, 31:53; Joshua24:2; 1 Chronicles 1:26). Parallelsin linguistic features. Although the Maritexts arebasically written in Old Babylonian,proper names and a fair number of local linguistic usagesdisclose that a major segment of the populationseems to have spokena NorthwestSemitic languagecommonly known as Amorite. Almost twenty years ago,the work of HerbertB. Huffmon provided a good provisional analysis of the Amorite propernames at Mari.We may compareit today to the work of I. J.Gelb, on Amorite propernames in general,which itself will need to be revised and expanded(Huffmon 1965;Gelb and others 1980). Biblical scholars have often drawnattention to the fact that the Amorite propernames from Mari are especially similar to names that appearin the biblical traditions of the patriarchsor of the Exodus/ Conquest. In particular,they have noted names that contain the element Haqba/Aqba/Cqbwhich also appearsin the name of the patriarch Jacob.The observationhas also been made that the name of the tribal groupBinu-Yaminafrom Mari correspondsexactly to that of the Israelite tribe of Benjamin,the "sons of the right hand,"the "Southerners." The propername David has been linked with the alleged word "dawidum,"meaning "commanderin chief"or "hero,"but this supposed parallel will not bearup, because the word ought to be readas da-aw7-duum, from dabdum, "defeat." The Northwest Semitic makeup of the languagespoken locally at Mari is demonstrableby a certain number of regionalpeculiarities in the Old Babylonianused at Mari. Such local uses exist in phonology, morphology,syntax, and vocabulary, particularlyin the vocabularyof everydaylife. The publication of new texts will offerus new Northwest Semitic
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Tvo views of a gypsum statue representing
a singer who performedat the court of king Iblulil. It was found in the Templeof Ihtaratat Mari with a second fragmentary statue of the singer playing a harp. The inscription on this statue indicates it was a votive gift for the king and gives the singer'sname as Ur-Nanshe (or Ur-Nina). Scholars have debated over whether Ur-Nanshe was male or female. Height is approximately26 centimeters. It is now in the Damascus Museum. Photographsfrom Mari by Andre Parrot,Editions Ides et Calendes, CH-Neuchdtel, Switzerland.
linguistic elements and will permit us to steadily furtherour knowledge of Amorite in orderto better classify the Northwest Semitic languages of the second millennium B.C.E. (Westenholz1978;Malamat 1962, 1971;Gelb 1961;Greenfield 1969). Ethnosociological parallels.Mari society appearsto have been, as does Israelite society at its beginning, a dimorphic society in which the city and the tribal characteristicsmerged or clashed (deVaux 1978:230). While commercial enterprises seemingly were undertakenby city-dwellers, under the control of the royalhouse, agricultureand the raising of livestock, especially sheep, seems to have been left to seminomads whose lifestyle correspondedfairly closely to that which is depicted in the patriarchaltraditions. This seminomadic society seems to have been subdivided, organizedinto households (compareHebrew beyt-'ab), clans (comparega'dim),and tribes, where the traditional authorities, the elders ('ibuitum),played an important role (Matthews 1981). The elites among these tribes were not only able to make alliances with each other (haydram qat lum, compareHebrewkarat berit)but could "makepeace"(salimam epesum, compareHebrewCaidh silom), that is, agreeto recognize the king of Mari as their overlord. Among the sociopolitical institutions, the ban at Mari (asakku)has also been comparedto that of early Israel (comparethe herem and the biblical accounts of the conquest). Parallelshave been drawnbetween Mari and Israelas well in the matters of the procession held at the enthronement of the king and the organizationof the census. It is important to note, however,that this last practice typically is carriedout by a central government. Such a governmentdoes not appearin the history of early Israeluntil the Davidic/Solomonic empire (Malamat 1966;Sauren 1971; Speiser 1958).
Aerial view of the palace at Mari.In the backgroundand to the left is the Templeof HItar and the pre-Sargonicquarter.Mission archdologiquede Mari, tome 69, plate VII, 2.
The
Ban
in
and
the
Old at
Testament
Mari
f7
thin the Old Testamentthere is the idea that some things are singled out as particularlytabooforthe community to handle.In Hebrew,the term used is herem, which is sometimes translated V as "bannedthing"or "thingdevoted."To the writers of the Old Testament,an objectwas in heremeither becauseof extraordinaryuncleanness or because of exalted sanctity. The violation of this ban was a serious offense, punishable by death, and the community was under strict command to exact the penalty or face the wrath of the deity (Leviticus27:28-29; Joshua6:18). One of the most famousnarrativesinvolvingthe banin the Old Testament is the storyof Achan'sdisobedienceduringthe conquest of Jericho,recordedin the book of Joshua.BeforeJerichofell, Joshuahad declaredthat all the city's silver andgold wereunderthe ban, since they wereto go to the "treasuryof the Lord"(Joshua6:19).Achankeptsome forhimself, resultingin God'sangeragainst Israel(Joshua7:2-15). Joshuadiscoveredthe violation of the ban,andthe entire community stonedAchan,his family,andall his possessions,then burnedthem (Joshua7:22-26). At Mari,there is evidence of a concept that functioned in much the same as way the Old Testamentban.The expressionat Mariforviolating the banwas "eatingthe taboo"(asakkam akilum). The taboo,or asakku, could belong to either a godor the king, and to "eatthe asakku"profanedits special character. To "eat the asakku"was considered a serious violation, although the exact penalties areunclear. In a text reminiscent of the Achan story,a tribal chief reportsto the ruler of Marithat priorto a battle, he warnedhis men that whoever took spoils for themselves "ate the asakku"of the gods Adad and Sama' (ARMV.72).The remainderof the text is unfortunatelyfragmentary, but the chief was apparently accusing a man of violating the ban and seeking judgmentagainsthim. The appearanceof the ban at Mariis significantin that it providesstudents of the Old Testamentwith a largercultural context for the idea of the ban. By observingthe variouswaysin which the ban functionedat Mari,it maybe possible to discovernew meaningsin the OldTestamentconceptionof the banas well as gain a renewedappreciationforthe common heritagesharedby the cultures of the ancient Near East.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
103
In regardsto religious matters, commentators have pointed out the referencesto "thegods of my/your/his father"which arepresent in the patriarchaltraditions as well as in certain texts from Mari (ARM V.20.16,compareGenesis 31:53; ARM X.113.21;X.156.10-11)that referto the kings of Aleppo and Qatna, as well as the many referencesto the gods Addu/l(H)adad and Dagan, not to mention the many correspondencesmade with the name Yahweh(Romer1971; Huffmon 1971). Moreover,we see with certainty the practice of giving prophetic oracles at Mari,which seems to have been an everydayaffair.This practice
the urge to find everywhereevidence to provethe great antiquity of the biblical traditions.Involvedin this is the more or less conscious presupposition that the greatage of these traditions establishes their truth. The lure of a certain trend towards harmonization or, to be more spethe of Usefulness cific, of a Bible-centeredappreciation Analysis of these parallels is not simply a of Parallels Many biblical scholars have stressed result of one'simagination; we must be awareof this predisposition in the importance of the parallelsbetween the Maritablets and the orderto avoidprematureand biblical texts because they draw mistaken conclusions (Sasson 1980). Caution is to be advised all the from them an indication or confirmore because the biblical texts and mation of the antiquity of the the Mari corpus appear,from the Israelite patriarchaltraditions. These point, approximately,to the first, to be considerablydistant from '"Amoriteera,"which is more or less each other geographicallyand chronologically. Mari is located several contemporaneouswith the golden, hundredkilometers from Palestine, age of Mari-the nineteenth to A caution: much eighteenth centuries B.C.E. About ten and the majorityof the Maritexts years ago this view was held by many date from the nineteenth and time and distance orientalists, among them many of eighteenth centuries B.C.E., while the first biblical texts set down in in the most famous the The field. the Bible separate excavatorof Marihimself, Andre writing probablydate from the tenth Parrot(1967),William Foxwell century B.C.E., the era of David and Mari texts. and the Solomon. In orderto evaluate the Albright (1973),and later, JohnC. L. usefulness of a parallelbetween two Gibson (1962)and Rolandde Vaux has been linked to prophetism in texts and two bodies of literature,it (1978)were all of this opinion. The is essential that we examine not excellent historical synthesis of early Israelmany times. Studies on this subject have multiplied, and it is de Vauxis illuminating in this only the material that is similar but not possible to review them all. Men- regard.He points out that the also the material that is different, tion of the broadtreatments of parallels that have been put forward and we should consider the different FriedrichEllermeier (1968),Edward are of a very uneven nature and do ways in which these texts have come Noort (1977),and Armin Schmitt not proveor disprovethe fundamen- down to us. Wehave receivedthe tal historicity of the Israelitepatriar- biblical texts as literarytraditions (1982)will have to suffice. These to be first seem at written in manuscripts,while we are chal traditions.In particular,they glance parallels in awareof the Maridocuments more applicablebecause at Mari,as little the provide help establishing in early Israel,prophetic oracles do date for the patriarchs(deVaux 1978: through the discoveryof material not appearto have been the sole 256). He nevertheless goes on to con- written on clay tablets. or cultic of clude that these biblical traditions Moreover,just because Harran temple perpossession and are mentioned in the sonnel. They could be received Nahor agree with the evidence of proper a in even a well as in the patriartexts as names, linguistic features, and socio- Mari dream)by layman, (often a laywoman. There are even atchal narratives, the two traditions logical data, and it is very likely that to the trace are not necessarily contemporary; apocalyptic genre we are close to linking the arrival in tempts to its earliest manifestations in cerboth of these cities lived on well Canaan of Israel's earliest ancestors tain Maritexts (Moran1969; with the Amorite migration (de Vaux after the nineteenth and eighteenth Heintz 1978: 265). 1971; Craghan1974; centuries B.C.E. We might well date the biblical accounts of the "ConSasson 1982). This reasoning seems rather All these similarities arewell contradictory. We may ask if we do quest" to the era of the Mari texts known today to specialists in Mari because Hazor is mentioned in not see here the temptation that has and biblical studies, largelybecause been evident at every important Joshua 11:16;however, the total of the work of Henri Cazelles (1967), discovery of significant epigraphic absence of any mention of Hazor or Dennis Pardee(1984),Jean-Georges materials, as at Ugarit and Ebla. It is of Mari in the patriarchal traditions
104
Heintz (1969),and, aboveall, AbrahamMalamat (1980).It is not necessary to go back overthis material in detail. Rather,it is more helpful to seek to understandmore clearly the usefulness of these parallels,as well as their importance.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
indicates instead that they are more recent. The Mari texts clearly show the economic and political importance of Hazor during the nineteenth to eighteenth centuries B.C.E. If the patriarchaltraditions date from this period, it would be curious indeed if they made no mention of so important a city. More generally,it is not because the patriarchaltraditions seem to describe a seminomadic society that is similar to that of Marithat we are able to arguethat the two societies date from the same period;we find just as many parallels between the patriarchaltraditions and the Near East of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries of the modem era. Moreover,when the same scholars compareprophecyat Marito prophecy in Israel,they do not conclude that the prophetAmos is a contemporaryof Zimri-Lim. In orderto evaluate properlythe usefulness of the parallels between Mari and early Israel, it is essential that we avoid all exaggeratedevaluations of their importance, which could lead to incorrect chronological conclusions. If we seek to date the patriarchaltraditions and, more generally,to understandthe origins of early Israelmore clearly,we must first carryout the work of literary criticism, tradition criticism, and historical criticism on the biblical texts themselves. As a result of such work, biblical scholars seem recently to be placing an early date for the patriarchaltraditions into greater doubt. This new dating would leave a huge gap of more than five centuries before the very beginning of Israelas we properly define it (Thompson 1974; Van Seters 1975). In a similar vein, the parallels with biblical Hebrew should not be exaggerated in linguistic studies. We must place them into the more general context of early Northwest Semitic languages. Unfortunately, the Northwest Semitic languages of the second millennium B.C.E. remain little known, with the exception of
the Ugaritic texts and the glosses or regional features of the el-Amarna letters. The classification even of languages that lie at the center of this family remains very controversial at this time. This is because the Northwest Semitic peoples consistently used Babylonianas the language of written culture; they used cuneiform writing exclusively until about the fifteenth century and thereafterless B.C.E., systematically. Nevertheless, it is necessary that we attempt to link the Northwest Semitic features of the Mari texts, despite these problems,with Northwest Semitic texts that are more closely related to them in time and in geography.Using this method, the first parallels that come to mind are those with the Ugaritic texts. To cite but one example, the Mariterm nahWlum/nihlatum("inheritance, property")should be comparedto the Ugaritic nhlt beforewe turn to the Hebrewnahaliih. It has been noted elsewhere that an archaictext from Mari,recentlypublishedby Jean-Marie Durandseems to bear out the merit of this method. It points to a prefix for the third-personplural in ti, a Northwest Semitic characteristic that may also be found in the Ugaritic texts and in the el-Amama letters (Durand1982). Moreover,if we look for parallels with the Northwest Semitic texts of
Above: Stone relief of an elegantly dressed goddess smelling a flower. This was found in court 131 of the palace. Height is 13.5 centimeters. It is now in the Louvre. Below: Fragmentarygypsum statue of a seated man and woman embracing,found in the pre-SargonicTempleof Istar. The statue is 12.6 centimeters high and is in the Aleppo Museum. Photographcourtesy Mission archeologique de Mari.
the firstmillenniumB.C.E.,in view of the limited scope of the Northwest Semitic texts from the second millennium, it would seem best that we turn first to Aramaic texts. Indeed, even if we have only a few texts in old Aramaic at our disposal that date from the beginning of the first millennium, this should be done. The "Amorite"of Mari seems to have been closer to old Aramaic than old Hebrew.Amorite was spoken, during the second millennium, in those areaswhere Arameans are known to have lived at the end of the second millennium and the beginning of the first. This had induced certain orien-
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
105
talists, Martin Noth among them, to believe that the "Amorites"should be identified as "Proto-Arameans." Even if we discardthis terminology, because it runs the risk of creating confusion, it is most likely a priori that the '"Amorite" of Mariwas the immediate ancestor of the Aramaic branchof the Northwest Semitic languagefamily, ratherthan the parentof the Canaanitebranchfrom which Hebrewwas descended. In a similar manner,the parallels seen in the giving of prophetic oracles at Mariand in Israel remind us that early Israelis not the only land in the ancient Near Easternworld where the practice is attested. Apartfrom many references to dreamsand oracles in Hittite texts, the story related in the Egyptian papyrusof Wen-Amonshows thatat Byblos around 1100B.C.E.it was possible for an ecstatic prophet to carryoracles to the king. The stele of Zakkur,king of Hamath and Lu'ashat the very beginning of the
dangerof exaggeratingthe importance of these similarities; we should not give them more meaning than they actually possess. Indeed, these parallels do not acquiretheir full value unless they are at the center of a more generalanalysis of the relations between Mariand the Northwest Semitic world of the second and early first millennia. The data of the Eblatexts may eventually carrythis evaluation back into the third millennium.
