Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Jump to content

Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shetarlo (talk | contribs) at 18:09, 6 January 2024 (Standardization, removing unsourced. (Temerarius, I respect the grind, but you need to learn tone and sourcing convention)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Pithos A shows five figures. There are a bull and calf. A seated musician or weaver is to one side. In the center appear[1] "Yahweh and his Asherah."

The Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions are a series of inscriptions found at Kuntillet Ajrud in the Sinai Peninsula. The inscriptions, most of them on jars, were found among an unusual number and variety of vessels and other inscriptions,[2] and date to the late-9th century BC.[3][4] Many are religious in nature, invoking Yahweh, El and Baal, and two include the phrases "Yahweh of Samaria and his ʾasherah" and "Yahweh of Teman and his ʾasherah."[5]: 87, 95 

The finds were discovered during excavations in 1975–1976, during the Israeli occupation of the Sinai peninsula, but were not published in first edition until 2012.[6][7][full citation needed]

The "shocking" and "exceedingly controversial"[8][full citation needed] inscriptions have been called "the pithoi that launched a thousand articles"[9][unreliable source?] due to their influence on the fields of Ancient Near East and Biblical studies, raising and answering many questions about the relationship of Yahweh and Asherah.

Description

The most famous[10] inscriptions are found on two pithoi,[11] especially Pithos A, obverse pictured. The central figures are human-bovine and have writing above their heads. The musician (or weaver[12]), seated and about the same size as the standing figures, appears unnamed. The sucking motif with the quadrupedal animals is also quite central, but most scholars analyze the standing figures in relation to the "Yahweh and his Asherah" language. Pithos A was done in what resembles an ochreish red on pottery the color of toasted butter, while wall inscriptions were in black on plaster.[13][page needed] At least one piece is a multi-color work. Contributing to difficulty, the "incriptions (sic) reveal odd data at different angles"[14] or photos may mislead.

The reverse of pA has a line of ambiguous mammals including most clearly a boar. The remaining below, drawn more confidently, are all goddess symbols: a pair of caprids flanking a sacred tree, on bottom a lion. The central figure:

"It is mainly a tree trunk with branches and shoots coming out from it, eight in flower and eight in bud. Pirhiya Beck notes that the tree may be compared with Phoenician examples which show lotus and bud. Its overall form, however, is curious. The flowers are not quite lotuses. The trunk seems like that of a palm tree, but at the top of the trunk is a feature that looks rather like a large almond nut, with the pits of its shell clearly shown. Interestingly, three main branches come from each side of the trunk, and the other two flowering shoots and two minor budding shoots (or shoots with small almond nuts) come from the ’almond’ motif. Like the menorah, then, this representation of an asherah has three branches coming from each side of a central trunk. As we have seen, in the drawings of the Lachish ewer, the trees shown also have three branches coming from a central trunk and look very like menorot. In the Ta’anach stands, the tree is an upright trunk with several furled fronds coming out from the two sides; in one case six and in the other eight.[15]

Kuntillet Ajrud, then "Contellet Garaiyeh", in 1871. Kuntilet Quraiyah on some maps.[16]

Pithos B has figures in a worshiping attitude and other elements.

Inscriptions

"The workers became so enthusiastic with their finds and so wrapped up in their whole endeavor that it became almost impossible to tear them away from their work. As the magnitude of their discoveries became apparent, they nearly had to be dragged away from their trenches when it was time for food or rest."

[16]

Pithos A

ʾmr ʾšyw hm[l]k ʾmr lyhlyw wlywʿšh wl [ ... ] brkt ʾtkm lyhwh šmrn wlʾšrth

"Says ʾAšiyaw the k[in]g: Say to YHLYW, and to Yawʾāšah, and to [...] blessed are you all to Yahweh of Samaria, and to his Asherah".[17]

Pithos B

The second jar follows A's unbroken single line of text with a multiply broken set of partial lines. You can see interpretation of "carriage returns" or breaks within words.

