Journal of ancient near eastern religions �7 (�0�7) 76–95 Journal of Ancient Near Eastern 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 detailed 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 alongside 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 insights 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 �0.��63/�569���4-��34��87 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 universal 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 distinct 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 inscriptions, some scholars have suggested that the two toponyms refer to specific 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 suggesting location for the two YHWH’s temples. Other scholars have assumed that the designation “YHWH of Samaria” refers to that particular god’s temple located 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 region 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 people 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 prophecies 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 nature 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 Tiglathpileser 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 gentilic, “the Samarians.”8 “The Samarians” also appears as a name for people arriving 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 7 8 9 Grayson 1996: 211:8; Bagg 2007: 210, writ. kursa-me-ri-na-a-a. Tadmor and Yamada 2011: 203, s.v. Samaria. Gadd 1954: 179–180 line 25; Bagg 2007: 210, writ. lú urusa-me-ri-na-a-a. 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 requires 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 11 Müller 1992: 27 noted this. 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 reality 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] rejected 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 statue made to replace it—and alludes to them one after the other. The singular form in v. 5a (“your calf”) refers to the calf statue that was despoiled and 12 13 14 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. The noun ’āwen alludes to Bethel (Beth-aven) on the one hand, and to all illegitimate cult places in Israel on the other. 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 happened –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 predicts 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 envision 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 16 For recent discussion of v. 2a, see Irvine 2014, with earlier literature. 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 contained 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 evidence 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 officially 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 impossible 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 prophesied 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 conjunction 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 19 20 21 22 For the problems involved with the study of biblical prophecy, see recently Jeremias 1996a; 2013, with earlier literature; Kratz 2011a; 2011b; 2011c. Kratz 2011b: 42–45; 2011c: 66–69, with earlier literature. Jeremias 1996b. 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. 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 pilgrimage 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 flourishing 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 centre 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 24 25 For a detailed interpretation, see Rudolph 1971: 189–193; Wolff 1977: 228, 238–240; Paul 1991: 162–164; Jeremias 1998: 87–89. For the list of scholars who omitted Beer-sheba from the prophecy, see Paul 1991: 164 n. 47; Jeremias 1998: 81, 89. 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 considered the omitted word unacceptable, just as other biblical editors replaced Ba‘al with the denigrating noun boshet, and Bethel with the negatively connoted Beth-aven. What may have been the replaced original word? Scholars have suggested 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,” thereby 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 27 28 29 30 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. Mays 1969: 149. Mays’ suggestion that a late editor inserted v. 14aa is redundant and was not supported by other scholars. 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. Olyan 1991: 149 already suggested this rendering. 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 position 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 belong 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 sanctuaries are also alluded to in Jer 4:15, “For a voice declares from Dan and proclaims 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 32 33 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. 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. 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 relations 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 district of the Danites: Thus in the Hellenistic time of Zoilos, the local inhabitants had an obscure 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 ancient 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 translation of derek, rather than a translation of dōdekā as some scholars suggested.39 34 35 36 37 38 39 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. 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. Biran and Tzaferis 1978; Biran 1981: 145–147; 2001: 221; Arbeitman 1994: 11–12. Flusser in Biran 1981: 149. 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. 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 reference 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 bestehenden Tatsache.”40 The oath in v. 14ac was pronounced by the epithet/appellative 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” visà-vis the “crossing over to Beer-sheba”). Biblical Beer-sheba is probably located in Bīr es-Saba‘, about four kilometers 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 according to several Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions brings blessing. The identification 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 assemblages discovered at Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, which indicate that most of the supply 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 41 42 43 44 Zimmerli 1932: 3 n. 5. 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.” 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. Gophna and Yisraeli 1973: 115–118; Panitz-Cohen 2005: 143–152. 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 probably 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 inscriptions 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 eliminated 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 sacred 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 writing, there were strong social and cultural memories of the holiness of the site. 45 46 Lipschits 2004, with earlier literature. 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 conjunction 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 contemporaneously that—side by side with YHWH as a universal god—local manifestations 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 inscriptions 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 biblique 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 syrischpalästinischer 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