Positive Contributions of Parallelsbetween Mariand the Bible After having arguedagainst the dangerof an exaggeratedview of the importance of parallels between Mari and the Bible and for the necessity of placing them into the more generalframeworkof the Northwest Semitic world, I can now, in this last section, evaluate the positive contributions and the usefulness of these parallels. Parallelsin linguistic featuresand eighthcenturyB.C.E.bearswitnessto ethnosociological matters. The the fact that the king receivedproBible, until now, has occupied a unique place at the center of the phetic oracles by the mediation of seers (hzn)and of messengers or Northwest Semitic world. Its unequaled length, the continuity of its spokesmen (cddn).Near the end of the eighthcenturyB.C.E.,the texts texts, and the uninterruptedtradifound at Deir cAlla, in the Jordan tion of textual exegesis have all made Hebrewthe best known and most valley, relate a story concerning "Balaam,son of Beor,the man who easily used Northwest Semitic saw (hzh)the gods,"and from whom languagefrom ancient times. Because of these features,which we he received messages at night. Although the languagein which this do not meet in any of the other coltext is written remains controversial, lections of Northwest Semitic texts, the clearest indicators seem to relate it is obvious why we referto the it to the Aramaicbranchof the North- Bible'srelatively easy-to-usecollection. In contrast to biblical material, west Semitic languagefamily. We the other Northwest Semitic texts at still compareprophetism may the to made up of fragmentaryunits, are Mari Neo-Assyrianoracles, the under come these had gatheredfrom here and there, whose although influence of Aramaization in the interpretationsare often quite uncertain. Therefore,when we use the empire (Huffmon 1974;Kiihne 1978; Levine 1981;McCarter1980;WeipBible we must keep in mind the special problems we face in this body pert 1981;Weippertand Weippert literature.Because it is made up of of Lemaire 1982; 1984a). These historical, linguistic, and texts written down overthe course of about a millennium, we must rely ethnosociological remarkson the usefulness of the parallels drawnbe- upon the results, sometimes uncertween Mariand the Bible show the tain, of textual criticism, literary
106
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Religious objects found at Mari. Tbp: Bronzelion discoveredin 1937 at the entrance to the Templeof Dagan. It is approximately70 centimeterslong. Aleppo Museum. Middle: Lion-headed eagle found in court XXVI of the pre-Sargonic palace. Its body is made of lapis lazuli, the head and tail are of gold and the eyes are encrusted with bitumen. It is 12.8 centimeters high. Damascus Museum. Bottom: Steatite vase from the Templeof Iftar ornamented with entwined serpents. It is 26.2 centimeters high. Aleppo Museum. Photographscourtesy Mission archeologique de Mari.
criticism, and tradition criticism. Historical parallels.Even if the seminomadic tribes mentioned in the Maritexts could be placed in parallel relationships with the Aramaic people who occupied the same areaat the end of the second and the beginning of the first millennia, the fact remains that our sources do not yet allow us to see them clearly.Despite the suggestive works of J.-R.Kupper(1957),J.T. Luke (1965),Michael C. Astour (1978),and Michael Heltzer (1981), which deal with the ties between the '"Amorites" of Mari (the "Suteans"in particular),the ahlmu-Arameansof the late second millennium, and the Arameans of the first, the difficulty of reconstructingthe history of the origins of the Aramaic peoples is notorious. This history is inaccessible to us through textual references except for the distortedperspective of a few scattered referencesin the royalinscriptions of their enemies, the Assyrians. The oldest Aramaic inscriptions known to us at this point date from the second half of the ninth century B.C.E. Given this it is drawupon useful to situation, the indirect testimony of the biblical traditions about the Aramaic origins of at least one part of early Israel. This tradition would probablyallow us to understandparticularparallels between Mari and the Bible more clearly. It is helpful that we try to focus a bit more sharplyon the Bible'shistorical importance (Miller 1983;Lemaire,in press). Without entering here into all of the details of the literaryand historical criticism of the Pentateuch, let us recall that this tradition of Aramaic origin is very well attested to as the proclamation of the "creed" of Deuteronomy 26:5:"Myfather was a wanderingAramean."It also seems to be very much a part of the Jacobcycle. His family is said to have come from upperMesopotamia, more specifically, from the area aroundHarran(Genesis 28:10). I have elsewhere endeavoredto
In 1983AndreLemairepresenteda talkat a colloquiumwhosetitle was"Aproposd'uncinquantenaire: Mari,bilanet perspectives" [Onthe occasionof a fiftiethanniversary: Mari,wherewe startedandwhere we aregoing].A slightlymodified versionof thattalkwill be published in Actes du Colloque edited
byJ.-M.DurandandJ.Margueron. Thepresentpaperis basedon that article.Ithasbeentranslatedby T.Glassandeditedby Jonathan FatherGlassandProfessorJackM. Sasson. show in greaterdetail that the Israelite tribal confederationcame into being through the alliance, in the thirteenth century,between two groups,the Bene Israel,Tvhohad come from Egyptand were living in the mountain country of Ephraimto the southwest of Shechem, and the Bene Jacob,who had come from the Aramaic territories and had settled in the region of Hepherto the northeast of Shechem. More recently, in a study about to be published, I try to show that the Aramaic tribe of the Bene Jacobwas probablyfrom upper Mesopotamia, from the areaof the upperBalikh basin (Harran,Nahor, Serug),and its migration probably took place at the collapse of the Mittannian empire and the invasion of the region by the Assyrian kings Adadnirari1 (1307-1275) and Shalmaneser1 (1274-1245) (Lemaire 1978, 1982, 1984b). Whateverthe validity of these last investigations of the origins of early Israel,we are able to see that parallels between Mari and the Bible may be used for a better understanding of the two text collections. We are able to see this, providedthat their differenthistorical contexts are carefully kept in mind and that we reject chronological links between the Maritexts and the patriarchal traditions of the Bible. As we recall the Aramaic origins of a tribe helping to make up the most ancient form of early Israel,we are able to
place both bodies of texts into the broaderframeworkof the Northwest Semitic worldof the second and early firstmillennia-a worldaboutwhich we still have a great deal to learn. Bibliography Albright,W.F. 1973 Fromthe Patriarchsto Moses:I. FromAbrahamto Joseph.The Biblical Archaeologist 36: 5-33. Astour,M. C. 1978 The Rabbaeans:A TfibalSociety on the Euphratesfrom Yahdun-Limto Julius Caesar.Series:SyroMesopotamianStudies 2/2. Malibu, CA: Undena Publications. Biran,A. 1980a Tell Dan, FiveYearsLater.Biblical Archeologist 43: 168-82. 1980b TwoDiscoveriesat TelDan. Israel ExplorationJournal30: 89-98. Cazelles, H. 1967 Mariet I'AncienTestament.Pp. 73-90 in La Civilisation de Mari, edited by J.-R.Kupper.Series: Bibliothequede la Facult6de Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universit6 de Liege 182. RencontreAssyriologique Internationale15. Paris:Les Belles Lettres. Craghan,J.F 1974 The ARMX"Prophetic"Texts:Their Media,Style and Structure.The Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University 6: 39-57. Durand,J.-M. 1982 Sumerienet Akkadienen pays amorite.MARI 1 (Mari:Annales de RecherchesInterdisciplinaires): 79-89. Ellermeier,E 1968 Prophetiein Mari und Israel. Series: Theologische und Orientalistische Arbeiten 1.Herzberg:VerlagErwin Jungfer. Gelb, I. J. 1961 The EarlyHistory of the West Semitic Peoples.Journalof CuneiformStudies 15:27-47. Gelb, I. J.,Bartels,J.,Vance,S.-M.,and Whiting, R. M. 1980 Computer-aidedAnalysis of Amorite. Series:Assyriological Studies 21. Chicago:OrientalInstitute of the University of Chicago. Gibson, J.C. L. 1962 Lightsfrom Marion the Patriarch. Journalof Semitic Studies 7: 44-62. Greenfield,J.C. 1969 Amurrite,Ugariticand Canaanite. Pp. 92-101 in Proceedingsof the International Conferenceon Semitic
BIBLICAL 1984 ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE
107
Studies, Jerusalem,1965. Jerusalem: The IsraelAcademyof Sciences and Humanities. Heintz, J.-G. 1969 Oraclesprophetiqueset "guerre sainte"selon les archivesroyalesde Mariet I'AncienTestament.Supplements to VetusTestamentum17: 112-38. 1971 Prophetiein Mariund Israel.Biblica 52: 543-55. Heltzer,M. 1981 The Suteans. Naples:Istituto UniversitarioOrientale. Huffmon, H. B. 1965 Amorite PersonalNames in the Mari Texts.Baltimore:JohnsHopkins Press. 1971 Yahwehand Mari.Pp. 283-89 in Near EasternStudies in Honorof W F Albright,editedby H. Goedicke.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins Press. 1974 PropheticOraclesin the Ancient Near East:Reflectionsof their Use in Form-CriticalStudy of the Hebrew Bible.Pp. 101-04 in Society of Biblical Literature,SeminarPapers 1974, VolumeI, edited by G. MacRae.Cambridge,MA: Society of BiblicalLiterature. Kiihne,C. 1978 Hittite Texts.Pp. 166-69 in Near EasternReligious TextsRelating to the Old Testament,edited by W. Beyerlin(translatedby J.Bowden fromthe German).Philadelphia: WestminsterPress. Kupper,J.-R. 1957 Lesnomades en Mdsopotamieau temps des rois de Mari. Series: Bibliothequede la Facult6de Philosophie et Lettresde l'Universite de Litge 142.Paris:LesBelles Lettres. Lemaire,A. 1978 LesBene Jacob,essai d'interpretation historiqued'unetraditionpatriarcale.Revue Biblique 85: 321-37. 1982 Recherchesactuelles sur les origines de l'ancienIsrael.JournalAsiatique 270: 5-24. 1984a L'inscriptionde Balaamtrouve e Deir cAlla:Aspects 6pigraphiques. Paperpresentedat the International Congresson BiblicalArchaeology held April 1-10, 1984.Jerusalem: IsraelExplorationSociety. 1984b Lahaute M~sopotamieet l'origine des BendJacob.VetusTestamentum 34. in Lastele aramdennede Barhadad. press Orientalia. Levine,B.A. 1981 The Deir cAlla PlasterInscriptions. Journalof the American Oriental Society 101:195-205.
108
Luke,J.T.
1965 Pastoralismand Politics in the Mari Period.Unpublisheddissertation from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Malamat,A. 1962 Mariand the Bible:Some Patternsof TribalOrganizationand Institutions. Journalof the American Oriental Society 82: 143-50. 1966 The Banin Mariand in the Bible. Pp. 40-49 in Biblical Essays 1966, Proceedingsof the 9th Meetingof "DieOu-TestamentieseWerkgemeenskap in Suid-Afrika." Potchefstroom,South Africa:OuTestamentieseWerkgemeenskap. 1969 Hazorand its NorthernNeighbours in New MariDocuments (W.E Albrightvolume). EretzIsrael 9: 102-08, 137 (Hebrew). 1971 Mari.The Biblical Archaeologist34: 2-22. 1975 Mari and the Bible:A Collection of Studies. Jerusalem:Hebrew University. 1983 "Silver,Gold, and PreciousStones fromHazor"in a New MariDocument. Biblical Archaeologist46: 169-74. Matthews,V.H. 1981 Pastoralistsand Patriarchs.Biblical Archeologist 44: 215-18. McCarter,P.K., Jr. 1980 The BalaamTextsfromDeir cAlla: The FirstCombination. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research239: 49-60. Miller, J.M. 1983 The MelqartStele and the Ben Hadadsof Damascus. Palestine ExplorationQuarterly115:95-101. Moran,W.L. 1969 New EvidencefromMarion the History of Prophecy.Biblica 50: 15-56. Noort, E. 1977 Untersuchungenzum Gottesbescheid in Mari;Die-"Mariprophetie" in der alttestamentlichen Forschung. Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament,202. Kevelaer/ Neukirchen-Vluyn:Butzon & Bercker/Neukirchener Verlag. Pardee,D. 1984 LiterarySourcesforthe History of Palestine and Syria:The MariArchives. Biblical Archaeologist47 (this issue). Parrot,A. 1967 Mari.Pp. 136-44 in Archaeologyand Old TestamentStudy,edited by D. W Thomas. Oxford:Clarendon Press. Romer,W.H. Ph. 1971 FrauenbriefeizberReligion, Politik
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
und Privatlebenin Mari. Untersuchungen zu. G. Dossin, Archives Royalesde MariX (Paris1967). Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament 12. Kevelaer/NeukirchenVluyn:Butzon & Bercker/ NeukirchenerVerlag. Sasson, J.M. 1980 TwoRecent Workson Mari.Archiv fir Orientforschung27: 127-35. 1982 An ApocalypticVision fromMari?: Speculationson ARMX.9. MARI 1: 151-67. Sauren,H. 1971 L'intronisationdu roi en Israela la lumiere d'unelettre de Mari.Orientalia LovaniensiaPeriodica2: 5-12. Schmitt, A. 1982 ProphetischerGottesbescheid in Mari und Israel, Eine Strukturuntersuchung. Series:Beitrigezur Wissenschaftvom Alten und Neuen Testament6/14. Stuttgart:VerlagW. Kohlhammer. Speiser,E. A. 1958 Census and Ritual Expiationsin Mariand Israel.Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 149: 17-25. Thompson, T. L. 1974 The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives.Series:Beiheftzur Zeitschrift fir die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 133. Berlin: W.de Gruyter. VanSeters,J. 1975 Abrahamin History and Tradition. New Haven:YaleUniversity Press. de Vaux,R. 1978 The EarlyHistory of Israel, translatedby D. Smith. London: Darton, Longman& Todd. Weippert,H., andWeippert,M. 1982 Die-"Bileam"Inschriftvon Tell Der cAlla.Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins98: 77-103. Weippert,M. 1981 AssyrischeProphetiender Zeit Asarhaddonsund Assurbanipals. Pp. 71-115 in Assyrian RoyalInscriptions, New Horizonsin Literary, Ideological, and Historical Analysis, edited by E M. Fales.Rome:Istituto per l'Oriente. Westenholz,A. 1978 Some Notes on the Orthographyand Grammarof the Recently Published TextsfromMari.Bibliotheca Orientalis 37: 160-69. Yadin,Y 1972 Hazor, The Head of all those Kingdoms.Series:The Schweich Lecturesof the BritishAcademy 1970.London:OxfordUniversity Press.
