Journal of
Journal of ancient near Ancient Near
Eastern
eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95 Religions
brill.com/jane
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and
YHWH of Teman
Nadav Na’aman
Tel Aviv University
nnaaman@post.tau.ac.il
Abstract
The Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions mention blessings by the names of YHWH of Samaria
and YHWH of Teman. Like all ancient Near Eastern gods, these two regional gods must
have had central temples. This article examines their possible locations and suggests
that the combination of the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions with the eighth-century
prophecies of Amos and Hosea holds the key for identifying these. In light of a de-
tailed analysis of Hosea’s and Amos’ prophecies, it is further suggested that YHWH
of Samaria was the name of the major God of the Kingdom of Israel and his main
temple was located at Bethel, and that YHWH of Teman was the name of the God of
the southern desert regions and his temple was located at Beer-sheba. Israelite traders
who traveled southward probably visited the latter god’s temple, offered him sacrifices,
made vows to repay him if they succeed in the expedition, and thus turned him to be
their patron god during their travel in the desert region. This suggested identification
explains why the Judahite cult place of Beer-sheba appears in Amos’ prophecy along-
side the Israelite sanctuaries of Bethel, Gilgal, and Dan.
Keywords
Kuntillet ‘Ajrud – YHWH of Samaria – YHWH of Teman – Bethel – Dan – Beer-sheba
The publication of the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions, which include blessings
by the names of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman, provided new in-
sights for the study of the religion and the cult of Israel and Judah in the eighth
century BCE.1 In the biblical literature, the god Ba‘al is associated with various
1 For the inscriptions, see Aḥituv, Eshel and Meshel 2012: 86–107, 129–33.
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi 10.1163/15692124-12341287
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 77
places (e.g., Ba‘al Gad, Ba‘al Hermon, Ba‘al Hazor, Ba‘al Peor), while YHWH
is typically portrayed as a universal, supra-territorial god. But the Kuntillet
‘Ajrud inscriptions present YHWH as being associated with particular places
or territories—suggesting that YHWH was considered a local god at the time.2
Clearly, then, in the mid-eighth century, YHWH was perceived both as a uni-
versal god—the master of the entire land—and also as a god associated with a
specific territory or place.
Conventionally, each regional god had a temple (or temples) as well as dis-
tinct cultic vessels, rituals, and ceremonies. This situation raises the question
of the locations of the temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman.
Given the similarity in the way the two appellations are mentioned in the in-
scriptions, some scholars have suggested that the two toponyms refer to spe-
cific regions: the former to the god of the Samaria highlands or even that of the
Northern Kingdom and the latter to the god of the southern desert regions.3
Since Samaria and Teman are vast territories, these scholars avoided suggest-
ing location for the two YHWH’s temples. Other scholars have assumed that
the designation “YHWH of Samaria” refers to that particular god’s temple lo-
cated in the capital of Samaria.4 Thus, they have distinguished between the
designation “YHWH of Samaria,” which refers to the god of a city, and “YHWH
of Teman,” which refers to that of a region. Some scholars have speculated that
the latter’s temple might possibly be located in the east, somewhere in the re-
gion of Edom, but have avoided suggesting an exact location.5
What may have been the locations of YHWH of Samaria’s and YHWH of
Teman’s temples? Since Kuntillet ‘Ajrud was a North Israelite site and the peo-
ple who wrote the inscriptions arrived from Israel, the natural place to search
for an answer is in the prophecies of Amos and Hosea. The books of these two
prophets are our best sources for the religion and cult of Israel in the eighth
century BCE. Amos prophesied in the mid-eighth century BCE, at about the
same time as the writing of the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions; Hosea prophesied
several decades later, during the late years of the Northern Kingdom. As the
two prophets directed their criticism to the cult and culture of the Northern
Kingdom, their words provide the natural site for searching the location of the
temples venerated by the Kingdom’s inhabitants.
2 On this problem, see recently Hutton 2010, with earlier literature.
3 Müller 1992: 26–27; Aḥituv, Eshel and Meshel 2012: 130a; Na’aman 2011: 304; Blum 2012: 57–58.
4 See, e.g., Emerton 1982: 12–13; Lemaire 1984: 132; McCarter 1987: 139–142; Olyan 1988: 34–35;
Keel and Uehlinger 1998: 228; Uehlinger 1998: 741–742; Dijkstra 2001: 29–30; Hutton 2010: 191;
Köckert 2010: 365–366; Finkelstein 2013: 137.
5 Keel and Uehlinger 1998: 228; Hutton 2010: 191–192; Aḥituv, Eshel and Meshel 2012: 130a.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
78 Na ’ aman
In what follows, I will first present some extra-biblical sources that refer to
Samaria as a name of a Northern Kingdom. I will then analyze some prophe-
cies of Hosea in which he criticizes the Israelite cult centres located in the
Samaria highlands and nearby regions. Next, I will discuss those prophecies of
Amos that criticize the cult centres of his time. In light of this analysis, I will
suggest locations for the temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman
and offer a clarification regarding the travellers of Kuntillet ‘Ajrud’s devotion
to the gods of these temples.
Samerina and Samaria as Assyrian and Biblical Names for the
Kingdom of Israel
The Assyrian royal inscriptions from the ninth and eighth centuries BCE use
alternate names for the kingdoms located in the south Anatolian, Syrian, and
Palestinian regions. For example, Damascus is called ša imērišu, Bit Ḫazaili,
and Aram; Israel is called Sir’ala, Bit Ḫumri, and Samerina. The variety of
eponymic/dynastic, territorial, and capital city names reflects the complex na-
ture of these kingdoms, and it is not always clear why a certain inscription uses
a certain name rather than another.
The earliest reference to Samerina as a name for the Northern Kingdom
appears in an inscription of Adad-nerari III (809–782), in which the Assyrian
king referred to Joash, the King of Israel, as “of the land Samaria.”6 Tiglath-
pileser III (745–727) refers four times to Menahem, Israel’s king, as “of the
land Samaria.”7 Sargon II’s inscriptions called the inhabitants of the cut off
Kingdom of Israel that encompassed only the Samaria highlands by the gen-
tilic, “the Samarians.”8 “The Samarians” also appears as a name for people ar-
riving from Israel in various Assyrian administrative texts dated to the eighth
century BCE.9 Evidently, even before the annexation of Samaria in 720 BCE
and the establishment of the province of Samerina, the Assyrians used the
name “Samaria” to designate the kingdom and its capital city and “Samarians”
to identify the origin of people who arrived from Israel.
