The Egyptian Origin of the Ark of the Covenant

21 Pages·2015·6.06 MB·English

17
The Egyptian Origin of the Ark
of the Covenant
Scott B. Noegel
Abstract
The best non-Israelite parallel to the Ark of the Covenant comes not
from Mesopotamia or Arabia, but from Egypt. The sacred bark was a
ritual object deeply embedded in the Egyptian ritual and mythological
landscapes. It was carried aloft in processions or pulled in a sledge or a
wagon;itspurposewastotransportagodoramummyandsometimesto
dispenseoracles.TheIsraeliteconceptionoftheArkprobablyoriginated
underEgyptianinfluenceintheLateBronzeAge.
TheArkoftheCovenantholdsaprominentplace insightintotheIsraeliteArkandthenarrativesin
in the biblical narratives surrounding the which it appears by looking to a hitherto
Israelites’ exodus from Egypt. Its central role as overlookedparallel:theEgyptiansacredbark.
avehicleforcommunicatingwithYahwehandas
aportablepriestlyreliquarydistinguishesitfrom
all other aspects of the early cult. In varying Ark of the Covenant
detail, biblical texts ascribe tothe Arka number
offunctionsandpowers,whichhaveledscholars BiblicaltextsdescribetheArkoftheCovenantas
toseetheBible’sportrayaloftheArkastheresult a sacred object containing five major features.
ofhistoricaldevelopmentandtheologicalreinter- The first is a wooden box (Heb. ʾaro¯n), roughly
pretation.1 While some have looked to 4 ft. (cid:1) 2.5 (cid:1) 2.5, and overlaid with gold.2 The
Mesopotamia and premodern Bedouin societies secondisalid(Heb.kappo¯reth),madeentirelyof
for parallels to the Ark, the parallels have gold, not plated like the box,3 which contains a
remained unconvincing and have contributed molding running along its top edge. Its third
to the general view that the Ark was uniquely component is a pair of gold kerubˆım, i.e.,
Israelite.TodayIproposethatwecangaingreater
2Thewordsˇittˆım “acacia” is aloanfrom Egyptian. See
Muchiki (1999: 256). There are a number of species of
1SeeDietrich(2007:250–252).
acaciathatgrowinEgypt,theSinaipeninsula,theJudean
S.B.Noegel(*) desert,andtheNegev.
NearEasternLanguagesandCivilization(NELC), 3The lid also is translated “mercy seat,” based on an
UniversityofWashington,Seattle,WA,USA etymological association. However, the word kappo¯reth
e-mail:[email protected] simplymeans“covering.”
T.E.Levyetal.(eds.),Israel’sExodusinTransdisciplinaryPerspective, 223
QuantitativeMethodsintheHumanitiesandSocialSciences,DOI10.1007/978-3-319-04768-3_17,
#SpringerInternationalPublishingSwitzerland2015
224 S.B.Noegel
“sphinxes,”4 that rest on top of the lid and face In addition to serving as a reliquary, texts
each other with their wings touching. Note that attribute two other functions to the Ark. Most
the lid was understood as God’s “throne,” prominently, it served as the symbolic presence
whereas the box was viewed as his “footstool” of Yahweh. In times of war, Yahweh led as the
(e.g., 1 Chron 28:2, 2 Chron 9:18, Ps 99:5, Lord of Hosts, seated upon the kerubˆım,
132:7).TheArk’sfourthfeaturewasitswooden surrounded by standard bearers preceding him.