(1) ʾmr
(2) ʾmryw ʾ-
(3) mrl ʾdny
(4) hšlm ʾt
(5) brktk ly-
(6) hwh tmn
(7) wlʾšrth yb-
(8) rk wyšmrk
(9) wyhy ʿm ʾdn-
(10) y ʾrk ḥym
(11) bšlm ʾmr hʾ

(1) Says
(2) ʾAmaryaw: "ʾ-
(3) MRL, my lord,
(4) is all well with you?
(5) I bless you to Ya-
(6) hweh of Teman
(7) and to his Asherah. May he bl-
(8) ess you and protect you,
(9) and may he be with my lo-
(10) rd as a long life
(11) in peace." says he.[17]

Meshel 3.9

(1) ...lyhwh htmn wlʾšrth
(2) ...kl ʾšr yšʾl mʾš ḥnn wʾm pth wntn lh yhw[h]
(3) klbbh

(1) ...to Yahweh of the Teman, and to his Asherah,
(2) ...all which he asks from a man he will give generously. And if he entices, Yahwe(h) shall give to him
(3) his wish(es).[18]

Meshel plaster fragments

Meshel (№ unknown)

(1) wbzrḥ ʾl br...
(2) wymsn hrm...
(3) wydkn gbnm...
(4) wšdš ʾly...
(5) lbrk bʿl bym mlḥ[mh...]
(6) lšm ʾl bym mlḥ[mh...]

(1) And when El shone forth in...
(2) and mountains melted...
(3) and peaks were crushed...
(4) (unknown)
(5) to bless Baal on the day of bat[tle...]
(6) to the name of El on the day of bat[tle...][19]

Meshel 4.1

(1) ...ʾrk ymm wyšbʿw [...] ytnw l[y]hwh tymn wlʾšrth
(2) ...hyṭb yhwh hty[mn...]

(1) [...may] he lengthen [their] days, and may they be satisfied [...] may they be given to [Ya]hweh of Teman and to his Asherah.
(2) ...the favored of Yahweh of the Te[man...][18]

In this inscription, "Teman" is spelled tymn, as opposed to above tmn. The inclusion of this yodh may indicate diphthongization.

Meshel 4.3

(1) (...)
(2) [...ʾ‍]hly y[šrʾl? ...]
(3) lydth · whʾ...
(4) [ʿ‍]ny wʿsq bn ʾbyn ʾ[š] dl...
(5) lbšm ywn md(?)w [ng]ʾl bd[m...]
(6) nd ḥlp wym [y]bš ʿ(?)d...
(7) [ḥ]rn bšnt d[br(?)] r[ʿ]b w[ḥ]rb šḥt qyn š[q]r wmrmh...

(1) ...
(2) [...t]ents of I[srael? ...]
(3) his birth, and he...
(4) [a po]or and oppressed son of a ne[edy], poor per[son]...
(5) their clothing is muddy, his garment(?) [defi]led with blo[od...]
(6) a heap of water has passed, and the sea [has dr]ied until(?)...
(7) [a burn]ing anger in a year of pl[ague?], h[un]ger and [de]solation, the spear destroyed, fa[ls]ehood and deceit...[20]

First paper

Being an arid area, much was preserved. The first treks found cloth, rope, and even wood.[citation needed]

"Zin"[who?] 1976 said Meshel "knew immediately that this place was different" from other archaeological sites from the copious pottery. The vital factor for its unparalleled nature was, Meshel and Carol Meyers say, being on a major highway between important locations. It presented some categories.[citation needed]

1. Single letters inscribed on pottery before firing
2. Inscriptions incised on pottery after vessel was fired - "they are not ostraca"
3. Incised inscriptions, stone vessel
4. Inscriptions on wall plaster "Four have been recovered." They "had to have been made on the spot" because they appeared on the walls.
5. Inscriptions on whole storage jars, two complete plus fragments.

The paper[which?] mentions a combination qop-resh among the single-letter examples and other oddities.

Interpretation

Main article: Asherah

The references to Samaria, capital of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, and Teman suggest that Yahweh had a temple in Samaria, while raising questions about the relationship between Yahweh and Qos, the national god of Edom.[21] Such questions had previously been raised due to the Tanakh's apparent reluctance to name the deity. Personal name Qošyaw may even equate the two.[22][23]

Kuntillet Ajrud

Grammar

The final h on the construction yhwh šmrn w'šrth is "his" in "Yahweh and his Asherah."[11][24][full citation needed] This is well-attested earlier[25][full citation needed] but unusual in Biblical[26][full citation needed] use with personal or divine names; Z Zevit suggests *’ašerātā as a "double feminization."[27][28] The localized Yahweh, "of" Samaria and Teman is unseen in the canon but follows familiar patterns, Eshel 2014 calls it expected.[29][30][full citation needed] One source points out the oddity of interpreting a preposition -l (terminal lamedh) with the preceding word rather than the following[31] as others mention an l- prefix.[32][full citation needed]

Alphabetic development

The inscriptions are good examples of a script mid development. Part shows an ayin without a dot hugging a yod, together constituting what could be confused for an ayin alone in earlier more ocular form.[33][full citation needed] At least some of the shins reflect an earlier conception of the letter.