6 Grayson 1996: 211:8; Bagg 2007: 210, writ. kursa-me-ri-na-a-a.
7 Tadmor and Yamada 2011: 203, s.v. Samaria.
8 Gadd 1954: 179–180 line 25; Bagg 2007: 210, writ. lú urusa-me-ri-na-a-a.
9 Kinnier-Wilson 1972: 91, 93; Dalley and Postgate 1984: 282, writ. kursamerinaya; Fales 1994:
371–374.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 79
The usage of “Samaria” for the Northern Kingdom is also known from some
Biblical historiographical and prophetic texts.10 Two prophetic stories refer to
Ahab and Ahaziah each as “King of Samaria” (1 Kgs 21:1; 2 Kgs 1:3). The “cities
of Samaria” as a general name for the kingdom’s cities are mentioned in 1 Kgs
13:32; 2 Kgs 17:24; 23:19. In 2 Kgs 18:34, the LXXL and Vulgate mention “the Gods
of Samaria” at the end of the verse (see further discussion below). Verse 33 (“Has
any of the gods of the nations ever saved his land from the king of Assyria”)
clearly indicates that “Samaria” in v. 34 is a state, not a city. Moreover, Isa 10:9–
11 clearly refers to “Samaria” as a name of the kingdom. “Mount Samaria” is
mentioned in Amos 4:1; 6:1, and the “Mountains of Samaria” in Am 3:9 (for the
“calf of Samaria” in Hos 8:6, see below).11 Evidently, “YHWH of Samaria” of
the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscription may be interpreted as a name for either the
kingdom or its capital. Establishing the correct one of these alternative
interpretations is possible only by close analysis of all the available textual
evidence.
Analysis of the Evidence Presented in the Book of Hosea
Hosea’s prophecy mentions Samaria six times. Of these six references, only
the identification of “Samaria” referred to in Hos 8:5–6 is controversial and re-
quires a detailed discussion.
Samaria as Another Name of the Northern Kingdom (Hos 7:1a; 10:5;
14:1a; 8:5–6)
In four references, Samaria appears in parallel to “Ephraim” and “Israel,” that is,
as another name for the Kingdom of Israel:
When I would restore my people’s fortune, when I would heal Israel, the
guilt of Ephraim is revealed, and the wickedness of Samaria, for they have
acted falsely (7:1a).
10 Müller 1992: 27 noted this.
11 For “Mount Samaria” (hr šmrwn) and “Mountains of Samaria” (hry šmrwn) as designations
of the entire area of the Samaria highlands, compare the late-eighth century BCE Judahite
inscription from Khirbet Beit Lei, “The mountains of Judah (hry yhwdh) belong to the God
of Jerusalem.” See Naveh 1963: 81–85; Lemaire 1976: 558–559; Renz 1995: 245–246; Parker
2003: 268–270.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
80 Na ’ aman
The inhabitants of Samaria are afraid for the heifers of Beth-aven, for
its people mourn for it and its priests lament?12 for it, because of its glory
that has departed from it (10:5).
Samaria is perishing, its king like a foam upon water. Ruined shall be
the high places of guilt (’āwen),13 the sin of Israel. Thorn and thistle shall
grow on their altars (10:7–8a).
Samaria shall bear her guilt for she rebelled against her God … Return,
O Israel, to the Lord your God, for you have stumbled because of your sin
(Hos 14:1a, 2 [ET 13:16a, 14:1]).
Two of these references (Hos 7:1a; 14:1–2) are late editorial additions, whereas
the other two (10:5, 7–8a) may be attributed to the prophet and reflect the re-
ality of his time. A striking similarity exists between these references and the
Assyrian royal and administrative inscriptions in the way they employ the
name of the capital city (Samaria) for the Kingdom. Naming a kingdom by
the name of its capital city was a common practice at that time; indeed, Hosea’s
prophecy also reflects this convention.
Hosea 8:4–6
To introduce the discussion, I translate the passage as follows:
(4) They made kings but without my will; they set up royal officials but
without my knowledge. Their silver and gold they make idols (‘āṣābbîm)
for themselves so that they will be destroyed (ykrt<w>). (5) He [God] re-
jected your calf, O Samaria.14 My anger has flared up against them. How
long will they be incapable of purity? (6) For from Israel indeed it is; a
craftsman has made it, it is not God. Rather, the calf of Samaria shall be
broken into pieces.
It seems to me that the prophecy refers to two statues (‘āṣābbîm)—the
despoiled calf that was carried to Assyria and the recently manufactured stat-
ue made to replace it—and alludes to them one after the other. The singu-
lar form in v. 5a (“your calf”) refers to the calf statue that was despoiled and
12 For discussions of the possible meaning of yāgîlû in Hos 10:5, see Davies 1992: 237–238,
with earlier literature; Macintosh, 1997: 400. The verb is a wordplay on the verb gālāh,
which is mentioned in this sentence.
13 The noun ’āwen alludes to Bethel (Beth-aven) on the one hand, and to all illegitimate cult
places in Israel on the other.
14 See discussion in Barthélemy 1992: 548–549.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 81
hence rejected by YHWH, whereas the singular forms in v. 6 (“it is”; “the calf of
Samaria”) refer to the statue that was recently manufactured.
The subject of the prophecy in Hos 8:4–6 are the people of Israel. The
prophet accuses them of not drawing conclusions from what has recently hap-
pened –that is, the despoliation of the calf statue—and of producing a new
statue of gold and silver to replace the plundered one (v. 4b). Hosea interprets
the despoliation of the statue as a sign of its rejection by YHWH (v. 5aa) and
as a proof that it is not a god (v. 6). The production of a new statue despite the
indication of its uselessness roused divine anger (v. 5ab); hence, the prophet
predicts that, like the despoiled statue, the recently manufactured statue is
also doomed for destruction (v. 6b).
Like Hos 8:4–6, the prophecy in Hos 10:5–6a refers to two calf statues (the
“heifers of Beth-aven” is a denigrating term for the statues). The prophet first
mentions mourning rites conducted for the despoiled calf (v. 5b) and then pre-
dicts that the fate of the newly manufactured calf will be identical (v. 6a: “It too
shall be carried to Assyria”).
More details on the manufacture of the recently prepared calf statue are
conveyed in Hos 13:2a: “By their silver they made for themselves a molten
image, an idol skillfully made [literally: “according to their skill”].15 All of it is
the work of craftsmen.” The similarity of the description of the manufactured
molten image to several other biblical texts that either explicitly (1 Kgs 12:28–
29, 32; 14:9; 2 Kgs 10:29; 17:16; 2 Chr 11:15; 13:8) or implicitly (Exodus 32; Deut 9:12,
16, 21; Ps 106:19; Neh 9:18) mention the Bethel calf statue is self-evident.