poles, which were inserted through four gold Each standard was topped with a banner
rings and never removed.5 Only the priestly representing an Israelite tribe or family line
tribe of Levi was permitted to carry the Ark, (Num2:1–34,10:35,Ps132:8).8
and even then, only after they had veiled it AsthesymbolicpresenceofYahweh,theArk
(Exod 40:3, 40:21).6 No one of non-priestly was connected to miracles and oracles. Thus,
descent was allowed to touch it. The Ark’s fifth when the priests carried the Ark into the Jordan
feature was its contents: the tablets of the law River the waters parted (Josh 3:8–17), and
(Deut 10:1–5, ʾaro¯n hab-berˆıth; Exod 25:22, Moses, Phinehas, Samuel, Saul,9 and David
ʾaro¯n ha-edu¯th), a jar of manna (Exod each received divine direction from the Ark
16:33–34), and possibly the rod of Aaron (Heb (Exod 25:22, 30:6, Num 7:89, Judg 20:27–28, 1
9:4,cf.Num17:10).7 Sam3:3,1Sam14:18,cf.2Sam2:1,5:19,11:11,
15:24).10
Beforethetemplewasbuilt,theArkstayedat
a number of sanctuaries including Gilgal (Josh
4On the Egyptian origin of this creature, see already
Albright (1938) and now Mettinger (1999). Attestations 7:6), Shechem (Josh 8:33), Bokhim (Judg
oftheAssyriancognatedkur¯ıbudonotpermitapreciseor 2:1–5), Bethel (Judg 20:27), Shiloh (1 Sam
a consistent description of the creature. Thus, some 3:3), Kiriath-Jearim (1 Sam 7:1–2), and Gibeon
appear to have animal heads while others have human
(1 Kgs 3:4, 1 Chron 16:37–42, 21:29, 2 Chron
heads.Nevertheless,thedkur¯ıbucommonlyaredescribed
as fashioned images that either stand at entrances to 1:3–4). During the visits Yahweh would accept
portals or face each other. The use of the cuneiform sacrifices and bless his sanctuaries. Finally, the
DINGIRsignmarksthemasdivine.SeeCADK,559,s. Ark acquired a ritual function. On Yom Kippur
v. kur¯ıbu. Even in the Bible, there is some variation
the high priest would sprinkle bull’s blood onto
concerning this creature. Thus, the kerubˆım on the Ark
have two wings (Exod 25:20, 37:9), but four wings in andinfrontoftheArk’slid(Lev16:14).
Ezekiel’svision(Ezek1:6).Theclosestparallelsarethe
sarcophagus of Ahiram, king of Byblos, and an ivory
foundatMegiddo.BothobjectsarehighlyEgyptianized
anddepictakingseatedonakerubˆım-flankedthrone.The
latter item also features a winged solar disk and lotus
offering. See Kyrieleis (1969: 41–81). Many objects 8InExod17:15,MosesbuiltanaltartoYahwehafterhis
found at Megiddo dating to thisperiod evince Egyptian battle against the Amalekites and named it יסִּֽנִ ה֥וָהיְ
influence,ifnotalsoapresence.SeeNovacek(2011).On “Yahweh is my banner.” The identification of Yahweh
other possible parallels, including a stone throne from withabannerisreminiscentoftheEgyptianhieroglyphic
Lebanon and a divine statue from Cyprus, see Zwickel representationofntr“god”withabanner(i.e., ).
(1999: 101–105). On archaeological evidence for the 91Chron13:3suggeststhatpeopledidnotseekoracles
Israelitecult,seeZwickel(1994).
fromtheArkduringSaul’sreign.
5On two occasions oxen pulled the Ark on a “newly 10The LXX of 1 Sam 14:18 reads “ephod.” The instru-
constructedwagon”(1Sam6:7,2Sam6:3),thoughthis
mentofdivinationin2Samuelislessclear,butVander
wasnotordinarypractice.
Toorn and Houtman (1994) argue that “ephod” here
6Moreover,thepriestswereforbiddenfromlookingatthe standsfor“Ark”andthattheArkfunctionedfordivina-
kappo¯reth“lid.”Hence,itwasveiled.Onlythehighpriest tion.TheyalsoopinethatthereweremultipleArksinthe
couldlookatthekappo¯rethonYomKippur,providedhe regionwhoseexistence wasblurredbylaterDeuterono-
has undertaken a special rite and has changed his mistediting.Iftheauthorsarecorrectinarguingthatthe
garments(Lev16:4).Ontheveilandthelid,seeBordreuil ArkthatDavidbroughttoJerusalem wasnotanational
(2006). symbol,butaSaulidecultobject,thenperhapsweshould
7According to Josephus, Jewish Wars 5.219, the inner- looktothetribeofBenjaminastheoriginallocusforthe
mostsanctumwasempty. object.
17 TheEgyptianOriginoftheArkoftheCovenant 225
Fig.17.1 Divine
palanquins,reliefof
TiglathPileserIII
Itaccompaniedtribesintobattleandsignalled
Previously Proposed Parallels thepresenceofthedivine.However,theBedouin
to the Ark transported them on horses or camels. It
contained no box, no lid, and no poles. Some
Scholars have cited two objects as possible were inscribed with spells and Quranic verses,
parallels for the Ark. The first is a divine palan- but they never served as reliquaries or as the
quin as seen notably in the Assyrian reliefs of throne and footstool of God. They were not
Tilglath Pileser III (744–727 B.C.E.).11 The overlaidingold,andtheycontainednokerubˆım.
panel shows the king’s seizure of foreign gods There also were no restrictions on who could
fromtheirtemples(Fig.17.1).12 touchthem.