i~lil~0 01
Shrewdhistorianshave come to recognizethat recreatingthe past is essentiallyan imaginative undertakingin whichfacts culledfrom a varietyof sourcesare blendedtogethertoform a plausible moments reality.It is a commonverityoftheprofession,however,thatwhenit comesto reconstructing life,modernhistorianshavelargelyfailedto investtheirnarrativeswith thevision from Mesopotamian necessaryto persuadeand commandattention.I have thereforeelectedto reversethe usualmode of inquiryand to offerin thefollowingpagesa work in whichthefacts areavailableto you in the notes suppliedat the end but in which the vision comesfrom two decadesof my immersionin theMari archives.I hopethatyou will readthisasfictional history(butnot as historicalfiction)and that you willfind theexperimentnot devoidofdidacticbenefits.I alsohopethatyou will note theambiguity of the title and realizethat Zimri-Lim'sthoughtsare, in effect,hardlydistinguishable from my own reconstructions.1
110
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
imri-Lim pacedbackandforthin thesmallreception
room to which the Ugaritic emissary would be broughtupon touringvthepalace.2He thought again of the prophecyhe l acied&ivedfrom Addu-duri.3 Although everyonehad told himtoigno"'it, he kept returning to it. Addu-duriwas competent and in~t t hysterics, and the dreamshe reportedwas bloodcurdlmg'n He was suddenly angrywith himselfo•f l&lfiig once" more on the old woman'sdream,and' kped tstaratt griffin that had been painted on the wall~BIfs•fierce eprofile botfh attractedand repelled~hiif~,lhe was woriiedhe-toldkAwnself. he should look for4 his oia affairs:Is&Asme 7 ble in b be corrected.He bega;r thing was wrongj ,gn1o7s •a n. Ma wi, op0' ••qeeo0, b There werei o lems. . 16pru them t landathe. oodsthVclotihg-anthe Certainly
weapons she
ft
herpl fitortanft staiditioonc re markets,andmanurxfctu.red...dy•Idntmnueo •es a.nnf traderoute was
rich tolls exacted from ships sailingitj' Eiphjties. spatchi?• The assured.HiffWh'arfasterswer•di political situation also was satisfactory Hisvissals i-nthe Upper Country were faithful (alth?ugh i•eping te-eious track of their changing relatioghips with •ftsenad the other)4,and Benyaminite nomads were ninoore retles than usull. To the West, relations with Hazo, Qatnaan-idYamkbhdrenained friendly,as did those to the Southeast with Eshnunnkand Babylon.4 The thought of Yamkha, caused him to slohis ace. Yarim-Limwas still kin there and Zimri-Limwas•4ompletely confident of his was, after all, his father-K-: support;jYarimvbLix law. But now he was and the future 1ing,JIaga seriousrainig, murabi, seemed to favorhis namesake in BabylonoverZimriLim. Truthto tell, Zimri-Limno longer really felt like acting as the faithful client. The changing relationship with Yamkhadwas troubling but not, he thought, serious. And one of the reasons he wanted to meet less formally with the emissary from Ugarit was to see what he could learn from him about the latest from Yamkhad. Hammurabihimself had made the request that the emissary from Ugarit be allowed to visit Mari. Zimri-Limfelt a little better, and he decided to relax on the comfortabledivan. If he fulfilled his responsibilities to his people and especially to the gods, he should be all right. He would not make the mistakes his fatherYakhdun-Limhad. Once, when he was waiting to get into this very room to see his father, one of his father's vassals, a visiting king, stormed out angrily. Two of his followers were trying very hard to calm him down. When they were almost out of sight he thought he could make out the word "haughty." Zimri-Lim agreed even then. His father had sacrificed the well-being of Mari to his own vanity-launching battles at In the precedingpapersin this issue, the sound "kh"has been indicatedby bh, and the sound "sh"by '. In the presentpaper,these sounds have been spelled out so that readersunfamiliarwith the diacriticalmarks can gain a better sense of the pronunciationof affectedwords.Ed.
Artist'sinterpretation of a griffin paintedon a palace wall at Mari.
Addu-duri's To
Dream
introduce thisdream, recorded in properly
ARMX.50,I needto mentionthreematters. Thefirstcameto lightonlyafterIhadwritten myanalysisof thisdream(Sasson1983a)and concernsourdiscovery thatAddu-duri diedwhenZimriLimwasmasterofhisownhouse;in fact,at theheightof his powers.Fromthis perspective, Zimri-Limmaywell haveregarded Addu-duri asa Cassandra-like figure,and merelyhavedismissedthe burdenof hervision. The second matter refers to a convention in Mesopotamianas well as, for that matter,Hebrew theology,thatholdsthatgodsleavetheirshrineswhen theydecideto abandona city to its enemies.Finally,I alertyouto thefactthattwocrucialtermsarekept,inmy opinion,purposelyambiguous.In the firstparagraph, restoration aswell shulmum,carriesoppositemeanings: as destructionof a dynasty;in the last paragraph WTraDagan can be regardedas the name of a previous occupantof Mari'sthroneor as a full sentence,which appealsto Daganto return.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
111
Upon presentingher own nightmare,Addu-duri minor provocations,marchinghis unhappyarmies across hunturnshurriedly to a prophecy thatconfirmsthenegative dredsof miles to challenge the deeds of half-forgotten thrust of her own nightmare.She then sends along predecessors,memorializing his victories with inscriptions in a divinerto materialthat will be used by Zimri-Lim's properlyreservedfor the acts of immortals, creating authenticatethe reliabilityof the dreameras carrierof vocabulary cities and naming them afterhimself. When Yakhdun-Lim divinemessages:a lock of herown hair,andfringesof heardrumors about his own wife, he humiliated her by setting wearingwhenshehadher clothingshewaspresumably her outside the palace. He punished allies for imagined slights dream. Since the restoration/destructionof your father's by abandoningthem to powerfulShamshi-Adadof Asshur in house, I have neverhad such a dream as this. Previous the north.' All this tempted the gods- though Yakhdun-Limneverhad portents of mine were as this pair. In my dream, I entered the chapel of the goddess to face the consequences of his vanity. No. That was left to Belet-ekallim; but Belet-ekallim was not in residence! others. Sumu-Yamamhad not been on the throne long when he Moreover,the statues beforeher were not there either. was struck down by a harem conspiracy,and Zimri-Limhad to Upon seeing this, I broke into uncontrollable flee for his life. weeping.-This dream of mine occurred during the Those were darktimes, thought Zimri-Lim.Towait in evening watch!all those long years while Shamshi-Adadtook control hiding I turned around, and Dada, priest of the goddess and his son Yasmakh-Adadon Mari'sthrone was put Ishtar-pishra,was standingat the doorof Belet-ekallim's excruciating.6 but a voice on 0 hostile kept uttering:"Return, chapel; But enough of that! He'dgotten through, and now he was Dagan, Return, 0 Dagan!";this is what it kept on uttering. king. He fulfilled his responsibilities. His affairswere clear. More A female ecstatic of the goddess Annunitum The dreammeant little -no more than the many others he'd Do not go received, most of which foretoldgood fortune. arosein the temple to announce: "Zimri-Lim! on a journey; stay in Mari, and I myself will be At that moment he noticed that his personal secretary responsible (foryou)." Shunukhrakhaluwas standing in the doorway.He wondered My lord, therefore, should not neglect his own how long he had been there and he wavedhim away.Zimri-Lim protection.Ihave herewith sealed a lock of my hair and knew what he wanted to talk about. A few days earlierhe had fringes of my garment, sending them to my lord. received a letter from Yaqqim-Addu,the provincialgovernorof SaggaratumProvince saying that his sister Yamama'shusband had drowned.7Zimri-Limhad liked Asqudum;a diviner and an all-purposepalace functionary,he had been useful (andit hadn't Rule at Mari been that easy to find a husband for Yamama). MARIDYNASTY ASSYRIANDYNASTY It would be necessary to honor Asqudum with a kispum Ila-Kabkabu Yagid-Lim ceremony soon,8but Shunukhrakhaluwas concerned lest Zimri-Limpostpone the festival of Ishtarthat was soon to take Aminu (Sumu-Yamam) place.9His secretarywas a stickler for propercultic procedure. Zimri-Limcould alreadyhear him arguingthat festivals could 18201 Yakhdun-Lim not be postponed since they were meant to remind the gods, no (1755)2 Shamshi-Ade less than humans, of ancestral covenants."Ifwe are to hope for Ishtar'sfulfilling her part of the pledge,"he was likely to say, (Sumu-Yamam) "wemust have our own celebrations and prayerscoincide with that particularmoment in the past when vows were exchanged 1800 Yasmakh-Adad (1735) between her and us."He could not be stoppedfrom giving his sermons (pedantsare rarelystifled), even if one stated his agreement in advance.But because Shunukhrakhaluwas cautious 1780 (1715)
Zimri-Lim
1760 (1695)
Ishme-Dagan
Hammurabi of Babylon 1Middlechronology 2Lowchronology
Adapted from a chart in volume 10 of Encyclopedia Judaica (1971).
112
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
and often timid, just to be sure, he would ask that a haruspex be ordered to perform liver divination; and Zimri-Lim would have to participate. He hated the messy procedure passionately. But he would do it. He stood up and walked back to the wall. He had always had the uncomfortable feeling that the griffin was about to turn and look at him. It was a very effective painting. Zimri-Lim began to feel impatient. His son-in-law BakhdiLim should have finished showing the Ugaritian around by now. He needn't take him to all two hundred and fifty rooms! His annoyance against him did not last long, though. He liked
his son-in-lawvery much. In fact, he planned to ask him to become majordomoin the palace. He only wished that all the marriageshe had arrangedfor his daughtershad workedas well. 10
He thought of Kirum and Shimatum. Marryingthem both to Khaya-Sumuof Ilansurahad been a mistake, no question. His advisors had warnedhim of it, but Khaya-Sumuhad asked for their hands before concluding a treaty,and Zimri-Lim depended on him to troubleshoot among his inconsistent allies in the Upper Country. It might have worked,he thought, if Shimatum had not provenso fertile (twins no less!). Kirum'sletters had become increasingly strident, and he was beginning to think he would have to ask his wife Shiptu to arrangefor Kirum'sreturnlest she do something to hurt herself. She has threatenedto do so often! As bad as they were, however,her letters were no worse than the ones he received from Inib-sharri,whom he had married to Ibal-Adduof Ashlakka. Ibal-Adduwas a faithful vassal, but not terribly sensitive. He insisted on favoringhis first wife, even in Inib-sharri'spresence. Zimri-Lim shook his head. It hurt him to think of the dowry that his daughterswould abandonshould they returnhome. EvenErishti-Aya,who, inspiredby her aunt the priestess, had insisted on entering a cloister, was less trouble. Her letters from the Sun-god's establishment in Sipparwere always sanctimonious and full of vapidblessings (andlately also resentful comments about Shiptu),but at least these could be ignored. He was thankful for Inib-shina'smarriageto Bakhdi-Lim, and for the good matches he had arrangedfor his daughters Tispatum and Ibbatum.The formerwas happily marriedto IliIshtarof Shuna, the latter to Khimdiya, a rising star at the court of Andariq.But more than anything, he longed for a son. His thoughts easily driftedto his wife of recent years, Shiptu. She is young and healthy, he thought, and one day she will surely bear that son. He rememberedwell the-daywhen he went northward,just afterhis splendid victory overthe dreary Benyaminites,to meet her father the king of Yamkhad.They each had huge retinues. The father of the bride carriedgifts, many coming from as farawayas Caphtorin the midst of the Great Sea, but he expected even more from his future son-inlaw. Zimri-Limhad worn a splendid tunic from Tunip,manycolored, and embroideredwith mythological scenes all along its broadhems. He chose to ride a glossy mule, on that occa-
theydid Countrywerevassalsof Zimri-Lim, not necessarilygetalongwith eachother.In the followingexcerptsfromlengthyletters, territorialdisputes became so entangledthat only recourseto ordealsby the river-godcould resolvethe situation.The charactersthat appearin the two texts marriedto twoof include:Khaya-Sumu, kingofIlansura, of Zimri-Lim's Ili-Ishtar, king Shunaandthe daughters; land of Shabasim,marriedto Zimri-Lim'sdaughter, writerofthefirstletter,kingofSusa Shubram, Tispatum; (notthe Elamitecity) andthe landof Apum,possibly anotherson-in-lawof Zimri-Lim;Ili-Addu,king of Kidukh.Thecity in disputeis Shunkhum. ThesecondletterwassentbyMeptum,Zimri-Lim's highofficial.Thetwolettersmaybeconcernedwiththe and samelanddispute.Thetwotexts,in transliteration translationbut not in copies,can be foundin Bottero (1981:1034-44).
sion, because he wanted all to know that he was king of the Amorites and not merely a ruler of nomads. Shiptu herself came out from the tent, a mere child, huddled against her nursemaid Zizi. But since then, she had come to take command of the palace, seeing to it that all was well managed when her husband went on his frequent battles or tours of duty. Yet Zimri-Lim knew well that she had come to be much resented for her efficiency, and feared because of her potential for bearing the future prince of Mari." But Bakhdi-Lim was now standing at the threshold, and Zimri-Lim motioned him to usher in the emissary from Ugarit. "How do you find my palace? Yes? Did Bakhdi-Lim show
FirstLetter Formerly,when my lord was in Tadum and when IliIshtar of Shuna wrote my lord concerning Shunkhum: "Thecity is mine; they seized it by force,and Ili-Adduof Kidukh has been raiding me constantly ever since"these and much more Ili-Ishtar having written my lord-, my lord summoned me and gave me instructions: "Ili-Ishtarand his elders, Ili-Addu and his elders, you and the elders of Apum as leaders, ought to get togetherand have Khaya-Sumurender a decision for all of you. Whateverdecision
Oneof thirty-twoclaylivermodelsfoundin room108of the Maripalace.Liverdivinationinvolvedinspectingan animal'sorganforabnormalstate,shape,and coloringin is used orderto predictfutureevents.Thephotograph courtesyof MuseesNationaux,Paris.