All three prophecies emphasize the manufacture of a new statue and envi-
sion the carrying of the new statue to Assyria. Hos 10:5–6a explicitly indicates
that the statue was erected in Bethel/Beth-aven. Hos 10:15a (“Thus he [God]
has done to you, O Bethel, because of your great wickedness”) also alludes to
the despoliation of the Bethel calf statue.
This discussion clearly implies that the calf of Samaria referred to in Hos
8:5–6 was erected at Bethel. There is no single textual attestation in the Bible
that mentions calf statue erected in the city of Samaria. To the contrary, all
the available evidence in biblical historiography and prophecy indicates
that the statue was erected in Bethel.
These conclusions are by no means new. In his commentary on the Book of
Hosea, Hans Walter Wolff wrote as follows:16
15 For recent discussion of v. 2a, see Irvine 2014, with earlier literature.
16 Wolff 1974: 140.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
82 Na ’ aman
But where was the calf of Samaria located? We possess no evidence that a
calf ever stood in Samaria. Indeed, it is to be concluded from 2 Kgs 10:26f
that the Baal temple, erected by Ahab according to 1 Kgs 16:32, never con-
tained the calf idol.… Thus we can hardly postulate the existence of such
a cultic image in the city of Samaria only on the basis of the combination
of the two words “calf of Samaria” in Hos 8:5, 6. Moreover, the statement
in Am 8:14 is too obscure to support this thesis. Hos 10:5 is decisive evi-
dence against this, for there the inhabitants of Samaria are represented
as worshipers of the calf in Bethel. Thus the “calf of Samaria” (‘gl šmrn) is
to be conceived of as the idol Jeroboam I erected in Bethel (1 Kgs 12:29).
Nor according to 2 Kgs 10:29 was it destroyed by Jehu, but was official-
ly worshiped uninterruptedly, down to the time of Hosea according to
2 Kgs 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28. Accordingly, the “calf of Samaria” should be
understood as another expression for “royal sanctuary” and “temple of
the kingdom” designating the temple of Bethel (Am 7:13). The singular
(calf) confirms the presumed period when Hosea delivered this saying:
the calf of Dan … ceased to exist after the invasion of Tiglath-pileser.
Wilhelm Rudolph reached the same conclusion:17
Wenn es in V.5 “dein Kalb, O Samaria” und in V.6 “das Kalb Samarias”
heisst, kann mit Samaria nicht die Hauptstadt gemeint sein, in der wir
von keinem Stierbild wissen …, sondern das Nordreich; es handelt sich
um das Bild von Bethel, das ja auch in Am 7,13 ein “Reichstempel,” also
ein für das ganze Reich massgebendes Heiligtum genannt wird.
In this light, we may conclude that all six references to Samaria in the Book of
Hosea refer to the kingdom, not the city. Moreover, neither Hosea nor Amos
mentions a cult place located in the city of Samaria. Notably, of course, the
absence of reference to a cult place in the capital city does not indicate that
none existed. But if there was a cult place in Samaria, the two prophets did not
consider it important enough to deserve a special criticism.
Analysis of the Evidence of the Book of Amos
The Book of Amos is particularly important for the discussion, because the
original prophetʼs words were delivered at about the same time as the writing
17 Rudolph 1966: 164.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 83
of the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions. As per the scholarly consensus, biblical
prophetic books, including the Book of Amos, are not all the ipsissima verba of
the prophet; rather, they underwent extensive editorial work. Thus, it is impos-
sible to extract accurately the original text composed by the first author from
the book in its present form.18 Moreover, Amos’ disciples probably wrote the
early scroll of Amos after the destruction of Samaria and its annexation by
Assyria in 720 BCE.19 Jörg Jeremias even suggested that, although Amos proph-
esied several decades before Hosea, the early scroll of Hosea was composed
earlier than that of Amos. Hence, according to Jeremias, some prophecies of
the latter are dependent on those of the former.20 In spite of these obvious
limitations for the historical and religious study of the Book of Amos, enough
prophecies precisely reflect the time of the author and thus may be useful for
analyzing the problem at hand.21
Amos’ prophecy speaks of Samaria five times. Three prophecies (Am 3:9; 4:1;
6:1) mention “the mountain(s) of Samaria” and refer to the overall area of the
Samaria highlands.22 “Samaria” in Am 3:12 is the capital city, and the prophecy
is directed against the upper class of the city’s inhabitants. The most important
reference for our discussion is Am 8:14, which should be analyzed in conjunc-
tion with Am 5:5–6.
In what follows, I present a translation of each of the two prophecies and
then discuss it in detail.
Amos 5:4–6
(4) For thus says YHWH to the house of Israel: Seek me and live; (5) but
do not seek Bethel, and do not enter Gilgal or cross over to Beer-sheba.
18 For the problems involved with the study of biblical prophecy, see recently Jeremias
1996a; 2013, with earlier literature; Kratz 2011a; 2011b; 2011c.
19 Kratz 2011b: 42–45; 2011c: 66–69, with earlier literature.
20 Jeremias 1996b.
21 In a recently published article (Na’aman 2015), I criticized systematically what may be
dubbed the “post-exilic literati discourse” approach to the Book of Hosea, and this is also
applied for the similar—in my opinion untenable—approach for the Book of Amos. To
avoid repetition, readers are referred to my 2015 article, which includes both detailed
critical discussions and ample bibliography.
I highly doubt the radical approach according to which biblical prophetic texts are
useful neither for reconstructing the original messages of the prophets nor for elucidating
the phenomenon of prophecy in ancient Israel and Judah.
22 See above, note 11.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
84 Na ’ aman
For Gilgal shall surely go into exile, and Bethel shall become naught.23 (6)
Seek YHWH and live, lest it permeate the House of Joseph like fire and it
devour Bethel with no one to quench it.
The literary unit is enclosed by the request to seek YHWH rather then pilgrim-
age to cult sites (vv. 4, 6). It first criticizes three cult places (Bethel, Gilgal, and
Beer-sheba), then predicts destruction of two (Bethel and Gilgal), and finally
emphasizes the severe punishment destined to one (Bethel). This deliberate
3-2-1 structure probably conveys the message that the severity of punishment
results from the severity of sin of each cult place.