While some of the gods sit on thrones and While the palanquin and Bedouin objects
mighthaveservedasasourceoforacles,anum- offer some parallels, the dissimilarities limit
berofdifferencesremain.Nopoleswereusedto their usefulness asanalogues. Indeed, Menaham
transport them, and there are no boxes and no Haran long ago observed that the Ark’s origins
lids.Theywerenotcoveredingold,nordoanyof must be sought not in nomadic life, but in a
them contain relics or kerubˆım. There is no evi-
dence that the statues were carried into battle.
Finally,thereappeartohavebeennorestrictions uncritically into the scholarly literature. Nevertheless,
onwhocouldtouchthem. theitems arerather distinctinappearance andfunction,
A second object previously compared to the andeachhasitsownhistory.Theʿutfagenerallyrefersto
˙
the hooded camel saddle used by married women of
Ark is the Bedouin ʿutfa (also called a mahmal,
˙ ˙ Sudan, Arabia, Tripoli, etc. It cannot be traced to pre-
abu-dhur,markab,andqubba[Fig.17.2]).13 Islamictimes.SeeRobinson(1931b).Traditionplacesthe
originofthemahmal inMamlukCairointhethirteenth
˙
centuryCE.SeeRobinson(1931a).Themerkabandabu-
dhuˆrappeartobesynonymsfortheostrich-featherlitter
11Zwickel(1999:106)alsosuggestsaparallelwithEgyp-
that sits upon camels. They are recorded in premodern
tiandivinepalanquins,butheappearstorejectit,because
Bedouin society, but not pre-Islamic society. See Musil
the Bible refers to the ʾaro¯nas a footstool. He does not
(1928:571–574).TheEgyptianmerkabcannotbedated
consider a connection to the barks. See also Zwickel
beforetheeleventhcenturyCE,whenthePersiantraveler
(1994).
Nasir-i Khusrau described its use in conjunction with a
12Therelief,whichisondisplayintheBritishMuseum, Nileinundationceremony,seeSanders(1994:103).Only
wasphotographedbytheauthor. thequbbadatestopre-Islamictimes,asitisrepresented
13The image of the ʿutfa appears in Musil (1928: 573). onthetempleofBelatPalmyra(firstcenturyCE).Nev-
The ʿutfa, mahmal, ab˙u-dhuˆr, markab, and qubba have ertheless, all of these litters are tent-like structures, and
˙ ˙
been treated rather loosely as a collective by earlier thus,theyaremorefruitfullycomparedtothetabernacle.
biblicists who proposed them as parallels to the Ark See Homan (2002:90–94). Homan doesnot discussthe
(e.g., Morgenstern 1942; de Vaux 1965: 9, 296–297), abu-dhur.TheHebrewcognatequbba¯hinNum25:8also
and since that time they have been adopted somewhat referstoatent.
226 S.B.Noegel
Fig.17.2 Bedouinutfa
˙
sedentary community, since the Israelite priests
carried it on foot (Haran 1985: 270). Moreover, Egyptian Sacred Barks
as Michael Homan has shown (Homan 2002:
113–114),thestrongestparallelsforthetaberna- With this in mind, I should like to propose that
cle in which the Ark was placed are ancient the Egyptian sacred bark offers a more compel-
Egyptian military and funerary tents including lingandcompleteparallelfortheArk.Ofcourse,
the tent-like coverings for funerary barks.14 thebarkwasnotmerelyaboat,butasacredritual
This suggests even greater propriety in looking objectdeeplyimbeddedintheritualandmytho-
toEgyptforananalogue.15 logicallandscapesoftheEgyptians.Thoughthey
resembledboats,theyrarely,ifever,were setin
water.EvenwhentheyneededtocrosstheNile,
theywereloadedontobarges.Usually,theywere
14Curiously,Homan(2002:113)doesnotdiscussapos- carried by hand or in some cases dragged on a
sibleparallelbetweentheArkandtheEgyptianbark,but sledgeorplacedonawagon(Fig.17.3).16
insteadhenotesthatRamesses’goldenthroneappearsin
theQadeshrecordas“flankedbyfalconwings,justasthe The bark’s most basic function was to trans-
Arkisflankedbywingedcherubim.”Moreover,Homan port gods and mummies. When transporting
(2002: 145–147) notes that the construction of the gods, the bark was fitted with a gold-plated
tabernacle’s frame employs the term qera¯sˇˆım “(thin)
naos containingadivine image seated onahwt-
boards,” a word of nautical importance that elsewhere ˙
(i.e.,Ezek27:6)referstothemaincabinonaboat.See
alsoKitchen(1993:119–129).
