Jerusalem in Ancient History and Tradition (JSOT Supplement Series)

328 Pages·2004·17.87 MB·English

by  Thomas L. Thompson

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
SUPPLEMENT SERIES
381
Editors
David J.A. Clines
Philip R. Davies
Executive Editor
Andrew Mein
Editorial Board
Richard J. Coggins, Alan Cooper, J. Cheryl Exum,
John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon, Norman K. Gottwald,
John Jarick, Andrew D.H. Mayes, Carol Meyers,
Patrick D. Miller
COPENHAGEN INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
13
General Editors
Thomas L. Thompson
Niels Peter Lemche
Associate Editors
Modens Müller
Hakan Ulfgard
This page intentionally left blank
Jerusalem
in Ancient History
and Tradition
edited by
Thomas L. Thompson
with the collaboration of
Salma Khadra Jayyusi
T&.T CLARK INTERNATIONAL
A Continuum imprint
LONDON • NEW YORK
Copyright © 2003 T&T Clark International
A Continuum imprint
Published by T&T Clark International
The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX
15 East 26th Street, Suite 1703, New York, NY 10010
www.tandtclark.com
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Typeset and edited for Continuum by Forthcoming Publications Ltd
www.forthcomingpublications.com
Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press,
Trowbridge, Wiltshire.
ISBN 0-8264-6664-8 (hardback)
0-5670-8360-8 (paperback)
CONTENTS
Foreword vii
Preface xiii
Acknowledgments xvi
Abbreviations xviii
List of Contributors xxi
THOMAS L. THOMPSON
An Introduction: Can a History of Ancient Jerusalem
and Palestine be Written? 1
MICHAEL PRIOR
A Moral Reading of the Bible in Jerusalem 16
NIELS PETER LEMCHE
'House of David': The Tel Dan Inscription(s) 46
MARGREET STEINER
Expanding Borders: The Development of Jerusalem
in the Iron Age 68
SARA MANDELL
Rome, Syria and the Jerusalem High Priest:
The International Bases of the High Priest's Rule
of the Jerusalem City-State: 175-63 BCE 80
JOHN STRANGE
Herod and Jerusalem: The Hellenization of an Oriental City 97
FIRAS SAWAH
Jerusalem in the Time of the Kingdom of Judah 114
vi Jerusalem in Ancient History and Tradition