The prophecy of doom (vv. 5b–6) may well have been added only after the
Assyrian conquest of Israel in 720 BCE and the downfall of the former flourish-
ing cult centres of the kingdom. The absence of Beer-sheba from the doom
prophecy probably indicates that—unlike the two Israelite cult centres—
the Judahite cult centre remained intact at the time of writing. I can find no
justification for deleting Beer-sheba from v. 5a on the pretext that it is a late
interpolation.24 On the contrary, in the mid-eighth century BCE, the cult cen-
tre of Beer-sheba was quite popular among the inhabitants of the Northern
Kingdom, and Amos’ prophecy precisely reflects its cultic importance at that
time (see below).
Amos 8:14
Those who swear by the guilt (’ašemat) of Samaria and say, “As your god
lives, O Dan,” and “as the drk of Beer-sheba lives,” they shall fall, and never
rise again.25
Verse 14 is an old crux interpretum, and scholars have suggested various ways
to overcome the textual difficulties. I will divide the verse into three segments
(14aa–c) and discuss each in its own right.
23 For a detailed interpretation, see Rudolph 1971: 189–193; Wolff 1977: 228, 238–240; Paul
1991: 162–164; Jeremias 1998: 87–89.
24 For the list of scholars who omitted Beer-sheba from the prophecy, see Paul 1991: 164 n. 47;
Jeremias 1998: 81, 89.
25 For a detailed interpretation, see Marti 1904: 219–220; Mays 1969: 148–150; Rudolph 1971:
268–271; Wolff 1977: 323–324, 331–332; Paul 1991: 268–272; Barthélemy 1992: 688–689;
Weiss 1992a: 261–265; 1992b: 486–493; Jeremias 1998: 144, 151–153. See also the detailed
discussions of Barstad 1984: 143–201; Olyan 1991.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 85
(1) Two major problems exist in v. 14aa: the reference to “Samaria” and the
noun in construct form ’ašemat (“the guilt of”). Given the cultic context of
the verse and the absence of a central Israelite sanctuary at Samaria, I agree
with scholars who suggested that Samaria designates the kingdom and that
“the guilt of Samaria” refers to the calf sanctuary at Bethel.26
James Luther Mays noted that “‘guilt’ (’ašmā) is a word otherwise confined
to Chronicles, Ezra, Leviticus, and the late Psalm 69 (v. 5); in 2 Chron. 24.18;
33.23 it refers specifically to idolatry.”27 A late editor must have replaced the
original word with the negatively connoted noun ’ašemat because he consid-
ered the omitted word unacceptable, just as other biblical editors replaced
Ba‘al with the denigrating noun boshet, and Bethel with the negatively con-
noted Beth-aven.
What may have been the replaced original word? Scholars have sug-
gested various solutions (Asherat, Ashima, Eshem), though none of which is
convincing.28 The prophecy in v. 14 refers to the swearing of oaths in three
major cult centres (Bethel, Dan and Beer-sheba), and it is inconceivable that
the prophet refers to the swearing of an oath in YHWH’s major temple of Bethel
in the name of a secondary deity. Note that all blessings in the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud
inscriptions, which were written at about the same time as Amos’ prophecy,
and which reflect the religious language of that time, are delivered in the name
of YHWH. In this light, I suggest that the original text of v. 14aa was, “those who
swear by [the name of] YHWH of Samaria.”29 An editor replaced the original
“YHWH of Samaria” with the denigrating noun “the guilt of Samaria,” there-
by blurring the reference to the God of Bethel and dismissing the concept of
YHWH as a regional God.
The negative attitude of biblical editors to the combination of Samaria
with the noun “God” may be illustrated by comparison between 2 Kgs 18:34 and
Isa 10:9–11.30 The two texts share the same theme of the Assyrian king boasting
of his power and his mocking of the impotence of the kingdoms’ gods whom
he vanquished. The MT of 2 Kgs 18:34 is clearly corrupt, since the end of the
verse requires a preceding question and given that the foreign gods could not
26 Marti 1904: 220; Zimmerli 1932: 2 n. 4; Rudolph 1971: 270; Weiss 1992a: 262; Weiss 1992b: 488
n. 118; cf. Wolff 1977: 331–332; Paul 1991: 269–270.
27 Mays 1969: 149. Mays’ suggestion that a late editor inserted v. 14aa is redundant and was
not supported by other scholars.
28 For a detailed discussion, see Barstad 1984: 155–185. For criticism of all these suggestions,
see Weiss 1992b: 485–488, notes 102, 113–114, 116, 118.
29 Olyan 1991: 149 already suggested this rendering.
30 For the comparison, see Anbar 1990.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
86 Na ’ aman
be thought of as having failed to deliver Jerusalem. I therefore agree with those
scholars who accepted the versions of the LXXL and Vulgate and restored the
words, “Where are the gods of Samaria” at the end of the verse.31 A late editor
considered the “gods of Samaria” improper and omitted it. As against the text
of 2 Kgs 18:34, the text of Isaiah 10:9–11, which refers to the images and idols of
Samaria and Jerusalem, did not disturb the late editors, who left it as is.
Since Bethel was the main eighth-century BCE sanctuary of YHWH of
Samaria, the author of the late story of the conflict between Amaziah, the
priest of Bethel, and Amos (Am 7:10–17) called Bethel’s temple, “the king’s
sanctuary” and “the temple of the kingdom” (v. 13). Due to Bethel’s elevated po-
sition among all Israelite sanctuaries, the prophet opened his criticism of the
oaths that the inhabitants swore by mentioning the oath sworn in the name of
YHWH of Samaria, the God of Bethel’s sanctuary.
(2) The oath sworn in the name of Dan’s god (“As your god lives, O Dan”)
is closely paralleled in the late-eighth century BCE Judahite inscription from
Khirbet Beit Lei, “YHWH is God of all the earth. The mountains of Judah be-
long to the God of Jerusalem.”32 The similarity between ’lhyk dn (“your God,
Dan”) and ’lhy yršlm (“the God of Jerusalem”) is clear and again demonstrates
the local nature of the concept of god. This local aspect of YHWH appears side
by side with the belief in his universality (“YHWH is God of all the earth”) in
Israel and Judah in the eighth century BCE.
The dedication of the royal temple of Dan is related in 1 Kgs 12:29–30, while
2 Kgs 10:29 mentions the pair of royal temples of Bethel and Dan. The two sanc-
tuaries are also alluded to in Jer 4:15, “For a voice declares from Dan and pro-
claims evil from Mount Ephraim.” A subtle polemic against the temple of Dan
appears in the story of the northward migration of the Danites, the conquest
of Laish, and the Danites’ settlement in the ruined city (Judges 17–18).33 Thus,
the importance and centrality of Dan’s sanctuary in the Northern Kingdom is
clearly indicated in the biblical tradition.