Trials
the A
by River-god
in theUpper lthoughmanyof theleaders
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
113
you my icehouse? I had an Elamite engineer working on it for a full year.I am told - and I can'tsay that I quite understandit all -that last winter the cool evening air was made to freeze water in a shallow pond so that ice could be cut and stored in deep vaults. No matter,we should be able to have cool sherbets this summer. Well perhapsI'll take you myself. "Iassume all is well in Ugarit?I would like to visit there someday.I'mtold it's pleasant on the sea. Wehave now, as you doubtless know, an agent there, dispensing tin to points south. Have you met him? He goes aroundwith a translatorin case he meets with strangersfrom across the seas. "Youlook tired. Haveyou recoveredfrom your trip?If you didn'tsleep well I'dbe glad to have my privatephysician suggest something for you. I'mnot sure what-I've neverhad trouble sleeping-but I know he gave Shunukhrakhalua potion that was effective. My physician is very well-thought-of,especially since he stoppedthe spreadof a contagious disease recently. He isolated the poor woman, Nanna. She'smuch better now.12Personally, I think he might be a little too quick with the knife. Please let me know if you requireanything. "Let'ssit down. Youtoo. No. This isn't Babylon.We'renot so formal here. My ambassadorthere, Ibal-pi-El,tells me that Hammurabihas his scribes preparinga law code for him? Have you heardabout this? 'The best code ever.'Good luck to him! Does he not know that such collections are meant only for the gods?But I think them to prefergood deeds overnoble words, don'tyou? Certainly Hammurabihas done good deeds. Did he not make room for one of my daughtersin a cloister? Oh, other things too. "Thereason I wanted to talk informally with you today is to tell you why we cannot have a party in honor of your visit. I SecondLetter think you'veheardof the death of my sister'shusband?Yes.We With regard the plunging-team of Shubram and of are all saddenedby it. I naturally can'tconduct official business Khaya-Sumu which my lord sent to me, I sent at such a time, and soon we will be having the kispum of trustworthy inspectors with this plunging-team, (and Asqudum. Wehave these even for nonroyalindividuals here. I here is my report): First, they made a woman plunge (into the river); have orderedit: Loyaland faithful attendants should be so honored. Perhapsyou would like to participate.There is she came out (safely). After her, they made an elder and he went about into the God, 40meters plunge; nothing to preventus from having a fine meal duringthe (river) came out (safely).After him, they led another woman; ceremonies. Wehave just received fruits from the South, the she came out (safely).Afterher,however,the River-(god) first pick of the early season. I have alreadytasted the medlars, covered up a third woman, and since they had which ought to ripen a bit more when spreadon the palace's established for her the same distance as the elder, 40 roof. And we have truffles. I admit that I gaveYaqqim-Addua coveredup the thirdwoman, meters, but the River-(god) hardtime when he first sent them to me from Saggaratum,but
Khaya-Sumurenders for you, you will have to accept it."This is what my lord instructed me. WhenKhaya-Sumucame back here frommy lord's presence, according to my lord'sinstructions, we went to Khaya-Sumu-I and the eldersofApum as leaders,IliAddu and his elders-, at a time set by him; but [IliIshtar]did not show up,and did not evensend his elders! Instead, he dispatched Zakku, his servant, along with a page. Khaya-Sumuset for us the following conditions: "[Ili-Ishtar!]If this is indeed your city, two men and two women from Shuna should grasp earth from Shunkhum and plunge in the (divine) Riverdeclaring: 'The city is certainly mine, and has indeed beenattributedlong agoas shareto the land of Shabasim;the people of Apum have never ceded it as gift (to us).'They ought to make this declaration and, upon agreeing to plunge, they may take over the city. Otherwise, two men and two women from Apum should grasp earth from Shunkhum and plunge into the (divine)Riverdeclaring:'Thecity is certainly Shubram's, and has indeed been attributed long ago as share to the Khanean (tribesmen).'Theyought to make this declaration and, upon agreeingto plunge, they may take over the city." Khaya-Sumuhad set forus these conditions.But IliIshtardid not accept the conditions which Khaya-Sumu set for us; instead he decided to pillage the citizens of Apum,raidinginstantly whetherone travelsat dawn or finds night shelter.Ihave repeatedlywritten to him, but he does not respond to me or accept the decision....
the men fromKhaya-Sumu'steam refusedto plunge the remaining three women and formally declared: "The city and the land are certainly yours[Shubram's]!,," The elder then threw himself at the feet of Shubram'smen saying: "Do not have the remaining women plunge; they ought not die. We will secure a document ofno-contest concerningcity and land, and henceforth and evermore, no one will contest the matter. The city and the land are certainly Shubram's." He dictated a no-contest document before your inspectors, the Babylonian representatives, and the citizens of the (disputed)city. I am now dispatchingthis team to my lord;mylord may question the plungers....
114
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Amadugga, the head of the kitchen detail, tells me that they have been pickled successfully. (You like the name Amadugga? It means "Sweet Mama" in Sumerian, you know.) We also have pickled grasshoppers from Assyria, fine wines from Carchemish sent to me by king Aplakhanda, fish roe from the Balikh river, and deer meat stored from last season."13 think you would enjoy taking part, despite, of course, the sadness of the occasion. "Iappreciate your understanding and I sympathize with your hesitation. I would rather forgo all this myself and attend the spring festivals that will soon be breaking out in the villages and in my provincial palaces. Just yesterday I received
the first of the numerous requests I am sure to get to let the gods leave Mari in orderto visit their own shrines.'14I would much ratherhave the peasants keep their gods where they please, sacrifice when they aht4and avoid these yearly plaints d against it. They say to let the gods go home. ButI?Ir isi I don'tknow. I it's the best way to guaranteeh'.fiti4l1di ay• feel that loyalty is assuredby htiin s aftii&fa jtanagement on a& my part;and the gods know that 'a na2y v accordingly. '.".ron "Thepaintings on the walls of tfhi ae••kJa He diid c5 good. Yasmakh-Adadhad some of then•sone. decoratethe palacettii t all his fat•fwoul es tell mei to do on his cd"~h own?., women, thoug s,1 "Whydodn't 4go~e&the ehouse no? I show you somtrn ha An oeiggethas e• . you to the inner ,roya14hlkr•xd ~ , hey-?& to last. The built sthitiselves ort'f W•l•-spr.te.'gthie t A 9' go eternally." I
AfterabouttenyearsZimri-Limfell vidiimto urlbi ofB bylon.Mai .it was defeatedand its rampartsdisma4tledwithin tw1 •years;itnever again reachedthepoliticalprestigeit hadc4hieveddupig theprecedi g millennia. nol have leen enviable. Thefate of Zimri-Limis unkndwn,bu Shiptuand theotherwomenf'm Maw t~icould probablyt ken tAHammurabis palace-entered into theBabyloni's harem,handed er totusicians for dancinginstruction,or assignedtogeaveng establishment•,heinalepopulation was not left on the sio; the men wereprobablydisribu&edamong Hammurabi, his allies, and hi officers. Those entering aace Hammurabi'sprivate sharej'om tteij spoilswereprobab.hegiven ta as commensurate with theirtraiAIn e majoritylikelyassignedaspalace %T7i and templemenials.No doubtafew weresold byHammurabi'smerchants as slavestoforeigners. Notes
cloudless when nights,
winter
was
just properly
On
1Ihave explored these observations in more detail with regardto recreatingIsrael'spremonarchichistory (Sasson 1981), perature as well as that of Mari (Sasson 1984). Our appreciationof Zimri-Lim'scareeris undergoingmajor revisions as a result of recent inspection of the Mari archives. structed The biographicaldetails heretoforepresentedhad him, still a young man, escaping to Aleppo when Shamshi-Adadsuccause cessfully fomented a coup against either his father,YakhdunLim, or his brother(?),Sumu-Yamam.In Aleppo, Zimri-Limis shallow
freezing,
supposed to have married the daughter of the powerful YarimLim and remained with his father-in-law until the death of Shamshi-Adad gave opportunity for regaining his legitimate throne. It is now more likely that Zimri-Lim may have never lived in Aleppo, and that his marriage to Shiptu, the daughter of Yarim-Lim, occurred when he had acquired control, and indeed had reached the zenith of his power, at Mari. A recent reading of a sealing of a cylinder belonging to Zimri-Lim has also raised the possibility that he too was a usurper, as were so many of his contemporaries. Rolled upon the cover of a letter that belongs
air
a
form
to
con-
could
system ice
temabove
in
a
pond. Ice
at
Marin
thewinter airtemperature on atMari,
Suring clearnightswasusuallyonlya fewdegrees
above freezing. A properlyconstructed systemcould affectconditionsso that ice wouldform.Inturn,a properstoragefacilitycouldpermit its preservation foruse duringthe summer,when temperaturesoftenwent above1000 Fahrenheit.The
BIBLICAL 1984 ARCHAEOLOGISTIJUNE
115
main component of the system wouldbe a shallow,rectangularpond 10 to 20 meters wide and severalhundred meterslong. Its long axis would runeast-west,anda wall would be built along its south side to a height sufficient to keepthe entirewidth shadedfromthe low winter sun during ice-making season. There would also be lower walls on the east and west ends to shield the pond from early morning and late afternoonsun. On cloudless winter nights the pondwouldbe filled with water.The waterwouldlose heat to the sky by radiation; at the same time the walls, blocking off the wind, would reduce the amount normally gained by convection. Under these circumstances, even with the heat gainedfromthe groundby conduction, the net heat loss was sufficient to freeze the water. The depth to which the watershould freeze would vary with the air temperature,although the rate of ice formationcouldbe increasedby addinga few centimeters of waterat a time throughoutthe night. The amount of ice produced could also be increased, of course, by employing more than one pond. On the following day ice could be cut up and stored in the second component of the system: a storage pit presumably 10 to 15 meters deep. Weknow quite a bit about ice and its storagefrom almost a dozen or so Maricitations. While the ancients, it seems, dranktheir beer warmthey, and their gods for that matter,liked nothing betterthan to chill their wine with ice. And to do so, they built centrally located facilities from which they could convey ice-at night, and in wooden crates or buckets. We know that Zimri-Lim built such ice-storage facilities in Saggaratumand in Terqa,two cities where the king hadpalaces.In fact it is likely that all foursuch provincialcapitals,in which the king kept a full-fledged court when awayfrom Mari,housed similar constructions. A text (ARMXIV.25)gives us the dimensions of such a structure:about 6 meters by just less than 12 meters. The construction was elaborate and required specific measures for channeling water within it, apparentlyin orderto keepthe temperaturebelow freezing. We know that special expertise and much effort was necessaryto successfully complete the task. It is not surprising,therefore,that when Zimri-Limcompleted the icehouse (bitsuripim)at Terqa,to the northof his capital, he orderedpreparationof the following dedication: Zimri-Lim,son of Yakhdun-Lim,king of Mari,of Tuttul and of the Hana-land, builder of an icestoragefacility which never beforehas any king built on a bank of the Euphrates.He had ice conveyedfrom[ . .]and he built an ice-storagefacility at the bank of the Euphrates,at Terqa,the city well-loved by the god Dagan. JackM. Sasson which Theice-making above, mighthavebeen systempresented
to Zimri-Lim's early moments on the throne - a letter which, incidentally, was apparently never sent to its destination - is a statement that gives Khatni-[xxx] as the name of Zimri-Lim's father, and not Yakhdun-Lim. My own "solution" now is to propose that Yakhdun-Lim and Khatni-[xxx] are the same person, holding a name with variations on the root *KH.D.N ("toembrace")as the first of its elements. On all this, see Charpin and Durand, 1984. 2Many unpublished texts from Mari refer to Ugarit, a metropolis that becomes better known to us in documents from the Late Bronze Age, for it was an important commercial Elamite tin, traded depot already in the third millennium B.C.E. through Babylon, was shipped to Ugarit for international transport (Dossin 1970). The letter carrying a request to visit Mari is published in Schaeffer and others 1939: 16 and 17. It was sent by Hammurabi of Yamkhad later in Zimri-Lim's reign: "The Ugaritian wrote to
ask: 'Showme Zimri-Lim'shouse so that I can visit (it).'Now, I am herewith sending this servant to you."See also the epigraph to the paper by Gates appearing in this issue of BA. I have ob-
viously retrojectedthis event for dramaticpurposes. 3Agood English translation of selected prophecies and dreams from the Mari archives is found in Moran (1969).An overview of the Maridreams is providedin Sasson 1983;in particular see the appendix:290-92. ForAddu-duri'snightmare, see the text accompanyingthe present article; this particular prophecyis also given a literaryanalysis there. 4The relationship between Mari and Babylondeserves a special monographsince we have an abundanceof sources on the matter. The evidence indicates that Zimri-Limcame to the aid of Babylonon a number of occasions and that Hammurabi likewise sent his troops to supportMari.How and why the relationship souredto the point that Hammurabicame to destroy Mari is a subject of much speculation. Wecan document the coming crisis through letters, prophecies,diviners'reports,and administrativerecords. ARM II.76 gives an inkling of Mari'sdeterioratingfriendship with Babylon,as well as glimpses of Hammurabi'sformal court procedures,which followed a strict etiquette and included a code of proper dressing when in the king's presence. The
writer of this letter is a certain La'um.Since there existed a number of persons by that name, two of whom were important
officials in the courts of Yasmakh-Adad and Zimri-Lim, this particular letter cannot be securely dated. However, many bureaucrats lived to give service to more than one regime, and our La'um could easily have continued his diplomatic missions under Zimri-Lim. To clarify this text, one ought to bear in mind that we are dealing with two diplomatic missions: one that came from Yamkhad/Aleppo; and the other from Mari. The second delegation is composed of three separate groups: the diplomats used at Mari,is basedon a traditionalmethod used in Iranand described by Mehdi N. Bahadoriin his article in Scientific themselves (three persons, including the writer of the letter), American(February 1978,volume238, number2, pages144-54) delegates, and messengers. entitled "PassiveCooling Systems in IranianArchitecture!" "Weproceeded to have a meal before Hammurabi, enterthe ing palace's chamber, -Zimri-Addu, myself, and Yarem-
116
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE
1984
Addu. Theyprovided the three of us with formal attire, and they provided attires to all the Yamkhadianswho entered with us. However,since all the Yamkhadiansgot dressed, but the delegates who are servants of my lord had nothing to wear, I protested to Sin-bel-aplim about them as follows: 'Whydo you set us apart, as if we were criminals? Whose servants are we? And the delegates, whose servants are they?Are we not all the servants of our lord? Whydo you stir trouble between right and left groups?' This is what I said in protest to Sin-bel-aplim,myself quarreling with him. As to the delegates of my lord, they got angry,and stormed out of the palace's chamber. They told Hammurabi of the incident. Subsequently, they provided them with attire, and since they got dressed [ .. Hammurabi addressed me in assembly] as follows: '... Why do you continually create difficulties in my presence?
Do you imagine you can control my palace in the matter of formal wear?I provide and deny clothing at will! I won't come back to this affair;I will not provide clothing to the messengers at dinner!' This is what Hammurabi said to me. My lord ought to know this." 50Our knowledge of Yakhdun-Lim'sreign comes from a few and bureaucratictexts, from his year-nameformulae, juridical above and, all, from his monumental inscriptions. I offer a translation of one of these in the text accompanyingthe present article; a fuller study of this can be found in Sasson 1984. The text of a largerinscription is translatedby Oppenheim (1969:556-57). Yakhdun-Lim'sreign will be better known when a recently found small archive from his period is published. 6The rule of Yasmakh-Adad,placed on the throne by his father Shamshi-Adad,is well documented through an abundance of published letters; a few hundredmore are still awaiting final editing. Recent archaeologicaland artistic opinions have suggested that Marireachedthe apogee of its influence duringYasmakh-Adad's reign and was actually entering a period of decadence when Zimri-Limlost power (Parayre1982). ARM 1.3is a letter sent by Yasmakh-Adadto an unknown but obviously important god, accusing Yakhdun-Limand Sumu-Yamamof having broken their oaths and, hence, of deserving the fate that overcame their dynasty. Unfortunately the text contains large gaps and cannot be followed in its entirety. An English translation is given in Grayson 1972: 12 and 13. Sumu-Yamam's reign is still in deep shadows, even if we have a few texts dated to his reign. It is interesting that ZimriLim's scribes rarely recall Sumu-Yamam within sequences of Mari's past leaders. 7Asqudum, diviner and all-purpose palace functionary, will become much better known to us as soon as the harvest of texts found in his private villa are published. A good overview of these texts is available in Charpin 1984a. For his role as diviner, see Finet 1965/66. On the art of the diviner, see Starr 1983. His death is reported in ARM XIV.4, a letter sent by
Inscribeddisk of Yakhdun-Lim. Heightis 39 centimeters. Usedcourtesyof Missionarchdologique de Marl.
