From: owner-ane@ (ANE Digest) To: ane-digest Subject: ANE Digest V1998 #344 Reply-To: Sender: owner-ane@ Errors-To: owner-ane@ Precedence: bulk ANE Digest Sunday, December 13 1998 Volume 1998 : Number 344 Re: ane Meaning of dwd Re: ane Meaning of dwd ane A Note on Evidence Re: ane A Note on Evidence ane Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Accepting Submissions ane Maps of ANE ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 11:39:40 AST From: Tom Simms Subject: Re: ane Meaning of dwd On Sat, 12 Dec 1998 11:24:10 +0200, lloyd@iafrica.com writes: > >Dear Tom > >Your attitude seems unworthy of civilzed debate. No-one is "parade"ing. The >touchiness of your reaction to anything that uses available evidences as a >possible keyhole into the past (whether Grimm's fairy stories or not) is not >constructive to scholarly discussion. Lloyd, trying to make as history a 1st C BCE account of events over a millennium earlier without plentiful evidentiary support is NOT scholarly discussion. You must be aware of the prohibition set down earlier for discussing Biblical Historicity. I'm quite prepared to discuss the evidence from the time. 1st C BCE is not from the time. Tom Simms > >Lloyd Thomas >(Cape Town) > >Date: 11 December 1998 05:19 >Subject: Re: ane Meaning of dwd > > >>On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:37:25 -0500 (EST), morsil@webtv.net writes: >>>Dear George and Listmembers: >> >> [... Snip ...] >> >>>Already under David we hear of the forced labor under Adoram (2 Sam. >>>20.24). >> >> Surely you are aware the earliest ms of Samuel is a fragment of >> the LXX from 3rd C CE? I hope you're not putting forward the >> argument that the account is history. Show me the evidence that >> supports the story. >> >>>Realistically, we may suspect that the problems facing Israel's first >> >> [... snip ... noted ...] >> >>>I hope this helps to clarify my position. >>> >>>Best wishes, >>>Morris >> >> Since this is the season of unhistoric myth - certainly Nicolas >> of Myra did not exist in the form children see him nor did Jesus >> arrive in December, 1998 years ago, nor did Hannukah take place >> as I heard it related just this morning on radio (5,000 years ago, >> Romans destroying the Temple) - we might entertain some fictionaliza- >> tion of the past. However, don't parade fiction as history. >> >>Tom Simms >> ................................................... >> >http://watnow.uwaterloo.ca/~reda/kings/kings.html< >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >> > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 19:03:51 +0200 (IST) From: avigdor horovitz Subject: Re: ane Meaning of dwd Dear all, I don't think Morris' question about corvee at the time of David is at all out of place. The question is quite simple- is sbl or ms mentioned in any of the record regarding the time of David, and the answer is simply yes- II Sam 20:24, as has been pointed out already in this discussion. We might add II Sam. 12:31 which describes Davidic subjugation of Ammonites, and perhaps some other verses which may refer to forced labor at the time of David. Whether these texts reflect facts of the past from the time the purport to talk about is a hotly debated matter which involves among other issues the date of the evidence (and the 3rd century BCE is only one suggestion and the evidence of LXX is only one matter to be considered in dating the document). But even thought the use of the data is a subject of wide controversy, the existence of the data is uncontestable, and Morris should be permitted to understand the data as best he sees fit. Some will say it can be used, others, such as Simms will reject its use. But that is not the issue. Victor Hurowitz On Sat, 12 Dec 1998, Tom Simms wrote: > On Sat, 12 Dec 1998 11:24:10 +0200, lloyd@iafrica.com writes: > > > >Dear Tom > > > >Your attitude seems unworthy of civilzed debate. No-one is "parade"ing. The > >touchiness of your reaction to anything that uses available evidences as a > >possible keyhole into the past (whether Grimm's fairy stories or not) is not > >constructive to scholarly discussion. > > Lloyd, trying to make as history a 1st C BCE account of events > over a millennium earlier without plentiful evidentiary support > is NOT scholarly discussion. You must be aware of the prohibition > set down earlier for discussing Biblical Historicity. I'm quite > prepared to discuss the evidence from the time. 1st C BCE is not > from the time. > > Tom Simms > > > > >Lloyd Thomas > >(Cape Town) > > > >Date: 11 December 1998 05:19 > >Subject: Re: ane Meaning of dwd > > > > > >>On Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:37:25 -0500 (EST), morsil@webtv.net writes: > >>>Dear George and Listmembers: > >> > >> [... Snip ...] > >> > >>>Already under David we hear of the forced labor under Adoram (2 Sam. > >>>20.24). > >> > >> Surely you are aware the earliest ms of Samuel is a fragment of > >> the LXX from 3rd C CE? I hope you're not putting forward the > >> argument that the account is history. Show me the evidence that > >> supports the story. > >> > >>>Realistically, we may suspect that the problems facing Israel's first > >> > >> [... snip ... noted ...] > >> > >>>I hope this helps to clarify my position. > >>> > >>>Best wishes, > >>>Morris > >> > >> Since this is the season of unhistoric myth - certainly Nicolas > >> of Myra did not exist in the form children see him nor did Jesus > >> arrive in December, 1998 years ago, nor did Hannukah take place > >> as I heard it related just this morning on radio (5,000 years ago, > >> Romans destroying the Temple) - we might entertain some fictionaliza- > >> tion of the past. However, don't parade fiction as history. > >> > >>Tom Simms > >> ................................................... > >> >http://watnow.uwaterloo.ca/~reda/kings/kings.html< > >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> > >> > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 15:36:07 -0500 (EST) From: morsil@webtv.net Subject: ane A Note on Evidence Dear Listmembers: More than once I have encountered the view that because a document is very much later than the events it purports to describe it is worthless as evidence about those events. I regard this view to be childish. Evidence, especially for the ancient world, is not a yes or no matter. It is true that errors of transmission and deliberate distortions tend to increase with the passage of time. (On the other hand, contemporary documents may be myopic or ideological.) But temporal distance alone hardly disqualfies a document. After all there were scholars in the ancient world and respectable libraries stocked with venerable documents. (See, for example, Olof Pedersen (1998), Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East 1500-300 B.C. Bethesda, Maryland: CDL Press.) Sometimes, we must rely on later documents because the earlier ones have ceased to exist. With respect to the Bible the issues are rather complex. In my judgment the report that David played his lyre for Saul is a myth. But myths, as I understand them, manipulate symbols to send a message. It is this message that I wish to decode. Was there really a "David"? I believe that there was a ruler who supplanted "Saul" and founded a dynasty, but I doubt that his name was really "David". I find it difficult to believe that the scholars who wrote the Bible simply invented an entire "history" out of their own heads. Where was the market? (And why would they discredit their ideal king by adding to their invention that he used forced labor?) It seems more reasonable to me that there were strongly held traditions in the public domain about Israelite history which scholars could distort only to a certain extent and at there own risk. This should be sufficient for the present. Best wishes, Morris Morris Silver Department of Economics City College of New York ANCIENT ECONOMIES I http://members.tripod.com/~sondmor/index.html ANCIENT ECONOMIES II http://www.angelfire.com/ms/ancecon/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 18:05:23 EST From: FucciXXV@aol.com Subject: Re: ane A Note on Evidence In a message dated 12/12/98 2:39:23 PM Central Standard Time, morsil@webtv.net writes: > I find it difficult to believe that the scholars who wrote the Bible > simply invented an entire "history" out of their own heads. Where was > the market? (And why would they discredit their ideal king by adding to > their invention that he used > forced labor?) It seems more reasonable to me that there were strongly > held traditions in the public domain about Israelite history which > scholars could distort only to a certain extent and at there own risk. It's long been my own very subjective impression that the story of David in the Bible feels as if it's being "spin doctored" -- as if a body of David myth already exists which contains elements unpalatable to the author or inapposite to the purposes for which the text is being created, but elements which can't be jettisoned because they are known and so instead have to be laboriously reshaped. A signal example is David's tenure with the Philistines (1 Sam 27 et seq.) It seems very likely to me that some stories existed which included David having spent time allied to the Philistines; to position him as God's beloved and a model king of Israel it was necessary for the Biblical author to explain that time away as a ruse perpetrated on Achish by David, who always remained secretly loyal to Saul and Israel. Of course, this wouldn't mean that any such stories were in turn historical: only that they predated the Biblical text and were known widely enough to have to be accounted for. Jim Thorn Chicago, IL ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 16:00:59 -0500 From: snoegel@u.washington.edu (Scott Noegel) Subject: ane Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Accepting Submissions **Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Accepting Submissions** The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures (JHS) invites submissions in English on *all* aspects of the Hebrew Bible. Articles devoted to the Bible and its relationship to the Ancient Near East are especially encouraged. JHS is the only online journal that accepts brief notes in addition to longer pieces, and encourages the submission of bibliographies as well. Submissions should be sent in electronic form, preferably on disk and in Macintosh or PC versions of either Word or Word Perfect. Presentation of a hard copy of the article is optional. It is strongly advised that paragraphs be numbered, so to allow future reference to specific sections of the article, and to use endnotes. Submissions should include a short abstract of the article, and they should be sent to the general or associate editors of the journal for consideration. JHS is a proud member of the Association of Peer-Reviewed Electronic Journals in Religion (APREJ). For more submission information see the JHS website Scott B. Noegel JHS-Associate General Editor snoegel@u.washington.edu _________________________________________________________________ Dept. Near Eastern Languages & Civilizations University of Washington Box 353120 Seattle, WA 98195 Office: 206-543-3606 Dept.: 206-543-6033 FAX: 206-685-7936 http://weber.u.washington.edu/~snoegel/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:59:54 -0500 From: "Gary Greenberg" Subject: ane Maps of ANE I am interested in obtaining some inexpensive and easy to read maps as illustrations for a book to be published. I want a map of the Twelve Tribes distribution, key cities and sites in ancient Israel, Israel and its neighbors (Edom, Ammon, etc.), and Egypt with main cities. Any ideas as to sources or contacts? Gary Greenberg ------------------------------ End of ANE Digest V1998 #344 **************************** Back issues are available on the Oriental Institute World-Wide Web (WWW) site at: http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/ANE/OI_ANE.html