15We may add to this the fact that biblical tales set in brief discussion by Currid (1997: 23–32) and his
Egypt often show a close knowledge of Egyptian bibliography.
practicesandbeliefsand,insomecases,drawuponEgyp- 16Photograph of sacred barks at Medinet Habu by the
tian literary traditions. See, e.g., Sarna (1986) and the author.
17 TheEgyptianOriginoftheArkoftheCovenant 227
Fig.17.3 Barksonstands
withcarryingpoles,
MedinetHabu
block throne,17 which was veiled with a thin sacred bark, but rather many variations on a
canopyofwoodorcloth(Fig.17.4).18 theme,eachwithitsownsetofaccouchement.20
When transporting the dead, it carried the Many barks were decorated with protective
sarcophagus within a covered gold-plated cata- kerubˆım, such as the naos of the bark of Amun
falque (Fig. 17.5).19 There is no one type of
20See Go¨ttlicher (1992: 13–75), who divides the cultic
17On the hwt-block throne, srh-block throne, and the
˙ ˘ barks into four basic types: those belonging to districts,
“lion-throne,” see Kuhlmann (2008). For a comparative
states,gods,orofnon-localeorunspecifiednature,with
workonthrones,seeMetzger(1985).
each category containing many variations. Most of the
18Theveiledbark ofAmunhere comesfromarelief at barks are given epithet-like names, though the general
Karnak,photographedbytheauthor. termforbarkappearstohavebeenwi3,perhapsrelated
19Thephotographofthebarktransportingthecatafalque to the verb wi3 “to be separated, secluded, segregated.”
inthetombofUserhat(TT56)wastakenbytheauthor. SeeWA¨S1982:272.
228 S.B.Noegel
Fig.17.4 Veiledbarkof
Amun,Karnak
found on Seti I’s mortuary temple in Qurna The bark also gave oracles. While resting at
(Fig. 17.6, left) and the bark of Horus in the oneofthestationsitcouldbeconsultedbywrit-
templeatEdfu(Fig.17.6,right).21 tenoracles,andwhileenrouteduringtheproces-
Like the Ark of the Covenant, sacred barks sion, it could be asked a question to which it
were carried on poles by priests, the so-called would respond yes or no by bowing fore or aft.
pureones (Egyptian:wʿbw),whohadperformed Some priests marched before the bark wafting
purification rituals in order to hoist the bark. incense and others alongside and behind. Some
Though most Egyptian rituals were never borestandardsrepresentingnomes,muchlikethe
witnessed by the public, the procession of the tribal procession of the Ark of the Covenant
sacred bark was an important exception. It was (Barta1965–66).
thefocusofanintenseseriesoffestivalsthrough- While I know of no sacred bark whose foot-
out the year, as many as five to ten per month, stool contained relics, the placing of oaths
whichinvolvedloudmusicanddancing.22 beneaththe feet ofstatues is attested. Thus, ina
During the celebrations, priests carried the letter from Ramesses II to the Hittite king
barkfromoneshrinetoanother,andmadestops Hattusilis III, we find the following reference:
along the way, during which they dramatized “The writing of the covenant that [I made] to
mythological scenes. The route and length of the Great King, and which the King of Hattu
the processions varied depending on the gods has made with me, lies beneath the feet of [the
theycarriedandtheirmythologies.23 god Ra].The great gods are witnesses [to it].”24
Scholars have long likened this practice to the
24Acopyoftheletteralsowasplacedatthefeetofthe
HittitegodTeshub.Onthecorrespondencebetweenthese
kingsseeEdel(1994:1/16–29,2/27–29).FortheEgyp-
21Photographsbytheauthor.
tiantextsofthetreaty,seeKitchen(1971:225–232);Edel
22Stadler (2008). On Theban barks, see Bell (1985: (1983: 135–153). Note that Beckman (1996: 125) treats
251–294). the god in thebroken portionof the letteras the Hittite
23SeeSauneron(1960:93);Teeter(2011:56–75). stormgod.