Calligraphy

The inscriptions testify to the high level of literacy among their writers, even the "doodles" within them bespeak a calligraphic sophistication. Making comparison to the ancient and canonical Song of Deborah,[34] Ahituv 2014 elevates them to the "oldest known Hebrew poem" caught quoting a theophany that predates its scriptor.[35][full citation needed]

Context

The site didn't appear to be a village, which raised the question: what was it? There were ovens and container forms (jars, bowls, lamps, flasks) most undecorated. A room contained benches, like the space where the Balaam inscription was found.[10] Some guessed the sacred art indicated a temple. Some said the lack of evidence of cultic activity (that is, they found no carbonic traces of burned sacrifice or incense) meant it had been a mere caravanserei, like an Iron Age truck stop. Lissovsky pointed out that sacred trees (typically) leave nothing to archaeology.[36][37] Meshel imagines the nearby tree grove increased the sanctity of the area, a bamah (“high place”) may have been in Building B, and four massebot-like cultic stones that were found in Building A might reveal a cultic nature of the site.[38]

Bench Room

Meshel called in narrow and elongated building A the "bench room." It featured stone benches occupying most of its space. Among them some were plain stone, some plastered white, and some had decorated plaster. A straight strip of unfurnished floor afforded central perambulation.[39]

The pithoi were found among over 1000 Judean pillar figurines, in spaces with graphic walls:

"Pirhiya Beck, in her lengthy analysis of Horvat Teman’s finds, described this wall painting on plaster in some detail. The surviving fragments preserve the profile of a human head facing right with an eye and ear(?) all drawn in red outline, the eyeball and hair rendered in black, and a red object with black markings which Beck identified as a lotus blossom, concealing the mouth of the human figure. Additional plaster fragments show the figure dressed in a yellow garment with a red neckline border and a double collar-band drawn in red and encasing rows of black dots. Also discernable is a chair with a garment depicted in elaborate arrays of color (yellow, black, and red), part of the chair’s frame, pomegranates, and an unidentifiable plant. Beck pointed out that the size of the scene is impressive measuring some 32 cm in height, by far the largest mural at the site. She also speculated that these fragments are remnants of a larger scene that may have included several human figures participating in some type of ceremony with various plants in the background.12... Two installations located along the northern wall of building A’s courtyard can be interpreted as additional evidence for the observance of sacred ritual within the court yard..."[11]

Pieces of these walls were picked up from the floor to reconstruct the plaster fragments above; only one was still in situ in the strict sense clinging to the wall on which it was written, 4.3 above.[dubious – discuss]

Dating

Lily Singer-Avitz defends a date around the late 8th century; that is rather near the fall of Samaria in 722 BCE.[40] William M. Schniedewind argues that the oldest inscriptions may date as early as the late-10th century.[41] Meshel et al (1995) had suggested circa 801, finding carbon dating to support some primary evidence that pointed that way. The authors proposed it was a wayside shrine lying between more important destinations like Elat, Ezion-Geber, Kadesh Barnea.[13]

Phallus misstep

Scholarly confusion over phallus
Scholarly confusion

Until 2023, illustrations added a penis and testes to the smaller (and breasted) biped on pithos A. When publicity called this matching pair to note, citizens[who?] asked if this were a depiction of a gay God.[citation needed] Reporter Nir Hasson interviewed the author[11] of the editio princeps:

"One day archaeologist Uzi Avner called me and told me that he was looking at the exhibits at the Israel Museum and that he thinks the smaller figure has nothing between its legs. We rushed to the museum and they opened the display case for us. We had the Israel Museum restorer with us, who promised me that he had gentle hands, and with a light brush he cleaned it and it turned out that there was nothing [there]. Since then we have been careful to draw the picture with one figure with and one without. This made it easier for those claiming that they were male and female."