In
Praise
of
Myself:
Yakhdun-Lim Builds T
a
City
histextwasnotrecovered fromthesitewhere
a new city, Dur-Yakhdulim,was to be founded-as wouldbe expectedof a foundation inscription;rather,it wasfoundat Mari, in acomerofthepalace.Henceit servedpurposesother thancommemorative. Thisbecomesclearerasonereads the secondparagraph of the textwhereinYakhdun-Lim praiseshis owncreativeurges,failingevento paylip service to thoseof the gods. Ihaverestructured the textin orderto bringoutthe tripartitedivisionof the document,but, as I show in Sasson 1984,each section plays on themes that are sharedbyall. Yakhdun-Lim,son of Yaggid-Lim;king of Mari, Thttul and the Hana-land; the powerful king, who controls the banks of the Euphrates. Dagan proclaimed my kingship and gave me a powerful weapon, - "destroyerof kings hostile to me"-, so that I defeated seven kings-Hanean chiefs-who opposed me, annexing their territory; I removed the hostile forces from the banks of the Euphrates,and gave peace to my land;
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
117
I opened canals, thus dispensing with water-drawing throughoutmy land. I built Mari'sramparts and dug its moat; I built Terqa'sramparts and dug its moat. And in the burnt-field-an arid spot-where not one king since days of yore founded a town, Indeed I, feeling like it, founded a town, dug its moat, calling it "DurYakhdulim"; and I opened a canal for it, calling it "IshimYakhdulim." I, therefore,enlargedmy country and strengthened the structureof Mari and of my land, establishing my reputationfor eternity. Whoeverdiscards my commemorations, replacing them with his own, such a person,- be he king or governor-, may Anum and Enlil curse him darkly; may Shamash snap his weapons and those of his troops; may Ashnan and Sumuqan starvehis land; may hostilities close shut the gate of his country; may combat persist in his country; may trouble hound his kingship, daily, throughouthis life; may Anum and Enlil be evil counsel to him, forevermore.
Yaqqim-Addu,the provincialgovernorof SaggaratumProvince: "The day after the 20th of the month, the following news reached me: 'River currents carried away Asqudum from the boat, together with the men who rode with him, and he met his fate. 'I am writing instantly to my lord. Burqan died along with him; but I have not yet gotten the names of all those who died with him. I will write as soon as I gather the information. As to his house here, I have given stiff orders to his butlers, that they ought not harm either his slaves or his property."
80n the kispum ceremony,see Birot 1980, who gives a bibliographyand footnotes. This ceremony,in which the departedare called to memory, was a very important cultic occasion. In Mari,it occurredat least once, sometimes even twice, monthly, with modest amounts of food partakenat one point duringthe ritual. Normally, the kispum was in honor of dead kings, but in Mariwe have information that even nonroyal individuals were so honored. It cannot be ascertainedwhether the deadwere recalled duringsuch moments in orderto rest their souls in peace (comparethe Jewishkaddish, in its eventual application)or to preventtheir malevolence were they to feel neglected. I suspect that both issues were at stake. Zimri-Limreceived this letter, ARM 111.40,from KibriDagan, the governorof Terqaprovince:"Thegods Dagan and Ikrub-El are well; the city of Terqa and (its) province are well. Another matter. On the very same day I send this letter to my lord, the ecstatic of Dagan came here and spoke the following: 'God sent me! Write the king forthwith and let him present funerary offerings in honor of Yakhdun-Lim's ghost.' This is what this ecstatic spoke and I am writing it my lord. My lord may do as it pleases him."
9AnEnglish renderingof the elaborateritual cum pageantry presentedbeforeIshtaris given in Sasson 1973a:153, note 9. The text was published long ago in Dossin 1938. On the art of divination, with many pages devotedto the Mariformulations, see Starr1983. 10Thedaughtersof Zimri-Lim,their joys and tribulations, are discussed in Sasson 1973band in Batto 1974. The rosterof such princesses can be almost doubled now. Most of their letters arepublished in ARM X. See the text accompanyingthe present article, where Khaya-Sumuis assigned to settle a territorial dispute by means of a riverordeal. The last article to study the cloister and its institutions, especially the one at Nippur, is Stone 1982. The article is rich in bibliographical details. A dowry, apparently for a princess, is recorded in ARM XXI.219. Among other items, the list includes three female serOnlythe head remainsof an alabasterstatuerepresenting vants, much jewelry, clothing, furniture, vessels, kitchen utenan unnamedMariwarriorfoundon thepalacestairsnear court148androom210.Thechinpieceshownon thisstatue sils and cutlery, and so on. is also wornby the warriorthat appearsin the mural 11Riding a donkey as sign of kingship over urban dwellers is at the paintingfromroom132of thepalace.Thephotograph an act attested to as early as the third millennium B.C.E.,see beginningof this article shows the statue head found in situ. Sasson 1976: pages 72 and 73. ARM VI.76 contains the advice Height is 19.8 centimeters. It is now in the Aleppo Museum. Photographsfrom Mari by Andr6 Parrot,Editions Ides et offered by Bakhdi-Lim to Zimri-Lim: "May my lord honor his Calendes, CH-Neuchatel, Switzerland. kingship. Since you are the king of Hanean (tribesmen), and also are the king of the Amorites, may my lord not ride horses;
118
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
instead, he ought to ride a chariot or mules, so that he could honor his kingship."Therefore,when Christ entered Jerusalem on a donkey,the population, as well as the authorities, knew how to readthe symbolism at stake (Matthew21). 120n preventingthe spreadof infectious diseases, see ARM X.129, in which Zimri-Limwrites his wife: "Ihave heard: 'Nanna has an infection, and since she is often at the palace, it will infect the many women who are with her.'Now give strict orders:No one is to drink from the cup she uses; no one is to sit on the seat she takes; no one is to lie on the bed she uses, lest it infect the many women who are with her. This is a very contagious disease!" 13Thefood at the Mari royaltable is discussed within Bottero'scharming overview of Mesopotamian culinary arts (Bottero1982).On the much appreciatedspringmushroom, the truffle, and its gatheringfor the royaltable, see ARM XIV.35, written by Yaqqim-Addu:"Eversince I reached Saggaratumfive days ago, I have continuously dispatched truffles to my lord. But my lord wrote me: 'Youhave sent me bad truffles!'But my lord ought not to condemn(?)with regardsto the truffles. I have sent my lord what they have picked for me....'" writes in ARM XIV.8to Zimri-Lim:"The 14Yaqqim-Addu the district took hold of me regardingthe gods that mayors of are held in the cities of Saggaratumand Dur-Yakhdulim,saying about the matter: 'Itis time for sacrifices; release the gods so that they can offer them sacrifices in their own temple.' But since I had not asked my lord, I am not releasing the gods. May my lord write me whether the gods are to be conveyed to the villages or not, this or that, so that I could follow my lord's order." 150n the harem of Zimri-Lim,Durand'srecent study in 1984 demonstrates the well-known phenomenon that new rulers enjoyedthe harem of the dethroned.Note how Absalom treated his father'sconcubines, although he undoubtedlywent too public in pressing his temporaryadvantage(2 Samuel 16:20-23). Reuben'scurse (Genesis 49:3-4) evokes his prematureusurpation of his father'sconcubine (andRachel's maidservant)Bilhah (Genesis 35:22).
A house model found at Mari. lean Margueronbelieves that in spite of its circularplan, the model reproducesthe normal plan of local habitations. The higher central section of the model is thought to indicate the existence of a roof. Photographis used courtesy Mission archeologiquede Mari.
Bibliography Batto,B. F. 1974 Studies on Womenat Mari.Baltimore:The JohnsHopkins University Press. Birot,M. 1980 Fragmentdu rituel de Marirelatifau kispum. Pp. 139-50 in Death in Mesopotamia,edited by B.Alster.Copenhagen:AkademiskForlag. Bottero,J. 1981 Lordalieen Mesopotamieancienne. Pp. 1005-67 in Annali della Scuola Normale, Superioredi Pisa (Classedi lettere e filosofia)III,11. 1982 Laplus vieille cuisine du monde. L'histoire49: 72-82. Charpin,D. 1984a Les archivesdu devin Asqudum dans la residencedu ChantierA, MARI4 (Mari:Annales de RecherchesInterdisciplinaires) (forthcoming). 1984b Les archivesd'dpoqueAssyriennedans le palais de Mari,MARI4 (forthcoming). Charpin,D., and Durand,J.-M. 1984 Les origines de Zimri-Lim,MARI4 (forthcoming).
This seated statue of a temple superintendent, Ebih-il, was found in the pre-Sargonic Iotar Templeat Mari. An inscription carved into the shoulder of this alabaster statue is one of the earliest known votive inscriptions in the Semitic language. The man is shown in the attitude of a worshipper;his wide-open eyes are inlaid shell and lapis lazuli set in bitumen. Although his head is shaved he wears a full beard whose curls aremeticulously stylized and reveal the use of a drill-a hallmark of Mari sculpture. His upper body is shown naked, but from the waist down he wears the kaunakesgarment which some scholars believe was woven to simulate sheepskin. It is 52.5 centimeters high and is in the Louvre.Mission archeologiquede Mari, tome 65, plate XXVII.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
119
Portraitof a king from the mural in room 132 of the palace. Although the king's identity is uncertain it may represent Zimri-Lim. The ruler is shown in the ritual act of pouring libation beforea god.
120
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Dossin, G. 1938 Un rituel du culte d'Istarprovenantde Mari.RevuedAssyriologie et dArcheologie Orientale 35: 1-13. 1970 Laroutede l'6tainen Mesopotamieau temps de Zimri-Lim.Revue d'Assyriologieet dArcheologie Orientale 44: 99-106. Durand,J.-M. 1984 Les dames du palais de Marial'poque Assyrienne,MARI4 (forthcoming). Finet, A. 1954- Lesmddecinsau royaumede Mari.Annuaire de l'Institut de 1957 philologie et d'HistoireOrientaleset Slaves 15: 123-44. 1965/ Laplace du devin dans la societe de Mari.Pp. 87-93 in La Divination 1966 en Misopotamie ancienne et dans la regions voisines. Vend6mes: Pressesuniversitairesde France. Gates, M.-H. 1984 The Palaceof Zimri-Limat Mari.Biblical Archaeologist47 (this issue). Grayson,A. K. 1972 Assyrian RoyalInscriptionsI. Wiesbaden:Otto Harrassowitz. Moran,W.L. 1969 AkkadianLetters.Pp.623-32 in Ancient Near EasternTextsRelating to the Old Testament,thirdedition with supplement,edited by J.B. Pritchard.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. Oppenheim,A. L. 1969 Babylonianand HistoricalTexts.Pp. 556-67 in Ancient Near Eastern TextsRelating to the Old Testament,third edition with supplement, edited by J.B.Pritchard.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. Parayre,D. 1982 Lespeinturesnon en place de la cour 106 du palais de Mari,nouveau regard.MARI1:31-78. Sasson, J.M. 1973a The Worshipof the Golden Calf. Pp. 151-59 in Orient and Occident. Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament22, edited by H. A. Hoffner. Neukirchner-Vluyn:Neukirchner,Butzon & Bercker,Kevelaer. 1973b BiographicalNotices on Some RoyalLadiesfromMari.Journalof CuneiformStudies 25: 59-78. 1976 Pp. 72-73 in Interpreter'sDictionary of the Bible, Supplementary Volume.Nashville: Abingdon. 1981 On Choosing Models for RecreatingIsraelitePre-MonarchicHistory. Journalfor the Study of the Old Testament21:3-24. 1983 MariDreams.Journalof the American Oriental Society 103:283-93. 1984 On Reconstructingthe Histories of EarlyIsraeland of Mari.Colloques de Strasbourg(forthcoming). Schaeffer,C. F A., and others 1939 UgariticaI. Series:Mission de Ras Shamra3. Haut-commissariatde la R6publiqueFranqaiseen Syrieet au Liban,Servicedes Antiquit6s. Bibliothequearchdologiqueet historique31. Paris:PaulGeuthner. Starr,I. 1983 The Rituals of the Diviner. Series:BibliothecaMesopotamica12. Malibu,CA:Undena Publications. Stone, E.C. 1982 The Social R61leof the Naditu Womenin Old BabylonianNippur.Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 25 (February): 50-70. Thureau-Dangin,F. 1936 Iabdunlim,roi de Hana.RevuedAssyriologie et dArcheologie Orientale 33: 49-54.
Book
Reviews
The Prophets,Volume One, The AssyrianPeriod,byKlaus Koch; translated by Margaret Kohl, ix + 182 pp. Philadelphia: FortressPress, 1983; $10.95 (Paper). This paperbackvolume is the firstto be translatedof a twopartintroductionto Israel'sprophets.Koch'sgoalis "tograsp the prophets as thinkers, to work out the distinctive profiles of these mighty thinkers"(p.vii). Koch'srationale for this particularprojectis his conviction that even though the prophetsmay havebeen the subjectsof certainintuitive or ecstatic experiences, the propheticliterature,what the prophets actually wrote as opposed to what they experienced, representsthe giving of rationalform,"subsequent insight"(p.vii), to these priorevents. In this first volume, Kochprovidespreliminarycomments in which he defines Israel'sprophetsas moral futurists, that is, as people concerned with the relation of moral behavior to what happens in the world.Despite this moralconcern,the prophets seem not so much interested in the plight of the righteous suffereras in the fact that fartoo many people aregetting on fartoo well. As a consequence of this moral problem, an inescapable catastrophelooms for Israel.This view of the futureis, accordingto Koch,new andunique in the ancient Near East. (InKoch'sview, the Mariprophets"point forwardto"but are not fundamentally similar to Israel's prophets.)Byusing this notion of moral futurism, Kochis able to refer with approvalto earlier discussions of the prophets as "ethicalmonotheists,"though he prefersthe label "ethical,futuristic monotheists."At such points, his rhetoric stands in the way of crisp analysis - for example, "Thus concentric anthropology forms the one pole and ethical futuristic monotheism the other,in a field of force which is described in categories which are knit together into a metahistory"(p. 14). Afterthis prolegomenon,Kochproceedsto discuss the earlyhistoryof prophecyin Israel,the periodapproximately 1000 to 750 B.C.E. Here attention focuses on Nathan, Ahijah,Elijah,and Elisha.Kochappearsto subsume them all under the rubricndbi', as individuals functioning as cultic prophets.At this point, the analysis,particularlyas it lumps Elijah and Elisha together-the narratives of which are so different and the social circumstances of whom vary so decisively-is unconvincing. Koch'sassessment of Amos is the most original portion of the book, not surprisingly,since he authoreda major study in 1976devotedto Amos. Kochmaintainsthat Amos was not a Judahitebut was from a northern Tekoa,a site attested in postbiblical times. Much in the book of Amos, he suggests,maybe interpretedin an entirely cultic sense.