31 Benzinger 1899: 181; Burney 1903: 342; Šanda 1912: 260; Orlinsky 1939: 46; Cogan and
Tadmor 1988: 224 n. m, 233; Anbar 1990; Uehlinger 1998: 743–744.
32 Naveh 1963: 81–85; Lemaire 1976: 558–559; Renz 1995: 245–246; Parker 2003: 268–270. For
a different rendering and interpretation of the text, see Cross 1970; Miller 1981: 320–323;
Dobbs-Allsopp et. al. 2005: 128–130.
33 Noth 1962: 68–77; Amit 1990: 4–20; Bauer 1998: 175–252, 396–414, 429–40; Na’aman 2005:
47–51.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 87
Tel Dan has been extensively excavated, and the sanctuary located there
discovered and exposed.34 The history of the discovered sanctuary and its rela-
tions to the biblical account in the Book of Kings lies outside the scope of this
discussion.35 What matters is that the excavations reveal that Dan, with the
royal sanctuary in its midst, prospered in the eighth century BCE. Moreover,
the excavations confirmed the accuracy of Amos’ prophecy that mentioned the
God of Dan alongside the God of Samaria.
Among the many architectural elements discovered in the temple area is a
Hellenistic flat limestone on which a bilingual Greek and Aramaic inscription
had been carved.36 The Aramaic dedication inscription is partly broken; the
Greek inscription reads as follows: “Zoilos made a vow to the God who is in
Danois.” Avraham Biran interpreted the plural form Danois as the city name
Dan. But David Flusser suggested that the Greek inscription refers to the dis-
trict of the Danites:
Thus in the Hellenistic time of Zoilos, the local inhabitants had an ob-
scure memory about an unknown, more ancient tribe, the Danoi, who
lived in this district and who had there a cult center of their god, whose
name also became unknown.37
If this is indeed the case, it indicates that, although the identity of Dan’s an-
cient God was forgotten at the time, its ancient regional character was held at
least until the Hellenistic period.
(3) The interpretation of drk in v. 14ac (“as the drk of Beer-sheba lives”) is
controversial, and three main solutions have been offered: (a) to emend the
vocalization and read it dōrekā: “your divine council/assembly”; (b) to emend
the text and read it dōdekā, “your Beloved”; (c) to retain the reading derek
and translate it as either “way,” “pilgrimage,” or “power,” “dominion.”38 The
LXX translated it theos, which Martin Mulzer demonstrated is a free transla-
tion of derek, rather than a translation of dōdekā as some scholars suggested.39
34 For the excavations conducted at Tel Dan, see Biran 1993: 327–331; 1994:184–191, 201–210;
1999; 2001; Ackerman 2013: 169–170 n. 65, with earlier literature.
35 For criticism of Avraham Biran’s interpretation of the results of the Tel Dan excavations
and doubts expressed concerning the reliability of the biblical story of the foundation of
Dan’s sanctuary, see Noll 1998; Arie 2008; Berlejung 2009: 14–35.
36 Biran and Tzaferis 1978; Biran 1981: 145–147; 2001: 221; Arbeitman 1994: 11–12.
37 Flusser in Biran 1981: 149.
38 Olyan 1991: 121–123, with earlier literature; Zimmerli 1932: 3; Paul 1991: 268, 271–272;
Barthélemy 1992: 688–689; Weiss 1992a: 264; 1992b: 491–493; Jeremias 1998: 144, 152.
39 Mulzer 1996.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
88 Na ’ aman
However, Mulzer’s observations only proved that the LXX translated a text that
was similar to the Massoretic one.
Since oaths are taken in the name of god, it is necessary to look for a refer-
ence to god in v. 14ac. Indeed, oaths taken in the name of a divine assembly, by
pilgrimage/way or by power/dominion, are unknown in the Bible. As Walter
Zimmerli observed, “Das ḥê im schwur sonst immer nur in der Verbindung mit
Gott oder lebenden Menschen vorkommt, nie aber mit einer irgendwo beste-
henden Tatsache.”40 The oath in v. 14ac was pronounced by the epithet/appel-
lative of God, which in this case replaces its explicit name.41 The replacement
was possibly motivated by literary reasons. Following many scholars, I prefer
reading in v. 14ac dōdekā and translating the text, “as the Beloved of Beer-sheba
lives.” Either the original reading ddk was erroneously rendered drk (a familiar
mistaken rendering of dalet as resh), or a late editor who did not understand
the meaning of dōdekā fitted the text to that of Am 5:5 (“way of Beer-sheba” vis-
à-vis the “crossing over to Beer-sheba”).
Biblical Beer-sheba is probably located in Bīr es-Saba‘, about four kilome-
ters southwest of Tel Beer-sheba.42 Only a few parts of the Iron Age site were
discovered, since it is buried under the ruins of the Roman-Byzantine one as
well as the debris of the modern city.43 The location of the temple somewhere
within the ancient site remains unknown.
Who is the God that the prophet called “the Beloved of Beer-sheba?” With all
due caution, I suggest identifying him with YHWH of Teman, the God who ac-
cording to several Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions brings blessing. The identifica-
tion may explain the two references to Beer-sheba’s temple in Amos’ prophecy.
The site was an important station on the route of travellers who participated
in the international trade held at the time with the Gulf of Elath and south
Philistia. This role is confirmed by the petrographic analysis of the pottery as-
semblages discovered at Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, which indicate that most of the sup-
ply to the site came from Judah, with parts arriving from the northern Negev.44
The petrographic analysis shows that both travellers and supplies heading to
40 Zimmerli 1932: 3 n. 5.
41 In his discussion of Am 8:14, Stamm (1960: 172) examined the reading dōdekā (“Liebling”).
While emphasizing the rendering’s uncertainty, Stamm suggested that “nimmt man sie
an so wäre im übrigen dōd nur als (verselbständigtes) Beiwort eines Gottes und nicht als
Eigenname eines solchen erwiesen.”
42 For the location of ancient Beer-sheba, see Alt 1935: 318–323; Na’aman 1980: 149–51,
with earlier literature; Fritz 1994: 163, 165, 186, 253. For criticism, see Panitz-Cohen 2005:
143–155.
43 Gophna and Yisraeli 1973: 115–118; Panitz-Cohen 2005: 143–152.
44 Goren 1995; Singer-Avitz 2006: 209, 213; cf. Gunneweg, Perlman, and Meshel 1985.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 89
the site passed through the Beer-sheba Valley, which makes it likely that they
passed Beer-sheba and visited its temple on their way southward.