— Ze'ev Meshel, archaeologist[42]

See also

Bibliography

Meshel

Wikipedia's citation system sometimes refers to Meshel 1995, "Dating," as Meshel 2006. "Sinai" 2000 precedes but is understood to comprise part I of a greater work, the 2012 editio princeps being its Volume II. "Zin" 1976 is available online and still primary for contextual understanding of the site. Ahituv and Meshel can both be attributed translations in first edition; Ahituv was author of chapter and Mesheal author and editor of book.

  • Meshel, Ze'ev; Meyers, Carol (1976). "The Name of God in the Wilderness of Zin". The Biblical Archaeologist. 39 (1). The American Schools of Oriental Research: 6–10. ISSN 0006-0895. JSTOR 3209411. Retrieved 2023-12-31.]]
  • Gunneweg, Jan; Perlman, Isadore; Meshel, Zeev (1985). "The Origin of the Pottery of Kuntillet 'Ajrud". Israel Exploration Journal. 35 (4). Israel Exploration Society: 270–283. ISSN 0021-2059. JSTOR 27926000. Retrieved 2023-12-28.
  • Meshel, Zeev; Carmi, Israel; Segal, Dror (1995). "(PDF) 14C Dating of an Israelite Biblical Site at Kuntillet Ajrud (Horvat Teman)". Radiocarbon. 37 (2). Cambridge University Press. doi:10.2458/azu_js_rc.37.1665. ISSN 0033-8222. Retrieved 2023-12-23.
  • Meshel, Zeev (2000). Sinai. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports Limited. ISBN 978-1-84171-077-8.
  • Meshel, Z.; Ben-Ami, D.; Aḥituv, S.; Freud, L.; Sandhaus, D.; Kuper-Blau, T. (2012). "Chapter 5: The Inscriptions". Kuntillet ʻAjrud (Ḥorvat Teman): An Iron Age II Religious Site on the Judah-Sinai Border. Hazor. Israel Exploration Society. ISBN 978-965-221-088-3.