Thus, justice and righteousness (mi'pat and languagewhich has overtly to do with social criticism, is, s.daqdqh), at the same time, languagerootedin cultic usage.Moreover, Amos'admonitions to "seekYahweh" may constitute a call for penance rites. In a moreanalyticmode,Kochassesses Amos'thought using the categoryof metahistory,"atheoryaboutthe cohesion of all reality as a single, all-embracingthough complex process, in which Israel and Yahwehform the two essential poles"(p.73). Kocharguesthat Amos viewed the movement of history occurringon at least fourlevels: the divine level-when Yahwehsays"Iwill not revokeit"(Amos 1:3);the level of efficacious powers-the earth (Amos 8:8); the level of human spheresof activity- (Amos8:2);andthe evident realistic levels - military operations (Amos 5:2). These variouslevels interpenetrate,andyet it is clearthat, for Amos, they are related in no systematic way. Whatis it, then, that may serveto characterizeAmos and to distinguish him from other prophets? Is it his thoroughgoingsocial criticism, his critiqueof the cult, his conviction that an end is coming, his articulationof a complex metahistory, or some unique combination of these elements?At this point one looks fora syntheticstatement, but Koch gives us none. Hosea is differentfromAmos, Kochgoes on to point in out, his speech,his view of God,andhis overallconcerns. Cultic mattersratherthan social andeconomic issues take prideof place. LikeAmos, Hosea perceiveda metahistory. But Hosea'snotion is couched in the imageryof marriage, an image by means of which Yahwehappearsakin to a fertility god.Hosea,however,affirmedthe existence of a covenant between Yahwehand Israel,a relationshipwhich injected a note of transcendence into Hosea'sthinking and which preventedYahwehfrombecoming one naturalforce amongmanyothers.Andit is this notion of covenantwhich servesto integrateHosea'sthinking: The individuallevels of metahistory which in Amos seem to cleave apart,are here welded together by the idea of covenant"(p.93). Koch'sjust-citedassessment leadshim to affirmsomething very much like an intellectual and moral evolutionary scheme. Amos represented a moral sensibility more refined than those of his pre-literaryprecursors. Hosea'smetahistoryis more consistent than that of Amos. Micah'sview of the deity is more cosmic andtranscendent than are those of Amos and Hosea. And Isaiah expresses even more profound ideas about the ambiguities of life: dependenceversusindependencein the human condition, both in its national and in its personal manifestations. Whatbecomes apparentafterreadingKoch'sstudy is the fundamentalsimilarityhe discernsamongthe prophets under consideration. (This is especially clear in the summary of the second volume, pp. 193-204, which has not yet been translated.)There is a prophetic mode of thinking which all Israel's prophets share. They perceive a metahistory, a total movement running through time.
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE
1984
123
Koch'sjudgment about the significance of the prophets' achievements provides a similarly homogeneous assessment: "Forthe firsttime in the history of mankind,human beings daredto makehope the foundationof theirontology and their theology. The prophets therefore brought a futuristic turn into the thinking of following centuries, a sense of incompleteness anda furtherpurposeto be found in the course of world events"(p. 163). It is goodto havesuch summarycomments. However, since the goalof Kochwas to outline the distinctiveintellectual profilesof each prophet,thereis aproblem.WhatKoch saysaboutone prophetcanoftenbe saidaboutanother.The discourses of Amos and Hosea areadmittedly differentin vocabularyandimagery.Buthas he shown that they think differently or that they both representa prophetic way of thinking? Since he focuses so much on the notion of metahistory which these prophets share, one senses less of an evolution and more of a commonality or stability among the various prophetic literatures. This book contains many perceptiveobservationsof Israel'sprophetic literature.But it is a feast ratherthan a digested meal. It does not provide, as one expects of an introduction, clearly refinednotions about each prophet. Further, the system of enumerated paragraphs,though enabling the readerto know exactly where he or she is in the volume, does not createoptimal discursiveprose:See, for example, the transition from 7.8.3 to 7.8.4. Insum, this is an importantattemptto exploreIsrael's prophetsas thinkers.Whatit lacks in refinement,it makes up for in perceptive comments on particular texts or themes. Koch'sprogrammaticstudy joins that of G. Fohrer (Die Propheten des Alten Testaments, seven volumes [Giitersloh:GerdMohn, 1974-1977])as a recent introduction to Israel'sprophets Whichdeserves our attention. David L. Petersen Iliff School of Theology The Female Experienceand the Nature of the Divine, by Judith Ochshorn, xvii + 269 pp. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981;$17.50. In her introduction, Judith Ochshorn reviews the major currentviews, all generallypositive, on the role and status of women in the Judeo-Christiantradition. These views, however,appearto her too narrowlyfocused, overlooking "the significance of attitudes towardgender,power, and female sexuality in ancient polytheistic literature"(p.xv). Her book is an attempt to redressthe balance,by examining just such attitudes in paganmyths, rituals, and incantations as comparedwith biblicalnarratives.She mentions her indebtednessto the preeminent SumerologistSamuel Noah Kramerfor stimulating her to undertakethe work. In part 1, "Genderand Power: Theoretical Issues"'
124
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Ochshornpresentsher assumptions andperspectives.She disagrees strongly with the prevailingview that monotheism was a "seminalmoral and spiritual advance over polytheism"(p. 13),especially for women. Forher, a comparison of biblical texts (including the New Testament) with polytheistic documents highlights "the extent to which differentiations made on the basis of sex are imbeddedin the Bible'sview of divine-humanencountersand underscore the nature of those sex-linked distinctions" (p. 12). The polytheistic texts she focuses on come from Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Canaan;and she believes that despite their differences they had "sharedconcepts of divinity" and, therefore, "sharedviews toward gender" (p.26). Among these, in her judgment,arethe notion that both gods andgoddessesparticipatein human events, and the positive linking of divine female sexuality to benefits for the human community. Such concepts andviews, she thinks, must be reflectionsof the social realities;andmost important to her is the assumption that women played a prominent role in priestly activities in all three cultures. ForOchshorn,then, genderhad little importancein these cultures, since it was not seen in the divine sphere "asa necessaryornaturalcorrelativeof powerorpowerlessness" (p.89). It follows, therefore,that there existed "expansive attitudes towardthe sexuality of real women"(p. 34), as evidenced in the SacredMarriagerituals, which, for her, bespeak the celebration of female sexuality and the absence of denigration of women's biological functions. By contrast, the biblical attitudes toward women Ochshornsees as characterizedby profoundambivalence. She notes that there is a positive appreciation in the biblical image of "wisdomas feminine"(p.158f.).Butmuch more striking,in her view, is the Bible's"pervasivelypejorative attitude towardsexual females that almost borders on the obsessive"(p. 199). She finds especially abhorrent the recurrent imagery describing "female sexuality qua harlotry as equivalent to sin and moral transgression" (p. 163)-this in sharp distinction to the polytheistic celebrationof female sexuality in the rituals of the Sacred Marriage. The presence of such attitudes and imagery in the Bible, Ochshorn suggests, is probablya result of its male authorship, as against the sometimes female-authored polytheistic texts, notably, the Sumerian Exaltation of Inanna. Moreover, these attitudes correlate well with the almost total exclusion of women from leadership in Israel and from their absence in cultic participation, in contrast to what she has assumed for polytheistic Near Eastern cultures. Thus, for Ochshorn, the shift from polytheism to monotheism, a shift "fromdivine maternity and paternity" to a perspective which promoted "the absence of a feminine involvement in the all-important act of creation" (p. 225), led to the emergence of a basically ambivalent and fearful
attitude to women and their sexuality. The biblical perspective, she believes, "contributedto a legacy that has been destructive to the humanity of both sexes"(p.243). Specialists in biblical and ancient Near Eastern studies will find much to criticize in The Female Experience and the Nature of the Divine. Manydetails areincorrect and many interpretationsareeither too superficialor questionable-failings which may result from frequent reliance on outdated secondary sources. To mention just one example, Ochshorn suggests that the obliteration of Hatshepsut's reign from later Egyptiansources "wasnot expressive of a universally sharedattitude towardwomen in positions of power"(p. 104).Forif there had been such a sharedattitude, she explains, there would not havebeen "somuch evidence from that time for the participationof women as priestesses"(p. 104).But one familiar with ancient Egyptian views would know that the female qua Pharaohwas an unacceptableanomaly.Furthermore,it is questionablewhether in any ancient Near Easternreligion women served in the central cultic acts of caring for and feedingthe gods.They mainly servedto entertainthe gods with dance,music, and song.And evengrantingsome level of female cultic participation, it does not follow, as classicists in recent yearshave demonstrated,that this is necessarily evidence of high female status. As Ross S. Kraemerhas noted (Unspoken Worlds.Women'sReligious Lives in Non-Western Cultures [Harper& Row, 1980], p. 68)"participationin the DionysiacritualsaffordedGreek women a means of expressing their hostility towardand frustration with a male-dominated society" Furthermore,Ochshorn reveals again and again her own uncertainty as to whether the linkage between the world of gods and goddesses and the human world can indeed be made.Yetin the end, it seems to me, she relies too heavily on myths to drawconclusions about the human societies she is interested in. To be sure, myths can be useful when used in conjunction with other sources, but they alone have little independentvalue for the historian. The issue becomes especially clear in those cases where Professor Ochshorn follows Samuel Noah Kramer'sexcessively commonsensical approach to myth. This approachhas alreadybeen ably criticized by G. S. Kirkin his Myth. Its Meanings and Functions in Ancient and Other Cultures (Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress, 1970), pp. 88 and following. To sum up, it appears that the differing perspectives toward women in the ancient Near Eastern world were far more complex and variable than Ochshorn is willing to recognize. To understand them, I would suggest, the arena of socioeconomic and political realities is far more important than the theological which Ochshorn has emphasized. At the same time, all ancient Near Eastern traditions, including the biblical, shared more in their attitudes than Ochshorn seems to think: in their common articulated and communicated masculine outlook, and in their
family orientationwith little room or desireforindividual preferences and independence. Forall, women were the custodians and perpetuatorsof life, and none denigrated sexuality. The last is of central importance. Foralthough expressionsof ambivalencetowardwomen occur in all the traditions, especially in their wisdom literature, the absence of a body/soul dichotomy softened the ambivalence. It is Greekdualism that, in my opinion, contributed much to what Ochshorn says is "alegacy that has been destructive"(p. 243), for with the Greeks body/nature/ woman ranks far below soul/culture/man. Professor Ochshorn has asked questions which challenge the specialists. It is for them to respond. Rivkah Harris School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Flood
The The angelsshouldnot be blamedfortheirmisconduct.
Thiswastheirfirstview of the daughtersof men andnoveltydoesnot wearoffspeedily. Evenmen,who see womenfrequently, areknownto misbehave,afterthe firsttime too. It'snot angelkindbutmankind broughtthe Flood,andnot perhapsfortakingliberties with theirgirlfriends, orthe otherwayaround. At mostthatwasaccessoryto the crime, whichwas(saysthe officialreport)violence, a kindof far-flung abandon,locust-stripping of fellowmenand-women,jubilant smashing,tramplingof neighborsandstrangers indiscriminately, justforthe hell of it. Andthatbecamecontagious,fashionable, witty,etiquette,eagerto be photographed in situ, in action,in glossypublicity. Andprofitable.Sothe Floodbegan,at first a drizzle,lightandhardlysoaking, andfellowmenputon theirraincoatsandthat wasthat.Butthenthe raincamedown in showers,in steadydownpour, heavingup titanicwavesthatwashedandcrashed andsweptandswallowed,andthe noise couldbe heardfromoceanto ocean. Eventhe highestmountainsweresubmerged. It lastedonehundredandfiftydays, butthatwasenough. JudahGoldin
Handbook for Biblical Studies, by Nicholas Turner,ii + 144 pp. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1982; $8.95 (Paper). "Whatcan one do when a particularwordcannot be found in a regulardictionary,nor a dictionary of the Bible, nor
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
125
apparentlyanywhereat all, andyet is used as though everyone ought to, and apparentlydoes, know what it means?" (p. vii). Nicholas Turner,tutor in Old Testament at St. Stephen'sHouse, Oxford,and lecturer in Old Testament Theology at KebleCollege, Oxford,has attempted to deal with this frustratingquestion by compiling a glossary of over 1,500 technical terms used by biblical scholars. In addition, he provides thirty-six pages of introductory material: maps, chronologies, archaeological periods in Palestine, tables of rulers and empires, the Jewish calendar, Greek and Hebrew alphabets, a theological Who's Who?,and a briefdiscussion of modernEnglishBibles.As he warnsin the introduction,Turneris not tryingto teach, but to remind the readerby means of briefdefinitions that are intentionally "assimple as possible"(p. viii). The reviewerreadthis book with mixed reactions.On the one hand,Turneris to be commended, not only forhis attempt to meet a pressingneed felt by all who areinvolved in biblical studies but also for the comprehensiveness of the book.Eventhe neologismsof structuralismappearwith adequate,introductorydefinitions.Furthermore,that over 1,500technical terms in seven languagescan be discussed with only two typographicalerrors(p. 98, under "Mark, Secret Gospel of;' should surely read, "partof a letter by ... .";and "scarab;' p. 122, is an "ancient,beetle-shaped seal")borderson the miraculous. On the other hand, Turneroften moves beyond his stated task of providingsimple definitions by editorializing. Forexample,the definitionof'psittacism'reads,"Parrotfashion repetition; automatic, unthinking response, a perennial tendency in worship"(p. 117).Other examples include'cultus'(p.58),'deuteronomic'(p.61),'geneticfallacy' (p. 75), 'parthenogenesis'and 'pathetic fallacy' (p. 109), 'pneumatophany'(p.113),'propitiation'(p.115),'solascriptura'(p.125),and'tritheism'which is definedas a"mistaken
approachto the Trinitythat sees the three personsbut not the unity. Mohammedhad this problem"(p.137).The frequent use of nouns as adjectivesalso provedannoying.For example, under 'apocalyptic'Turnerwrites, "a strongly determinist view" (p.44). With regardto the definitions themselves, referents areoften ambiguous,as in the entryfor Lamentations'"five laments upon Jerusalem,destroyedby the Babyloniansin 587 BC"(p.93),wherewhat wasdestroyedis not immediately clear to the uninitiated. Furthermore,the definition of 'Octateuch' "name for the first eight books of the OT, Genesis-Ruth"(p.105),is simply incorrect.One might also question the use of the pedagogical"at-one-ment"in the definition of 'atonement' (p. 47) and the illustration of 'morpheme'(p.102).And some readersmay be offendedby the noninclusive language Turneradopts. This reviewerwill continue to recommend Richard N. Soulen'sHandbook of Biblical Criticism (second edition, Atlanta: JohnKnox, 1981),which, though less comprehensive (about600 terms), is entirely adequatefor all but the specialist, and provides grammatically accurate, more extensive definitions without editorial expansion. Mark Mark A. Throntveit Throntveit Luther Luther Northwestern Northwestern Theological Theological Seminary Seminary OldTestamentExegesis:A PrimerforStudentsandPastors, by Douglas Stuart, 143 pp. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1980; $7.95 (Paper). Douglas Stuart, associate professorof Old Testament at Gordon-ConwellTheological Seminary,sets out "topresent a step-by-stepguide to OTexegesis that would be nontechnical andsimple without being simplistic, that would explain not only the proceduresbut the goals of exegesis,
FulbrightProgramsSeek Applicantsfor Studyin the MiddleEast FulbrightFellowshipsareavailablein the academicyear 1985-86 forpredoctoralandpostdoctoralscholarswishing to do researchor teaching in Ancient Near EasternStudies or relatedfields. Membersof the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearchareurgedto applyforthese awards and to use the facilities of ASORcenters in Jerusalem,Amman, and Nicosia. Availableawardsinclude: Researchawardsin Bahrain,Cyprus,Egypt,Israel,Jordan,Morocco,Syria,andTurkey Lectureshipsin Bahrain,Egypt,Israel,Jordan,Lebanon,Qatar,SaudiArabia,and Yemen The Islamic Civilization ResearchProgram,supportingprojectsrelatedto Muslim societies in any country of the MiddleEast Travelawardsto Egyptor Israel,in supportof research Researchgrantsforrecent Ph.D.swho havenot done researchpreviouslyin Israel The applicationdeadlineforthe 1985-86 academicyearawardsis September15, 1984.Foradditionalinformation,predoctoralstudentsshould write to the Institute forInternationalEducation,809 United Nations Plaza,New York,NY 10017;postdoctoralscholarsshould write to the Council forInternationalExchangeof Scholars,11Dupont Circle,Suite300, Washington,D.C.20036. ForinformationaboutASORcentersin the MiddleEast,write ASOR,4243 SpruceStreet,Philadelphia,PA 19104.