17 TheEgyptianOriginoftheArkoftheCovenant 229
Fig.17.5 Barkon
catafalque,tombofUserhat
placing of the covenantal tablets in the Ark’s Liketheirdivinecounterparts,funerarybarks
footstool.25 functioned as a means of transport and mytho-
In addition, from the 18th Dynasty well into logical invocation. However, rather than trans-
the Roman period, Egyptians fashioned statues port images, they ferried the deceased to their
ofthegodPtah-Sokar-Osirisstandinguprighton tombs. As in the festivals, loud music
theirowncoffins(Fig.17.7).26 accompanied burial processions. These
Ofinteresthereisthatthecoffinsoftenhoused processions too were public, though the number
copies of the Book of the Dead or small corn ofattendeesnaturallyvaried.27
mummies.WhiletheRamessideletterandstatue The bark’s trip to the tomb invoked the jour-
are notexact parallelstothe Ark,they sharethe neyofthesunasitsailedtothelandofthewest.
conceptoftextsplacedbeneaththefeetofagod. LikeRainhissolarbark,28thedeceasedhopedto
sailonacycleofrenewalandemergewithhimat
dawn.
Evenfromthiscursorytreatment,itshouldbe
25SeealreadyHerrmann(1908).Theplatformsonwhich
Arkswereplacedalsosometimesstoredtexts.Thus,spell clear that the Ark and the bark share much in
64 of the Book of Going Forth by Day (lines 25–26) common in both design and function, and each,
concludes by noting that the spell was discovered by a in its own way, was connected to a historicized
master-worker in a plinth belonging to the god of the
Hennu-bark (i.e., Sokar or Horus). P. London BM EA
10477(P.Nu),Tb064Kf(line25),P.CairoCG51189
(P. Juya), Tb 064 (line 284). Moreover, in the 18th
Dynasty the term s.t wr.t “great seat,” which usually 27Teeter (2011: 57) remarks: “Festivals also illustrated
referred to the throne of a king or a god, came to be how little separation there was between the concepts of
used forthe pedestalonwhich onerested a divine bark funerary and nonfunerary practices. For example,
orthebarkshrineitself.Eventually,itbecameametonym festivalsofOsiris,thegodoftheafterlife,werecelebrated
for the temple. See McClain (2007: 88–89). Herrmann intheKarnakTempleandrecordedindetailattheTemple
(1908:299–300)alsodrawsattentiontotheparallel.In1 of Hathor at Dendara, structures that are not usually
Samuel10:25,Samuelalsoplacesascrollcontainingthe associatedwithmortuarycults.”
dutiesofkingshipbeforetheArk. 28Thesolargodrodeoneboat(mʿnd.t)duringthedayand
26TheLatePeriodexemplarshownhereiscourtesyofthe another(i.e.,mskt.t)atnight.Ontheorientationofthese
BritishMuseum(E9742). boats,seeThomas(1956:56–79).
230 S.B.Noegel
Fig.17.6 Naoicontaining
kerubˆım
mythology of return. Of course, I am not ofthedivinepresence.Itcontinuedtobeasacred
suggesting that the Ark of the Covenant was in object thatone could consultfor oracles,and its
factabark;onlythatthebarkservedasamodel, maintenancecontinuedtobetheexclusiveprivi-
whichtheIsraelitesadaptedfortheirownneeds. legeofthepriests.
Thus, the Israelites conceived of the Ark not as Moreover,thereisevidencethatitretainedthe
an Egyptian boat with a prow and stern and chthonicimportofitsEgyptianprototype.Inpart
oars,29 but as a rectangular object, more akin to thiscomesfromtheverynamethattheIsraelites
theriverineboatthatinformstheshapeofNoah’s gave the object, an ʾaro¯n, which also, and per-
Ark (6:14–16).30 Nevertheless, some of the haps primarily, means “coffin.”31 As such it
bark’sotheraspectsremainedmeaningfulinIsra- appears in the narratives concerning the deaths
elitepriestlyculture.Itstillrepresentedathrone ofthepatriarchJacob(Gen50:1–14)andhisson
andafootstoolandsoitstillservedasasymbol Joseph (Gen 50:26), both of whom were
embalmed according to Egyptian practice and
placedinanʾaro¯n.32
29Of course, the Israelites dispensed with the Egyptian
practice of placing an image of the God’s head on the
prowandstern.