Further scholarship

References

  1. ^ "A New Analysis of YHWH's asherah". Religion and Literature of Ancient Palestine. 2015-12-13. Retrieved 2024-01-03.
  2. ^ Meshel & Meyers 1976, pp. 6–10.
  3. ^ Ahituv 2014, p. 30.
  4. ^ Meshel et al. 2012, pp. 87, 95. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFMeshelBen-AmiAḥituvFreud2012 (help)
  5. ^ Meshel, Z.; Ben-Ami, D.; Aḥituv, S.; Freud, L.; Sandhaus, D.; Kuper-Blau, T. (2012). "Chapter 5: The Inscriptions". Kuntillet ʻAjrud (Ḥorvat Teman): An Iron Age II Religious Site on the Judah-Sinai Border. Hazor. Israel Exploration Society. ISBN 978-965-221-088-3.
  6. ^ Meshel et al. 2012. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFMeshelBen-AmiAḥituvFreud2012 (help)
  7. ^ Puech, 2014, "Trois campagnes de fouilles dirigées par Z. Meshel en 1975 et 1976 mirent au jour des restes de deux bâtiments, le bâtiment A le mieux conservé d'où provient l'essentiel de la documentation (voir figure 1 avec la situation des diverses inscriptions), et le bâtiment B très érodé à l'est. Ont été retrouvés des restes d'une occupation du début du Fer II B qui se sont révélés importants en particulier par l'abondance d'inscriptions gravées ou peintes sur des vases ou sur du plâtre, accompagnées de dessins. Le site à la frontière du royaume de Juda et du désert du Sinai se trouve sur une route de passage dès les temps anciens. La publication récente du rapport final présente les différents apports de ces découvertes, et parmi ces dernières, les inscriptions sont d'un intérêt majeur à plus d'un titre, et méritent quelques lignes complémentaires."
  8. ^ Stuckey J H | pg 44 | The Great Goddesses of the Levant
  9. ^ "How a Warrior-Storm God became the God of the Israelites and World Monotheism". YouTube. Retrieved 2023-11-03.
  10. ^ a b Schmidt, Brian B., "The Iron Age Pithoi Drawings from Ḥorvat Teman or Kuntillet ʿAjrud: Some New Proposals", JANER 2 (2002), p. 103.
  11. ^ a b c d Krause 2017, pp. 485–490.
  12. ^ Textiles in Ancient Mediterranean Iconography. Oxbow Books. 2022-02-03. doi:10.2307/j.ctv2npq9bb.8. ISBN 978-1-78925-724-3.
  13. ^ a b Meshel, Carmi & Segal 1995.
  14. ^ Puech 2014, pp. 161.
  15. ^ Taylor 1995, pp. 29–54.
  16. ^ a b Meshel & Meyers 1976, p. 6.
  17. ^ a b Puech 2014, pp. 161–94.
  18. ^ a b Allen, Spencer L. The Splintered Divine: A Study of Istar, Baal, and Yahweh Divine Names and Divine Multiplicity in the Ancient Near East, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614512363; p. 264
  19. ^ Largely following Mastin, B. A. “The Inscriptions Written on Plaster at Kuntillet ’Ajrud.” Vetus Testamentum, vol. 59, no. 1, 2009, pp. 99–115. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20699919. Accessed 7 Dec. 2023.
  20. ^ Krause 2017, p. 487.
  21. ^ Keel, Othmar; Uehlinger, Christoph (1998). Gods, Goddesses, And Images of God. Bloomsbury Academic. p. 228. ISBN 9780567085917. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
  22. ^ (והישוק) qwšyhw. "Note, however, that in Canaanite and Aramaic texts, qws is always spelled with a samek, never a šin." Danielson cites Bartlett 1989 pg 200.
  23. ^ Danielson, Andrew J. (2021-04-16). "On the History and Evolution of Qws: The Portrait of a First Millennium BCE Deity Explored through Community Identity". Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions. 20 (2): 169. doi:10.1163/15692124-12341314. ISSN 1569-2116.
  24. ^ The mispointing ... lack of knowledge of how -h in early (tenth century b.c.e.) orthography can represent a 3 masc sing suffix, known epigraphically. Frank Moore Cross and David Noel Freedman, Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry (SBLDS 21; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975)
  25. ^ -h in 10c BCE orthog. can represend a third masculine singular suffix, well attested from epigraphic... Jnl Bibl Lit 2013 pg 794 referencing Frank Moore Cross, Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry SBLDS 21 Missoula MT Scholars Press 1975)
  26. ^ Astarte in the Bible and her relation to Asherah | Antonioz Stephanie | pg 133 | Orbis biblicus et Orientalis,
  27. ^ "It is most reasonably taken as a mater lectionis for a final vowel ā marking."
  28. ^ Zevit 1984, pp. 39–47.
  29. ^ Eshel 2014 p 32
  30. ^ Splintered divine p 206
  31. ^ Context of Scripture II p 172
  32. ^ (Dahood, Ps vol II) Dahood and Penar "Lamedh Vocativi exempla biblio-hebraica", Verbum Domini
  33. ^ Eshel, Ahituv, Mazar pg 40 2014
  34. ^ Judges 5
  35. ^ Eshel, Ahituv, 2014 p 36
  36. ^ Rich, Viktoria Greenboim (2022-05-16). "7,500-year-old Burial in Eilat Contains Earliest Asherah". Haaretz.com. Retrieved 2023-11-29.
  37. ^ Na'aman & Lissovsky 2008, p. 186.
  38. ^ Splintered divine. p 266 on Meshel, "The Nature of the Site"
  39. ^ Meshel, Carmi & Segal 1995, p. 205.
  40. ^ Singer-Avitz, Lily (2009). "The Date of Kuntillet 'Ajrud: A Rejoinder". Tel Aviv. 36 (1): 110–119. doi:10.1179/204047809x439488. ISSN 0334-4355.
  41. ^ Schniedewind, William M. (2017). "An Early Iron Age Phase to Kuntillet 'Ajrud?". In Greenspahn, Frederick E.; Rendsburg, Gary A. (eds.). Le-maʿan Ziony: Essays in Honor of Ziony Zevit. Wipf and Stock. p. 136. ISBN 978-1-4982-0691-4.
  42. ^ "Did God have a wife? A surprising development". Haaretz. 4 April 2018 – via Facebook. Nir Hasson, who wrote the piece titled "A Strange Drawing Found in Sinai Could Undermine Our Entire Idea of Judaism," was contacted by a reader who noticed a discrepancy. Hasson explains.
  43. ^ Margalit, Baruch (1989). "Some Observations on the Inscription and Drawing from Khirbet el-Qôm". Vetus Testamentum. 39 (3). Brill: 371–378. doi:10.2307/1519611. ISSN 0042-4935. JSTOR 1519611. Retrieved 2023-11-08.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kuntillet_Ajrud_inscriptions&oldid=1193998174"