126
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
and that would serve as a handbook for reference as the student or pastordoes the actual work of exegesis"(p. 12). Toachievethis end, Stuartoffersthree chaptersof unequal length. Chapter1providesa thirty-threepage,twelve-step "GuideforFull Exegesis"in outline form andgearedto the needs of students preparing an exegetical term paper. Chapter 2 is a twenty-five page, six-step shortened or "blended"(p.56) version of the full guide designed for the pastor preparinga sermon. Chapter 3, whose sixty-four pages comprise approximatelyone-half of the book, is a helpful annotated bibliography of exegetical resources primarilyin English.The reviewerfoundthis thirdchapter to be the most valuable section of the book for students and pastors alike. With regardto Stuart'sstatedpurpose,however,some readers"whohaveno ideawhat homoioteleuton might be" (p.11)might be somewhat bewilderedby the maze of textcritical investigations Stuart recommends, including printing out a reconstructedHebrewtext with omissions and additions carefullymarked,and critical evaluationof as many versions (Greek, Syriac, Aramaic, Latin, and Qumran)as possible to ascertainvariantreadings,all with an eye to "reconstructas faras possible the text as originally inspiredby God"(p.23, Stuart'semphasis).Havingstruggled through all this, the novice exegete will be encouragedto read,"f the passage does contain textual or translational
difficulties, your congregation deserves to be informed aboutthem"(p.59).However,admonitionssuch as "Youwill surely not last long in the pastorateif your congregation hearseverysermonbegin with: 'Letus examine the textual problems of the passage'" (p. 75) may dampen that enthusiasm considerably. Furthermore,while some attempt is made at illustratingthe variousprocedures(forexample pp. 65-69 and a chartcomparingthe versionsof 1 Samuel 20:32 on p. 92), this reviewer found scant evidence of the concern to "explainnot only the proceduresbut the goals of exegesis" (p. 12).Finally, while the bibliographyis valuable, it can hardly"serveas a handbookfor referenceas the student or pastor does the actual work of exegesis" (p. 12). Indeed, Stuartrecognizes as much when he states elsewhere that the intention of the primeris "thatit shouldgetyou started, not that it should always be needed"(p. 53). All in all, Stuart'sprimer seems too elementary for anyonewho has had some exegetical training,and yet too complex (thereareforty-ninesubpoints in the "fullguide" and twenty-threesubpoints in the "shortguide")and confusing for the novice. Mark A. Throntveit LutherNorthwestern Theological Seminary
CATASTROPHISMAND ANCIENT HISTORY and AncientHistory,publishedtwice yearly,bringsyou Catastrophism in AncientHistoryand Biblicalarchaeology,like articles stimulating -"Abraham to Hezekiah: An ArchaeologicalRevision," STAN VANINGER -"A Different View on the Chronology of Hazor," MARVIN A. LUCKERMAN -"The End of Mitanni and Some Related Problems," LESTER J. MITCHAM
and AncientHistoryis availablenow to readersat only Catastrophism $6 per year ($8 overseas). To Catastrophismand Ancient History 3431 Club Drive, Los Angeles,CA 90064 Please send me a twice-yearlysubscriptionto C&AHfor (overseassubscribersadd $2).
years at only $6 per year
Name
i Enclosedis my check for
$
Address
City
ZIP
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
127
Books
Received
RichardAdamiak, Justice and History in the Old Testament. The Evolution of Divine Retribution in the Historiographiesof the Wilderness Generation. Cleveland:John T Zubal, Inc., 1982, xiv + 105 pp. $12.95 (Cloth). D. Amiran,M. Brawer,A. Negev, and Y Karmon,editors, Eretz-Israel17: A. J. BrawerMemorial Volume. Jerusalem:Israel Exploration Society, 1984, 20 + 338 (Hebrew) + 14* (English summaries) pp. + 45 pls. $40.00 (Cloth). Nahman Avigad, Discovering Jerusalem. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983, 270 pp. $24.95 (Cloth). Gonzalo Baiez-Camargo, Archaeological Commentary on the Bible. GardenCity, New York:Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1984, xxxviii + 289 pp. $17.95 (Cloth). EdwardM. Blaiklock and R. K. Harrison,generaleditors, The International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology Grand Rapids, Michigan: ZondervanPublishing House, 1983, xxx + 488 pp. + 16 pls. + 20 maps and index. $24.95 (Cloth). 0,OF
Gaalya Cornfeld, with Benjamin Mazar and Paul L. Maier, editors, Josephus, The Jewish War.Newly Translatedwith Extensive Commentary and Archaeological Background Illustrations. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982, 526 pp. + 32 pls. $39.95 (Cloth). Moshe Dothan, Hammath Tiberias. Early Synagogues and the Hellenistic and Roman Remains. Jerusalem:Israel Exploration Society, University of Haifa, and Department of Antiquities and Museums, 1983, 7 + 88 pp. + 37 pls. $45.00 (Cloth). RobertKarl Gnuse, The Dream Theophany of Samuel. Its Structurein Relation to Ancient Near Eastern Dreams and its Theological Significance. Lanham, Maryland:University Press of America, 1984, xiv + 264 pp. $25.75 (Cloth), $13.50 (Paper). JonathanA. Goldstein, II Maccabees. Anchor Bible 41A. Garden City, New York:Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1983, xxiv + 595 pp. $18.00 (Cloth).
BOOKPUBLISHERS Pleasesendall reviewcopiesto: The Universityof Arizona
0
Tucson, Arizona 85721
7
w. E Albright Instituteof Research Archaeological in Jerusalem is pleasedto announce new Academic Excavation
Appointments Fieldtrip Publication
Fellowships programs andimproved Researchlibrary Workshops Scholars' residence contact: Forfurtherinformation ASORAdministrativeOffices 4243 SpruceStreet Philadelphia,PA 19104 Tel:(215)222-4643
128
Dr. Peter B. Machinist Department of Oriental Studies
Moving?
Make Sure BA Moves With You
Correction In the article "The Ebla Tablets"by LorenzoViganband Dennis Pardeewhich appeared in our March 1984 issue, an error appearson pages 12 and 13. Under the heading "The Language," the block of text made up of the second through fourth paragraphsin the section has been transposedwith the block of text made up of the fifth through seventh paragraphs. Please note this in your copies of the article.
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
Please attach yourmagazine mailing label to this coupon and send both to: ASORSubscriptionServices, 4243 SpruceStreet,Philadelphia,PA 19104. Be sure to include yournew addresson the form. Thank you!
Attach Label Here
Name (please print) YourNew Address City State
Zip
Archaeologyof in
the
Bronze H.
Rudolph
the and
Transjordan Iron
Ages
Dornemann, Ph.D.
The archaeologicalrecord of the Transjordanis still limitedfor most of the centuries of the Bronze and Iron Ages but continuallyincreasing archaeologicalactivityis graduallyfillingthe gaps in the record. Dr. Dornemann, head of the Milwaukee Public Museum's History Section, writes from the vantage point of a field archaeologist with twenty years of experience in Near-Easternarchaeology. His intimate knowledge of the Transjordanis based on extensive involvement in Jordanianarchaeology,includingperiods as an archaeologicaladvisor to the Jordaniangovernmentfor tourism projectsand the firstdirector of the AmericanCenter for OrientalResearchin Amman. This volume provides a reference resource as new archaeological evidence is published,and a synoptic view of previous archaeological activities in the Transjordan.The ceramic materials, excavated or accidentally encountered, fall into two sequences. Dornemann's excavations on Jebel Qala' (the Amman Citadel) provide transitional materials. The ceramic sequences are examined in detail and are fully illustrated. The opening and closing chapters highlightgeneral problems in assessing the archaeological record: limitationsof surface survey evidence, evidence for settled or non-settled populations and the distinction of cultural sub-units within specific geographical limits. Briefreviews of available historicalevidence for the Bronze and Iron Ages are aided by the use of tables. ISBN0-89326-053-3
304 pages plus cover.
$50.00
Pleaseinclude$2.00for shippingandhandling.
PublicationsSection Milwaukee PublicMuseum
100
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE1984
800 W. Wells St. Milwaukee,WI 53233
BIBLE MUCH" ,'TOO 36 VOLUMES.16,486 PAGES. ANDSTILL GROWING. BUT IFYOU ANDYOURFAMILYARE TRULY INVOLVED WITHHOLY CANYOUAFFORD NOTTOSUBSCRIBE -WHILE CRIPTURE, YOUCANSTILL SAVE 25%ON EACH VOLUME ....
::• ?ar~t
.
?
i•
Ifyou wantnotonlythe best possible biblicaltranslation,butalso the finest possible biblicaleducation, TheAnchorBibleis exactlythe right size. Foronlya workof this scope can bringyou so close to the actualmessage of each bookof the Bible...towhat its itsays and howit emergedfromr historicalsetting. Morehas been learnedaboutthe Bibleinthe pastcenturythaninall the previouscenturiesof its existence. to TheAnchorBibleareall Contributors deeply involvedin this continuing scholarlyrevolution.Andbecause The AnchorBibleis beingpublishedbook by book,subscriberswillbe gettingthe resultsof tomorrow'sscholarshipas well as today's.Theyare,in fact,participatinginan ongoingprojectof enormoussignificance,one thatwill continueto shed new lighton previouslymisunderstoodpassages and biblicalepisodes. Answeringquestionsaboutthe Bible -as you readthe Bible Whydoes it takea 372 page volumeto translateand introducea biblicalbookas briefas Jeremiah? morethanone contributorhas (Actually, discoveredthattwovolumesarenecesto do justiceto the single book sary assigned to him!) TheanswermakesTheAnchor Biblean unprecedentedopportunityfor the modemreaderto appreciate, perhapsforthe firsttime,the central bookof his civilization.Everypage of translationis madeclearerbyseveral pages of notes andcomments.Ancient texts areilluminedbycontemporarylinuisticandarchaeologicaldiscoveries. Previousoralternatetranslationsare givenforall doubtfulpassages. And each volumeincludesa fascinating introductionwhichis oftena booklin itself. ReadingTheAnchorBibleedition of a familiarbiblicaltext is a new, wonderfullysatisfyingexperience.As you reactGenesis,forexample,you will discoveran intriguingexplanationof whyAbrahamintroducedhis wifeas his sister whenvisitingforeignlands.InPsalms,you aregiventhe firsttrans-
iii+ + "- " i:,+t !+,+,• '••
•"
lationto take intofullaccountthe Ras ShamrahUgaritictexts-with some startlingexamplesof importantprevious mistranslations. As you readthe Gospelof Matthew,you willfindthe answersto such questions-as:Whatwerethe actuallaws used to bringJesus to trial? Howcan we followthe events leading to the Crucifixion witha first-century conceptof time?Againandagain,contemporaryscholarshipmakesancient Scripturemoremeaningfulthanever before. Theextraordinary acclaimcontinues TheAnchorBiblehas already receivedthe highesthonorof the Americanpublishingindustry,the Award.Aboutthe project Carey-Thomas as a wholethereis generalagreement: "Thebest EnglishBibleyet;'says the BaltimoreSun. "Theoutstanding biblicalcommentaryof ourgeneration;' says ProfessorCyrusGordon."For specialist,scholar,andgeneralreader alike;'says the BostonGlobe,"The AnchorBibleis one of the greatest biblicalcontributionsof the century:' Commentsas each new volume is publishedarejustas enthusiastic. "Themost significantworkon the Psalterinthe last hundredyears:'' -Frederick L.Moriarity, S.J. the most provocative "Certainly commentarypublishedthis past year,"-Christianity Todayon Revelation."Freshandexciting...anew lookat the FirstGospel,'-Pulpit Digest on Matthew."Thebest commentaryon John availablein English'--Christian Century. Continuingacclaimsuch as this attests to the originalwisdomof generaleditorsWilliamFoxwellAlbright and DavidNoel Freedman,who sought as contributorsthose scholarsbest qualifiedto translateandintroduce each particular bookof the Bible. AnchorBibletranslatorshavetherefore come frommanynationsandfaiths, and each volumeis translatedbyan not a committee.Everyconindividual, tributoris concernedexclusivelywith
whatthe Biblesays, not withanyone of "whatit means:' interpretation A familyInvestment PresentplanscallforTheAnchor to consistof 66 Bibleultimately volumes,includingthe Apocrypha. Rightnow,you mayacquireexisting volumeson a convenientmonthlybasis andthenreceivenewvolumesas they are published.Youwillreceivea discountof 25%on each volumeas itis sent to you (currently AnchorBible volumesare regularlypricedfrom$14.00 to $18.00;subscriberspayjust$10.50to $13.50).And,ifyouwish,youmayalways returnanyvolumewithintwoweeks withoutcost orobligation.Finally, you maycancel yoursubscriptionat any time. Therewillneverbe a more advantageoustimeforyouandyour familyto discoverthe lifelong advantagesof an AnchorBiblesubscription.Tostartyourtrialsubscription,mailthe coupontoday.