LESTER L. GRABBE
Ethnic Groups in Jerusalem 145
PHILIP R. DAVIES
From Zion to Zion: Jerusalem in the Dead Sea Scrolls 164
THOMAS M. BOLIN
The Making of the Holy City: On the Foundations
of Jerusalem in the Hebrew Bible 171
INGRID HJELM
Brothers Fighting Brothers: Jewish and Samaritan
Ethnocentrism in Tradition and History 197
THOMAS L. THOMPSON
Holy War at the Center of Biblical Theology:
Shalom and the Cleansing of Jerusalem 223
DAVID M. GUNN
'Next Year in Jerusalem': Bible, Identity and Myth
on the Web 258
KEITH W. WHITELAM
Imagining Jerusalem 272
Index of References 290
Index of Authors 0
FOREWORD
The hijacking of commercial airplanes and their use in the destruction of
New York's World Trade Center on 11 September 2001 created much
uncertainty about plans to have a small conference in Jordan on 12-14
October on the theme of Jerusalem in ancient history and tradition. Three
members of the biblical institute at the University of Copenhagen were to
take part and the present writer had been responsible for planning the
conference together with Dr Salma Khadra Jayyusi. Altogether twelve
historians, archaeologists and biblical scholars from six different countries
were to meet for two days in Amman to discuss new perspectives on the
history of ancient Jerusalem and its relationship to biblical tradition. The
audience was to include teachers and scholars from universities in Jordan,
Palestine and Syria.
In spite of the uncertain political situation, we decided to hold the con-
ference. For myself, this included accepting a long-standing invitation
to visit Riyadh. Accordingly, on 6 October, I flew to that hyper-modern
Phoenix-like, big-city of the desert to give a lecture at the King Faisal
Islamic research center on the history of Palestine. My hosts were taken up
with the task of reassuring their American-Danish guest in a rapidly dete-
riorating political situation. Within a day of my arrival, the Americans had
decided to begin bombing Afghanistan rather than consider negotiations,
which would be brokered by either Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. The Saudis
expressed understanding for the American need to avenge the horrible and
murderous attack on innocent people in New York, but they were also
aware of the thousands of innocent Afghanis who would die in a military
action that perhaps might be avoided. It was inevitable that my visit was
taken up with many long theological discussions about 'holy war' (to be
fought only by God) and revenge (which belongs only to God). We also
struggled with the fine distinctions of journalists between Islamic terror
and American bombing and—central to all our discussions—about the
relationship between Palestinians and Israelis which is at the core of any
peaceful development in the Middle East. The academic study of religion
and freedom of discussion were defended. So also, the misuse of religious
viii Jerusalem in Ancient History and Tradition
language to manipulate society through fundamentalism and uncritical
theology was viewed as extremely dangerous. In all these discussions was
the awareness that we were on the threshold of just such a dangerous world
of competing fundamentalisms. As the bombing in Afghanistan continued
as I flew to Amman on 12 October, disjointed thoughts of discussing Jeru-
salem's ancient past evoked a surrealistic giddiness that replaced my
earlier sense of vulnerability with nausea.
I was unhappy that the theme of the conference, 'Jerusalem in ancient
history and tradition' did not seem as tame and comfortable in Amman in
October 2001 as it had in Copenhagen the previous summer when we
planned it. It quickly became clear that many of my colleagues had re-
written their talks after 11 September. History and tradition had become
two palpably distinct realities that competed with each other; not just now,
but also in the ancient past. The meeting began where many of us already
were in our own private thoughts, as the opening speaker, Michael Prior,
bluntly demanded that we distinguish between the good and the bad in
religious traditions. In doing so he argued for a view of the Bible as a
means of oppression as well as that our scholarship be ethically responsi-
ble in recognizing its relationship to modern politics. His illustrations with
the biblical traditions of the Promised Land and of David's eternal
covenant were not less significant for their Palestinian audience. Prior's
lecture set a question for the conference, to which each speaker in turn
attempted to contribute.
Niels Peter Lemche presented a computer-driven discussion on the
'House of David' inscription fragments from the eighth century, which
had been found at Tell el-Qadi, an Iron Age ruin at the headwaters of the
Jordan. This inscription has been the center of a decade-long debate
among biblical archaeologists and historians. Claimed by some to be direct
historical evidence for the Bible's kingdom of David, other scholars have
given the fragments a wide range of readings and interpretations, dating
them from as early as the ninth to late in the eighth century. Some have
suggested that the fragments come from more than a single inscription and
a few have raised the possibility that the texts show signs of being for-
geries. Modern political concerns have encouraged charges of bias, dis-
honesty and even anti-Semitism, sprinkled freely wherever the issue has
been discussed. While Lemche's demonstration showed that the possibility
that we are dealing with a forgery is substantial, his decision not to give a
decisive judgment on the issue was frustrating for some. His lecture was
followed by Margreet Steiner's presentation of Kathleen Kenyon's 40-
year-old excavation of Jerusalem's absent strata from the tenth century.
Foreword ix
Steiner, nevertheless, refused to interpret this as unambiguous evidence
that Jerusalem had not existed during this period, which the Bible presents
as the time of David's great kingdom. She rather—like Lemche—pre-
ferred uncertainty in her conclusions and spoke of the likely existence of a
town and perhaps a small 'chieftainship' in her historical reconstruction.
The reader will also face a similar frustration with two of the papers
included in this volume, which could not be presented at the meeting in
Amman. Sara MandelPs article discusses the international character of
Jerusalem's politics during the second and first centuries. This historian's
understanding of the 'Hellenization' of Jerusalem and Palestine disagrees
considerably with the understanding implicit in the archaeologist John
Strange's paper, which places the development of Hellenization much
later. Strange's paper on the policies of Herod the Great during the last
half of the first century BCE, moreover, reinterprets the 'Wailing Wall' as a
retaining wall for an agora, rather than as a wall belonging to a temple.
Both papers significantly change our understanding of Jerusalem at this
period, without being reconcilable with each other.
Such implicit disharmony between the various presentations, and be-
tween the speakers and the audience, can also be noticed in Firas Sawah's
comprehensive presentation of Palestine's history during the first half of
the first millennium BCE. This survey was not only based on the Kenyon
excavations that Steiner discusses, but also substantially disagrees with
Steiner's understanding of Jerusalem's tenth century. An even greater dif-
ference can be seen in Sawah's presentation of the seventh-century reign
of Josiah, especially in his effort to integrate biblical and historical infor-
mation, and the understanding of this period as it is discussed in Ingrid
Hjelm's paper. Here, a dominant Samaria had not ceased to exist as an
integral part of Palestine's political life at this time. One of the confer-
ence's most successful results, in my view, has been the recognition and
acceptance of the necessity of the freedom and independence for each
scholar to draw conclusions based on very limited historical evidence for
the past, whatever political interests might dictate. The distinction between
tradition and history's distinct views of the past as comprising two sepa-
rate realities, which could be harmonized with only the greatest caution,
was the invaluable and unanimous gain of the congress's open discussions.
The disagreements support understanding and keep the discussion open.
While most of the differences in our interpretations of historical events,
contexts and periods dealt with major issues that are in fact irreconcilable,
no disagreements were so extreme or so far-reaching as those presented
on the theme of ethnicity. The disagreement regarding the understanding