The legendary story of Elijah’s journey from Israel through Beer-sheba to
the Mount of God (1 Kgs 19:3) illustrates Beer-sheba’s location on the way from
Israel to the southern desert region. Israelite traders travelling southward prob-
ably visited the temple, offered sacrifices to the God, made vows to repay him
if they succeed in the expedition, and thus turned him into their patron god
during their travel in the vast region under his patronage. Success of the trade
might have increased YHWH of Teman’s prestige, as the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud in-
scriptions indicate. Amos, who prophesied during the era when the southern
international commerce prospered, must have been aware of the importance
of “the Beloved” of Beer-sheba for the inhabitants of the Northern Kingdom—
hence his criticism of the oath taken in his name (Am 8:14) and of people who
visited his temple (Am 5:4).
We know nothing of the history of Beer-sheba’s temple. It is said of Josiah
that he defiled the high-places where the priests had offered sacrifices, “from
Geba to Beer-sheba” (2 Kgs 23:8). There is no reference in the Bible to a cult
place in or near Geba. Hence, the border merism must have defined the
Kingdom of Judah’s borders and was written in order to suggest that the reform
encompassed the entire kingdom.45 It did not specify the location of the elimi-
nated shrines and does not supply information about Beer-sheba’s sanctuary.
The stories of the Book of Genesis relate that God revealed himself to Isaac
at Beer-sheba (Gen 26:24) and that the patriarch built an altar there and called
it by the name of YHWH (Gen 26:25). Jacob made sacrifices to YHWH on
this altar (Gen 46:1). Abraham planted a sacred tree in Beer-sheba and named
the site “the Everlasting God” (Gen 21:33). According to Abraham’s and Isaac’s
story-cycles, in Beer-sheba the two patriarchs signed treaties with Abimelech,
King of Gerar, and swore a solemn oath (Gen 21:27, 31–32; 26:31). In the early
research, scholars analyzed these stories and drew far-reaching conclusions
about Beer-sheba’s pre-monarchical sanctuary.46 It is commonly accepted
today that the pre-Priestly Abraham and Isaac story-cycles are late literary
works, dated to either the late pre-exilic or the exilic period. It is difficult to
draw concrete historical conclusions from these highly artistic, literary works.
Nevertheless, the assembly of distinct religious elements attributed to the sa-
cred site of Beer-sheba (an altar, sacred tree, divine revelation, the signing of
a treaty, and the swearing of an oath) indicates that at the time of their writ-
ing, there were strong social and cultural memories of the holiness of the site.
45 Lipschits 2004, with earlier literature.
46 Von Gall 1898: 44–51; Zimmerli 1932: 11–29.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
90 Na ’ aman
This notion corroborates the conclusions drawn from Amos’ prophecy, in con-
junction with the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions, of the prominent position of
Beer-sheba’s sanctuary and its God in the southern periphery of Judah in the
mid-eighth century BCE.
In sum, the three cities mentioned in Am 8:14 designate the main Israelite
regional sanctuaries dedicated to YHWH: Bethel to YHWH of Samaria, Dan to
YHWH of Dan, and Beer-sheba to YHWH of Teman. It was believed contempo-
raneously that—side by side with YHWH as a universal god—local manifesta-
tions of YHWH have their own region in which they figured centrally: YHWH
of Samaria in the central hill country and beyond, YHWH of Dan in Upper
Galilee, and YHWH of Teman in the southern desert regions. Whether there
were other temples dedicated to other regional YHWHs remains unknown.
Summing up the discussion, the combination of the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscrip-
tions with the prophecies of Amos and Hosea provides the key for identifying
the location of YHWH of Samaria’s and YHWH of Teman’s temples. YHWH of
Samaria was the name of the major God of the Kingdom of Israel, and his main
temple was located in Bethel. The temple of YHWH of Teman was located in
Beer-sheba. The traders who participated in the international trade, as well
as other North Israelite people, visited the place, offered sacrifices there, and
made vows to the local god. For this reason Amos, who prophesied during the
era of prosperity of the international southern trade, included the temple of
Beer-sheba in his criticism of the cult centres of Bethel, Gilgal, and Dan—the
three major cult centres of the Northern Kingdom.
References
Ackerman, Susan. 2013. “E-Dan.” JANER 13: 153–187.
Aḥituv, Samuel, Esther Eshel, and Ze’ev Meshel. 2012. “The Inscriptions.” Pp. 73–142
in Kuntillet ‘Ajrud (Ḥorvat Teman): An Iron Age II Religious Site on the Judah-Sinai
Border. Edited by Ze’ev Meshel. Jerusalem: IES.
Alt, Albrecht. 1935. “Beiträge zur historischen Geographie und Topographie des Negeb:
III. Saruhen, Ziklag, Horma, Gerar.” JPOS 15: 294–324.
Amit, Yairah. 1990. “Hidden Polemic in the Conquest of Dan: Judges XVII–XVIII.” VT
40: 4–20.
Anbar, M. 1990. “Kai pou eisin oi theoi tēs choras Samareias, et où sont les dieux du
pays de Samarie?.” BN 51: 7–8.
Arbeitman, Yoel L. 1994. “Detecting the God Who Remained in Dan.” Henoch 16: 9–14.
Arie, Eran. 2008. “Reconsidering the Iron Age II Strata at Tel Dan: Archaeological and
Historical Implications.” TA 35: 6–64.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 91
Bagg, Ariel M. 2007. Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der neuassyrischen Zeit. Teil 1: Die
Levante. RGTC 7/1. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients. Reihe B
(Geisteswissenschaften) Nr. 7/7/1. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert.
Barstad, Hans, M. 1984. The Religious Polemics of Amos: Studies in the Preaching of Am
2, 7b–8; 4, 1–13; 5, 1–27; 6, 4–7; 8, 14. SVT 34. Leiden: Brill.
Barthélemy, Dominique 1992. Critique textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. Tome 3: Ézékiel,
Daniel et les 12 Prophètes. OBO 50/3. Fribourg: Éditions Universitaires and Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Bauer, Uwe F. W. 1998. “Warum nur übertretet ihr Sein Geheiss!”: Eine synchrone Exegese
der Anti-Erzählung von Richter 17–18. BEATAJ 45. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Benzinger, Immanuel. 1899. Die Bücher der Könige erklärt. Kurzer Hand-Commentar
zum Alten Testament IX. Leipzig and Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Berlejung, Angelika. 2009. “Twisting Traditions: Programmatic Absence-Theology for
the Northern Kingdom in 1 Kgs 12:26–33* (the ‘Sin of Jeroboam’).” JNSL 35: 1–42.