THE ANCHOR Doubleday & Company, Inc. yl Gy
GardenCity,NewYork11530J)IDJA
Pleaseacce my application fora trialsubscription to
III
THE ANCHOR BBLE and send me immediatelymy copy of
the firstvolume. Genesis.I understandthat with Genesis(as with all succeeding volumes) I may return the book within two weeks without cost or obligation. Otherwise you will bill me for Genesisat the special subscriber'spriceof$12.00 ($4.00 less than the regular bookstore price of$I16.00) plus shipping and handling. II keep Genesis. will then be shipped one volume a month until I have received all published volumes. Thereafter. I will receive volumes as they are published. I am assuredthat I may returnany book within two weeks without obligation: that I will be billed individually(plus shipat a dtscountof ping and handling) for all volumes I 25% off the regular bookstore priceaccept, of each volume; that THEANCHOR BIBLE is currently priced at $14.00 to $18.00 per volume: and that I may cancel this subscriptionat any time without penalty.
I
I I
NAME ADDRESS
I
CITY STATE
ZIP
SIGNATURE
ZA-315
This offer valid only until Dec. 31. 1984J ? am"" *-NNW
%R=W? "mm
BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/IUNE 1984
109
1",,
ME
t6.c -tAz THE NAKED PUBLIC SQUARE Religion and Democracyin America byRichardJohnNeuhaus ConvincedthatAmericais now engagedin a historicmomentof notedpreacher testin, andscholarRichardJohn Neuhauspresents a provocativeandsophisticatedanalysisof democraticsocietyandtheplaceof religious valuesin it. Cloth,$16.95
CREEDS, SOCIETZYAND HUMAN RIGHTS
THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES
SHARINGJESUSIN THE
Edited by VinaySamueland CbrisSugden A collectionof papersanddiscussionsfromthe FirstConferenceof EvangelicalMission Theologiansdealingwith emergingChristologiesin the two-thirdsof theworldwhose peoplelivein situationsof poverty,powerlessness,andoppression.Paper,$12.95
THE GOSPEL OF JOHN ryF. F. Bruce
Writtenprimarilyforgeneralreaders,this malornewcommentaryon the FourthGospel includesnotesanda bibliography forthose interestedin furtherstudy.Cloth,$13.95
by ThomasF. Tracy In thistightlystructured,well-reasoned, and scholarlyessay,Tracyoutlinesa freshmodel forunderstanding Godin his relationships with the world,his creatures,andhistory. Paper,$11.95
THE FIRST AND SECOND
EPISTLES TO TIMOTHY AND THE EPISTLE TO TITUS
New International Commentary on the New Testament A Study in Three Cultures byBastiaan VanElderen Thislong-awaitedcommentary byMax L. Stackhouse provides resourcesfrom seriousstudentswith a thoroughexamination Using inter-disciplinary social set in the context texts of the Greek religions theory,comparative history, firmly research,andpersonalexperience,Stackhouse in whichtheywerewritten.Cloth,$14.95 analyzescompetingcreedsastheyfunction to hinderor advancehumanrightsin three THE SPIRIT AND differentsocieties.Cloth,$19.95 THE CONGREGATION Studies in I Corinthians z2-IS THE GREAT REVERSAL by pbP Ethics and the New Thstament A.Martin the Pentecostalunderstanding alengig byAlienVervey ofI Coriniians I2-IS,Martinoffersa fresh new examines the ethic of Thismajor examinationof the biblicaltext,firmly study Jesus,its expressionin the earlychurchand basedin currentexegesis.Paper,$7.95 Testament the relevance New in writings,and of Scriptureto the continuingmoraleducation THE CHRISTIAN AT PLAY of the church.Paper,$13.95 byRobert K.Jobnston bothto In anattemptto findan alternative NEW TESTAMENT SOCIAL the traditionalworkethicandthe hedonism ETHICS FOR TODAY much andnarcissismthatcharacterize byRichardH. Longenecker discussionof play,Johnstonhereoffersa Focusingon the threecoupletsof Galatians thoughtfullyaevelopedtheologyof play. 3:28,Longenecker laysa hermeneutical Paper,$8.95 foundationforthe discussionof Christian socialethics.Paper,$5.95 EVANGELICALS AND THE
TWO THIRDS WORLD
GOD, ACTION, AND EMBODIMENT
New Century Bible Commentary byKennethGrayston The latestadditionto this popularcommentaryseriesbasedon the RSV. Paper,$5.95
BISHOPS' PASTORAL LETTER
Edited byDean C. Curry ForewordbyArcbbishopjohnj. O'Connor Thisfirstscholarlyevangelicalcontribution to the nuclearweapons ebateis organized aroundthe maintiemes of the i983ishops' PastoralLetter.Paper$Io.95
GATHERED FOR LIFE
EditedbyDavid Gill Prefac byPhilip Potter The officialreportof the historicSixth Assemblyof tfie WorldCouncilof Churches, reports,and includingmajorpresentations, statementsaswellasa descriptiveand evaluativeaccountby the editor.Paper,$12.95
THE MEDIATION OF CHRIST Z Thomas F. 7brrance andinsightfuldiscussionof straightforward the roleof Christasmediatorwhichshows thecloseconnectionbetweenChrist'sroleas mediatorandthatof Israel.Paper,$6.95
I KINGS, WITH AN INTRODUCTION TO HISTORICAL LITERATURE The Forms of the Old Testament
Literature, Volume IX, byBurkeO. Long Longdiscussesthe character, genres,andformulasof OldTestament istoricalliterature,andoffersa unit-by-unit analysisof I Kingsasaneiampleof this literature.Extensivebibliographies; glossary of genresandformulas.Paper,$20.95
HEBREW IN THE CHURCH
The Foundation of Jewish-Christian Dialogue byPinchasLapide Translatedby rrollF. Rhodes The firstcomprehensive surveyof of the New Testament Hebrewtranslations andChristianliturgy.Paper,$9.95
REASON WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF RELIGION (Second Edition) byNicholas Wolterstorff A substantially enlargedversionof the author'searlierworkin whichhe discusses the bearingof Christianfaithon-thepractice of scholarship.Paper,$4..95 Pricessubjectto change. Formoreinformationon theseandother recentEerdmanstitles,writefora copyof ourlatestcatalog.Examination copiesof most publicationsareavailableto qualifiedprofessors. At your Bookstore,orwrite:
2 WMI*.
B.
EERDMANS
PUBLISHING CO. 25 II AVE.S.E./ GRANDRAPIDS, MICH.495o3 255JEFFERSON Max L. Stackhouse
Richard J. Neuhaus
F. F. Bruce
Allen Verhey Ralph P Martin
BIBLICAL 1984 ARCHAEOLOGISTIJUNE
121
ANNOUNCING1L ~~IlI
ALL FURTEE FILMTRIPSIN
AVAILABLE
ALSO
NOW
"NEW I" S
i o * " * I
IN
I
FILSTRIP
FILS
TE
~
l
I~
I
AR
SERIS
WITH SOUNDTRACKS.'i~llllI FORMAT
VIDEOTAPE
I~l~r~l
#178. "IMAGE ANALYSIS OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN"
"NEW I"
TheFilas FilmstripSeries is privileged to announce its newest filmstrip, "IMAGE ANA L YSIS OF TI SIIROLD OF TURIN, " a simplified summary and digest of the 66-page Haralickreport on digital analysis of the Shroud. This study was done by Dr. Y Robert M. Haralick, Director of the Spatial Data Analysis Laboratorv at VirginiaPol'technic Institute and State Universit. name of Blacksburg, Virginia.The flaralick report presents supporting evidence for the existence of'at least six letters of the TiberiusCaesarplus the characteristicastrologer 'sstaffand money-shaped pattern belonging to a coin issued byvPontius Pilate in 29 A.D. as existing in imprints over the right eye of the Man of the Shroud. Other implications from the report confirm the Shroud as the model of Bvyzantineicons of Jesus from the sixth centurv and suggest the existence ofta "modesty cloth "anda possible phylactery on the Man of the Shroud. This is the first complete digital analysis ever made of Shroud photographs. The filmstrip presents this new supporting evidence for the dating of the image on the Shroud, adding dramaticalli' to earlier $30.00 evidence that the Shroud is not a forgery and is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. LENGTH: 100 framies,30 nimiutevoice cassette witli narration by Fraticis L. Filas, S.J.. Professoir tf Theology at Loy)la University.
":" .0. . ... :
4
OTHER INTHEFILASFILMSTRIP SERIES: MATERIALS PILATE COINSONTHETURINSHROUD. #177: PONTIUS $30.00
100 frames, 30 minute cassette description.
"THE DATINGOF THE SHROUD OF TURIN FROMCOINSOF PONTIUSPILATE," InformationalPacket with numismaticsketches,2 slides, 1 color print, 14,000 wordMonograph. $6.50
OFJESUSCHRIST? OFTURIN:ISTHISTHEPHOTOGRAPH #163. THESHROUD
$25.00
84 frames,38 minutecassetteexplanation.
OFTHESHROUDOFTURIN:A DOCUMENTARY. #173. THE1978 EXPOSITION 113 frames, 30 minute cassette explanation. SH
illOFTURN
RO
' PEI
OTINl
$25.00 AL:Sae
1650
Infratoa
#77#13,17&
7.1
Pcet
66 A.D. # 160. JERUSALEM,
$22.00
Model reconstruction. 105 frames, 42 minute cassette explanation.
ISRAELTODAY. OFBIBLICAL #164. THEDESERTS $22.00
135 frames, 31 minute cassette explanation.
TODAY. LOCATIONS INJERUSALEM #165. BIBLICAL $22.00
133 frames, 38 minute cassette explanation.
TODAY. LOCATIONS IN GALILEE #167. BIBLICAL $22.00
133 frames, 31 minute cassette explanation.
OFTHEBIBLETODAY. #169. THESEACOAST $22.00
135 frames, 30 minute cassette explanation.
THEBIBLE. FORMS:A KEYTOUNDERSTAND #170. LITERARY $22.00
92 frames, 20 minute cassette explanation.
OFJESUS. #172. THERESURRECTION $22.00
Audio-visual recap of New Testament narratives. 116 frames, 25 minute cassette explanation.
TODAY. JESUSLIVED- AS IT LOOKS #174. WHERE $20.00
(Children's filmstrip: 5th grade and under.) 70 frames, 15 minute cassette explanation.
PAULVISITED ASTHEYLOOK TODAY. #175. PLACES $25.00
106 frames, 27 minute cassette explanation.
THEIRRELEVANCE TOTHEBIBLE. #176. THEEBLATABLETS: 100 frames, 30 minute cassette description.
$35.00
All cassettes for these filmstrips have automatic/manual signals to advance strip. Printed keys for each frame. Musical interludes. Except as noted, production, narration and photography by Francis L. Filas, S.J. ds *.
itep .
ne .
.
6(i~l
~?;~ ~
.
k .
.
Sys, a .ll ..
6*
6
66thout.obligation
6l~l''l~~l
upon
66ll~I~rll~l
.
re q ue 66
.t.t66addes6below . 6
6
6
6?L
DISTRIBUTED BY: Cogan Productions, A Division of ACTA Foundation, Suite A, 11134 Youngtown Avenue, Youngtown, Arizona, 85363. If ordering for institution, please give name of person ordering. If individual, please give credit reference. (No delivery charges if payment with order. U.S.A. ONLY.)
122
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/JUNE
1984
How to give a donationto
THEWALL STREET JOURNAL
AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch and savemoneydoing it.
If, right now, you subscribeto The Wall StreetJournal,$15 will be contributedin your name to American Schools of Oriental Research.
The Wall StreetJournalis a business newspaper- the Number 1 business publicationin the country, readeverybusinessday by more than six million men and women who look to it for the facts, figures, informationand insights they need to excel in their careers.But The Journalis awarethat art and culture, too, are essentialand enrichingparts of the lives of all of us. That is why The Journalhas recently expandedits dailycoverageof the artsand culturalevents.And that is why we'reextending this offer to you. Why not subscriberight now? American Schools of Oriental Research will benefit.And, with your own copy of The Wall Street Journalin your hand everybusiness day, so will you.
Attn:Managerof SubscriberService 200 BurnettRoad Chicopee,MA01021 Please start my subscription to OYes!The WallStreet Journal. O One Year$101 0 Six months$53 O Paymentenclosed O Billme Forcreditcardbillingpleasecheck: O AmericanExpress O VISA O MasterCard O DinersClub Card# Exp.Date Signature Myname Address State-
City
Zip
Creditcard orders validonly withcardholdersignature.
Alreadya Journalsubscriber?Consider the gift of a subscriptionto a business associate or a friend.The $15 donation will still be made in your name. To give a gift of The Wall Street Journal, please providethe informationrequested below. Forcorrect billing, remember to complete the section above. When we receive your gift instructions, we'll send an attractivegiftcardto your recipient,hand-signed in your name. Name Address City Sign giftcard 0 One year$101
State
Zip
0 Six months$53
Limitedtimeoffer - good in continentalU.S. only.6MSL
OFQ%
Now distributed by the American Schools of Oriental Research
Ancient
Jewish
Coinage
by Ya'akov Meshorer The first comprehensive publication of ancient Jewish coins in 100 years, Meshorer's work takes advantage of the many additional finds of new materials in recent years. While this publication is of particular interest to numismatists and archaeologists, the author also extensively treats Jewish history, the interpretation of ancient Jewish symbols, and Jewish epigraphy.
To Order:
Volume 1. Persian Period through Hasmonaeans. Pp. 184; 56 plates. Volume 2. Herod the Great through Bar Cochba. Pp. 295; 36 plates.
Send your orderand payment to: Eisenbrauns P.O.B. 275 Winona Lake, IN 46590 Mastercardand Visaare accepted;please supplyyour
Distributed by ASOR/Eisenbrauns for Amphora Books. 2 volume set: $150.00; $120.00 (20%discount) to members of ASOR.
Ifprepaying,add$3.00percopy to your prepayment.
card number and the expiration date.
ebbi i
!
O
,q-ji•i 8i !•?:
j
'
,•
i•
?
I, IIr ....
.
.................. L•
~
i: ?:
• •
?i
•
i ? ? ~I. ...•
::4: I I: : :iii: ;i_.i-ii:
web•ILO
i &k..... i-iii•
.
i
-iii•~?
.
.,
,?:?-
..L-40 7-
101-"Al
A
l???•
•ii •iI