30ThetermforNoah’sArkiste¯ba¯h(Gen6:14).Itisalso 31Thewordʾaro¯nappearsin2Kgs12:9–16(¼2Chron
usedforthesmallchestintowhichtheinfantMoseswas 24:8–12), where it is often translated “(money) chest.”
floatedtosafety(Exod2:3,2:5).Thewordte¯ba¯hisaloan However, the passage carefully states that the priest
from the Egyptian db3(t) “naos, casket, sockel for a Jehoida took anʾaro¯n andbored a holeinto itslid (i.e.,
throne.” Interestingly, like the Hebrew word kisse¯ʾ delet, lit. door). This clarifies that the coffin was
“throne,”theIsraelitesdidnotusethetermte¯ba¯hforthe repurposed as a coffer. The Akkadian cognate ara¯nu
Ark of the Covenant, even though it was available to similarly means coffin and cashbox, CAD A 2, p. 231,
them. It is plausible that the Israelites used the term s.v. ara¯nu. Note also that the Phoenician cognate ʾaro¯n
ʾaro¯n instead of te¯ba¯h (or kisse¯ʾ “throne”), because it appears on a number of royal memorial inscriptions in
distinguished the object from a boat while retaining its referencetoheavilyEgyptianizedPhoeniciansarcophagi.
chthonic associations. On the Hebrew and Egyptian SeeKAI,nos.1,9,13,13,29.Ifthewoodusedtobuildthe
lexemes, see HALOT, p. 1678, s.v. הבָתֵּ ; WA¨S 5: Ark (i.e., sˇittˆım “acacia”) is to be identified with spina
555–562, and Hannig (1995: 1003), s.v. db3(t). The aegyptiaca,thenitisnoteworthythattheEgyptiansalso
meaning “coffin” is spelled db3(t). On the word as a usedittoconstructcoffins.
loan into Hebrew, see Muchiki (1999: 258). On the 32Gen 50:2 states that Joseph ordered his servants and
LXX’s rendering of both ʾaro¯n and te¯ba¯h as κιβωτo´ς, physicians to do the embalming, but they are not
seeLoewe(2001). identifiedasEgyptians.
17 TheEgyptianOriginoftheArkoftheCovenant 231
Fig.17.7 Ptah-Sokar-
Osirisfigurestandingon
coffin
Underscoringthechthonicnatureoftheʾaro¯n Thenarratordoesnotsaywhytheprocession
is its frequent association with threshing floors. stopped here, but readers are forced to wonder,
See, forexample,theaccountofJoseph’sreturn because Jacob was to be buried at Machpelah
toCanaan: (Gen 49:30).33 Also unclear is what the
Canaanites saw that suggested an Egyptian
Whentheyreachedthethreshingfloorofthebram-
ble, near the Jordan, they lamented loudly and
bitterly; and there Joseph observed a seven-day
period of mourning for his father. When the
Canaanites who lived there saw the mourning at
thethreshingfloorofthebramble,theysaid,“The
Egyptians are holding a solemn ceremony of
mourning.”ThatiswhythatplaceneartheJordan 33See, forexample, Sarna (1989: 348),who asks “Why
iscalledA¯be¯l-Misrayˆım(lit.the“Mourningofthe doestheprocessionstopatjustthisplace?,”andsuggests
˙
Egyptians,”Gen50:10–11). thattheregionmighthavehadEgyptianconnections.
232 S.B.Noegel
mourningpractice.34Whilethetextmentionsthe However, since the Canaanites identified the
presence of Egyptian officials, they were far mourning ritual as an Egyptian practice, we
outnumbered by the elders of Israel, the house- must ask more specifically what cultic signifi-
hold of Joseph and his brothers, and all the cancethethreshingfloorhadinEgypt.