Biran, Avraham and Tzaferis, Vasilius. 1978. “A Bilingual Dedicatory Inscription from
Tel Dan.” Qadmoniot 10: 114–115 (Hebrew).
Biran, Avraham. 1981. “‘To the God who is in Dan’.” Pp. 142–151 in Temples and High Places
in Biblical Times: Proceedings of the Colloquium in Honor of the Centennial of Hebrew
Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion. Jerusalem: The Nelson Glueck School of
Biblical Archaeology of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.
Biran, Avraham. 1993. “Dan.” Pp. 323–332 in The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological
Excavations in the Holy Land, vol. 1. Edited by Ephraim Stern. Jerusalem: IES and
Carta; New York: Simon & Schuster.
Biran, Avraham. 1994. Biblical Dan. Jerusalem: IES and Hebrew Union College.
Biran, Avraham. 1999. “Two Bronze Plaques and the Ḥuṣṣot of Dan.” IEJ 49: 43–54.
Biran, Avraham. 2001. “The High Places of Biblical Dan.” Pp. 148–155 in Studies in the
Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan. Edited by Amihai Mazar. JSOTSup
331. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Blum, Erhard. 2012. “Der historische Mose und die Frühgeschichte Israels.” HeBAI 1:37–63.
Burney, Charles Fox. 1903. Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Kings with an
Introduction and Appendix. Oxford: Clarendon Press (Repr., 1970. New York: Ktav).
Cogan, Mordechai and Tadmor, Hayim. 1988. II Kings: A New Translation with
Introduction and Commentary. AB 11. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Cross, Frank Moore. 1970. “The Cave Inscription from Khirbet Beit Lei.” Pp. 299–306 in
Near Eastern Archaeology in the Twentieth Century: Essays in Honor of Nelson Glueck.
Edited by James A. Sanders. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Dalley, Stephanie and Postgate, J. Nicholas. 1984. The Tablets from Fort Shalmaneser.
CTN III. Oxford: British School of Archaeology in Iraq.
Davies, Graham I. 1992. Hosea. The New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
92 Na ’ aman
Dijkstra, Meindert. 2001. “I have Blessed You by YHWH of Samaria and His Asherah:
Texts with Religious Elements from the Soil Archive of Ancient Israel.” Pp. 17–44
in Only One God? Monotheism in Ancient Israel and the Veneration of the Goddess
Asherah. Edited by Bob Becking, Meindert Dijkstra, Marjo C. A. Korpel and
Karel J. H. Vriezen. London and New York: Sheffield Academic Press.
Dobbs-Allsopp, Frederick W., Roberts, Jimmy J. M., Seow, Choon L., and Whitaker,
Robert E. 2005. Hebrew Inscriptions: Texts from the Biblical Period of the Monarchy
with Concordance. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Emerton, John A. 1982. “New Light on Israelite Religion: The Implications of the
Inscriptions from Kuntillet ‘Ajrud.” ZAW 94: 2–20.
Fales, Frederico Mario 1994. “A Fresh Look at the Nimrud Wine Lists.” Pp. 361–380 in
Drinking in Ancient Societies: History and Culture of Drinks in the Ancient Near East:
Papers of a Symposium Held in Rome, May 17–19, 1990. Edited by Lucio Milano.
History of the Ancient Near East, Studies 6. Padova: Sargon.
Finkelstein, Israel. 2013. The Forgotten Kingdom: The Archaeology and History of
Northern Israel. Atlanta: SBL.
Fritz, Volkmar. 1994. Das Buch Josua. Handbuch zum Alten Testament I/7. Tübingen:
J. C. B. Mohr.
Gadd, Cyril John. 1954. “Inscribed Prisms of Sargon II from Nimrud.” Iraq 16:
173–201.
Gall August Freiherrn von. 1898. Israelitische Kultstätten. BZAW 3. Giessen: J. Ricker.
Gophna, Ram, and Yisraeli, Yael. 1973. “Soundings at Beer-Sheva (Bir es-Seba‘).”
Pp. 115–118 in Beer-sheba I: Excavations at Tel Beer-Sheba 1969–1971 Seasons. Edited
by Yohanan Aharoni. Publications of the Institute of Archaeology, No. 2. Tel Aviv
University: Institute of Archaeology.
Goren, Yuval. 1995. “Petrographic Analyses of Horvat Teiman (Kuntillet ‘Ajrud) Pottery.”
Tel Aviv 22: 206–207.
Grayson, Albert Kirk. 1996. Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC II (858–745
BC). RIMA 3. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Gunneweg, Jan., Perlman, Isadore, and Meshel, Ze’ev. 1985. “The Origin of the Pottery
of Kuntillet ‘Ajrud.” IEJ 35: 270–283.
Hutton, Jeremy M. 2010. “Local Manifestations of Yahweh and Worship in the
Interstices: A Note on Kuntillet ‘Ajrud.” JANER 10: 177–210.
Irvine, Stuart A. 2014. “Idols ktbwnm: A Note on Hosea 13:2a,” JBL 133:509–517.
Jeremias, Jörg. 1996a. “Grundtendenzen gegenwärtiger Prophetenforschung.” Pp. 1–19
in idem, Hosea und Amos: Studien zu den Anfängen des Dodekapropheton. FAT 13.
Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Jeremias, Jörg. 1996b. “Die Anfänge des Dodekapropheton: Hosea und Amos.” Pp. 34–54
in idem, Hosea und Amos: Studien zu den Anfängen des Dodekapropheton. FAT 13.
Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 93
Jeremias, Jörg. 1998. The Book of Amos: A Commentary. OTL. Louisville: Westminster
John Knox.
Jeremias, Jörg. 2013. “Das Rätsel der Schriftprophetie.” ZAW 125: 93–117.
Keel, Othmar, and Uehlinger, Christoph. 1998. Gods, Goddesses and Images of Gods in
Ancient Israel. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Kinnier Wilson, J. V. 1972. The Nimrud Wine Lists. CTN I. Hertford: British School of
Archaeology in Iraq.
Köckert, Matthias. 2010. “YHWH in the Northern and Southern Kingdom.” Pp. 357–394
in One God—One Cult—One Nation: Archaeological and Biblical Perspectives. Edited
by Reinhard G. Kratz and Hermann Spieckermann. BZAW 405. Berlin and New York:
de Gruyter.
Kratz, Reinhard G. 2011a. “Probleme der Prophetenforschung, in: Prophetenstudien.”
Pp. 3–17 in idem, Prophetenstudien: Kleine Schriften II. FAT 74. Tübingen: J. C. B.
Mohr.
Kratz, Reinhard G. 2011b. “Die Redaktion der Prophetenbücher.” Pp. 32–48 in idem,
Prophetenstudien: Kleine Schriften II. FAT 74. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Kratz, Reinhard G. 2011c. “Das Neue in der Prophetie des Alten Testaments.” Pp. 49–70
in idem, Prophetenstudien: Kleine Schriften II. FAT 74. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Lemaire, André. 1976. “Prières en temps de crise: les inscriptions de Khirbet Beit Lei,”
Revue biblique 83: 558–568.
Lemaire, André. 1984. “Date et origine des inscriptions hébraïques et phéniciennes de
Kuntillet ‘Ajrud.” SEL 1: 131–143.
Lipschits, Oded. 2004. “‘From Geba to Beersheba’: A Further Consideration,” Revue bib-
lique 111: 345–361.
Macintosh, Andrew A. 1997. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Hosea.
International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
Marti, Karl, 1904. Das Dodekapropheton erklärt. Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten
Testament, Abteilung XIII. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Mays, James Luther. 1969. Amos: A Commentary. OTL. London: SCM.
McCarter, P. Kyle. 1987. “Aspects of the Religion of the Israelite Monarchy: Biblical and
Epigraphic Evidence.” Pp. 137–155 in Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of
Frank Moore Cross. Edited by Patrick D. Miller, Paul D. Hanson, and S. Dean McBride.
Philadelphia: Fortress.
Miller, Patrick, D. 1981. “Psalms and Inscriptions.” Pp. 311–332 in Vienna Congress Volume
1980. Edited by John Emerton. Leiden: Brill.
Müller, Hans-Peter. 1992. “Kolloquialsprache und Volksreligion in den Inschriften von
Kuntillet ‘Ağrūd und Ḫirbet el-Qōm.” Zeitschrift für Althebraistik 5: 15–51.
Mulzer, Martin. 1996. “Amos 8,14 in der LXX. Ein Einwurf in die Tel Dan-Text Debatte.”
BN 84: 54–58.
Na’aman, Nadav. 1980. “The Inheritance of the Sons of Simeon.” ZDPV 96: 136–152.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
94 Na ’ aman
Na’aman, Nadav. 2005. “The Danite Campaign Northward (Judges xvii–xviii) and the
Migration of the Phocaeans to Massalia (Strabo IV 1,4).” VT 55: 47–60.
Na’aman, Nadav. 2011. “The Inscriptions of Kuntillet ‘Ajrud Through the Lens of
Historical Research.” UF 43: 299–324.
Na’aman, Nadav. 2015. “The Book of Hosea as a Source for the Last Days of the Kingdom
of Israel.” BZ 55: 1–20.
Naveh, Joseph. 1963. “Old Hebrew Inscriptions in a Burial Cave.” IEJ 13: 74–92.
Noll, Kurt Lesher 1998. “The God Who Is Among the Danites.” JSOT 80: 3–23.
Noth, M. 1962. “The Background of Judges 17–18.” Pp. 68–85 in Israel’s Prophetic Heritage:
Essays in Honor of James Muilenburg. Edited by Bernhard W. Anderson and Walter
Harrelson. London: SCM.
Olyan, Saul M. 1988. Asherah and the Cult of Yahweh in Israel. SBLMS 34. Atlanta:
Scholars.
Olyan, Saul M. 1991. “The Oaths of Amos 8.14.” Pp. 121–149 in Priesthood and Cult in
Ancient Israel. Edited by Gary A. Anderson and Saul M. Olyan. JSOTSup 125.
Sheffield: JSOT.
Orlinsky, Harry M. 1939. “The Kings-Isaiah Recensions of the Hezekiah Story.” JQR 30:
33–49.
Panitz-Cohen, Nava. 2005. “A Salvage Excavation in the New Market in Beer-sheba:
New Light on Iron Age IIB Occupation at Beer-sheba.” IEJ 55: 143–155.
Parker, Simon B. 2003. “Graves, Caves, and Refugees: An Essay in Microhistory,” JSOT
27: 259–288.
Paul, Shalom M. 1991. Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos. Hermeneia.
Minneapolis: Fortress.
Renz, Johannes. 1995. Die althebräischen Inschriften. Part 1: Text und Kommentar.
Handbuch der althebräischen Epigraphik, Band I. Edited by Johannes Renz and
Wolfgang Röllig. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Rudolph, Wilhelm. 1966. Hosea. Kommentar zum Alten Testament XIII/1. Gütersloh:
Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn.
Šanda, Albert. 1912. Die Bücher der Könige übersetzt und erklärt. 2: Das zweite Buch der
Könige. Exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament 9/2. Münster: Aschendorff.
Singer-Avitz, Lily. 2006. “The Date of Kuntillet ‘Ajrud.” Tel Aviv 33: 196–228.
Stamm, Johann Jakob. 1960. “Der Name des Königs David.” Pp. 165–183 in SVT 7. Brill:
Leiden.
Tadmor, Hayim, and Yamada, Shigeo. 2011. The Royal Inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III
(744–727 BC) and Shalmaneser V (726–722 BC) Kings of Assyria. RINAP 1. Winona
Lake: Eisenbrauns.
Uehlinger, C. 1998. “ ‘… und wo sind die Götter von Samarien?’ Die Wegführung syrisch-
palästinischer Kultstatuen auf einem Relief Sargons II. in Ḫorsābād/Dūr-Šarrukīn”.
Pp. 739–776 in “Und Mose schrieb dieses Lied auf”: Studien zum Alten Testament und
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95
In Search of the Temples of YHWH of Samaria and YHWH of Teman 95
zum Alten Orient: Festschrift für Oswald Loretz zur Vollendung seines 70. Lebensjahres.
Edited by Manfried Dietrich and Ingo Kottsieper. Münster: Ugarit Verlag.
Weiss, Meir. 1992a. The Book of Amos. I: Commentary. Jerusalem: Magnes (Hebrew).
Weiss, Meir. 1992b. The Book of Amos. II: Notes. Jerusalem: Magnes (Hebrew).
Wolff, Hans Walter. 1974. Hosea: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Hosea.
Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Wolff, Hans Walter. 1977. Joel and Amos: A Commentary on the Books of the Prophets Joel
and Amos. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Zimmerli, Walther. 1932. Geschichte und Tradition von Beersheba im alten Testament.
Giessen: Alfred Töpelmann.
Journal of ancient near eastern religions 17 (2017) 76–95