members of their father’s household. Indeed, InEgypt,thethreshingfloorwasmostwidely
Gen 50:9 states that the group constituted a associated with Osiris and his cult. I need not
ham-mahaneh ka¯be¯d meʾo¯d, “an exceedingly dwell here onthe complex origins andnature of
˙
largecamp.”Wearetoldnothingofprofessional Osiris.37 Suffice it to say that he was connected
wailing women nor of people dancing nor of an inter alia to the resurrection of the dead38; and
OpeningoftheMouthceremony.Eventhelength thoughtheetymologyofhisnameisdisputed,it
oftheevent,7days,suggestsanIsraelitemourn- is clear already in the Pyramid Texts that the
ing practice.35 Instead, the narrator twice states Egyptians identified him with a divine throne,
that the rite took place at a threshing floor. We perhapsasthe“SeatofCreation”orthe“Throne
must consider this as more than a passing refer- of the Eye (i.e., Sun).”39 The identification of
ence, for throughout the Near East threshing Osiris with new grain is attested abundantly in
floors were regarded as numinous places rich the mythological corpora as well as in ritual
with chthonic and fertility associations, and practices, such as the making of corn mummies
thus, they were loci for cultic activity.36 andOsirisbeds,40theritesfoundintheDramatic
Ramesside Papyrus,41 and the “Driving of the
Calves” (hw| bhsw) ritual.42 The latter rite was
˙ ˙
34Cf.themourningoverthemenwhomYahwehslewfor enactedatanumberofpublicfestivals,43during
looking into the Ark in 1 Sam 6:18–19. On the which the threshing of grain was interpreted as
peculiarities of thispassage andproposed connection to the dismemberment of Osiris.44 After mourning
Arknarratives,seeTur-Sinai(1951:275–286).
35WhenJacobdied,thenarratornotedthattheEgyptians
bewailedhimfor70days(Gen50:3).Herodotusrelates
that thebody was placed in niter for70days (Histories 37On the complex history of Osiris and the use of corn
2.86).DiodorusSiculusstatesthatthepreparationofthe mummies,seeGriffiths(1980).
body took 30 days and the wailing another 72 days 38Though neither Osiris nor the deceased whom he
(Histories1.91).However,Jobandhisfriendsmournfor judged ever returned to the land of the living. Instead,
7days(Job2:13).Cf.1Chron10:12. theywereresurrectedintheafterlife.
36Aranov(1977)suppliesawealthofcomparativedataon 39Pyr.2054.SeeGriffiths(1980:87–99).Ontheetymol-
the subject, though his approach is rather Frazerian in ogy of his name, see Kuhlmann (1975: 135–138) and
orientation. For the cultic use of the threshing floor in Westendorf(1977:95–113).
Mesopotamia, see Jacobsen (1975: 65–97). At Ugarit, 40Griffiths(1980:167–168);Tooley(1996:167–179).
threshing floors also were tied to mourning and fertility 41See Sethe (1928); Gardiner (1955); Quack (2006:
rites and used as sites for divination (CAT 1.141–145,
72–89);andGeisen(2012).
1.155)andsummoningthedead(CAT1.20–22).Similar
42Theverbhw|means“beating,threshing.”SeeEgberts
culticactivitytookplaceintheAegeanworld(Homeric ˙
(1995)fora comprehensivestudyofthisritual.Though
HymntoDemeter,185–189).Thethreshingfloorshareda
detailsmainlycomefromtemplesoftheGraeco-Roman
number of these associations in ancient Israel as well.
period, the original contexts for the ritual belong to
Thus,Gideonsoughtanoraclebymeansofdivinationat
Theban festival processions for Osiris in the Ramesside
a threshing floor (Judg 6:11–20). Prophecy and royal
period,whichthemselvesderiveinpartfromfestivalsat
judgment also took place there (1 Kgs 22:10–11), the
Memphis(Egberts1995:182–183).
latter, even during the period of the Sanhedrin (Aranov
1977: 161–176). The association of the threshing floor 43IncludingtheSokarfestival,OsirisMystery,Minfesti-
with fertility is suggested also in the book of Ruth, in val,festivalofBehdet,Opetfestival,andperhapsalsothe
whichRuthandBoazhavesexatathreshingfloor(Ruth festivalofthefirstmonthofsummer.SeeEgberts(1995:
3).SeealsoHos9:1.Thatsomesexualactivitytookplace 412).
inorneartheIsraelitetemple isclear bylegalandpro- 44Theritualalsoinvolvedtheroyalconsecrationoffour
pheticpronouncementsagainstsuchacts(see,e.g.,Deut mr.t-chests,reliquariesthatcontainedfourdifferentlycol-
23:18–19,Hos4:14,1Kgs14:24,15:12,22:38–47,2Kgs ored linen bandages for Osiris’ mummy. Some texts
23:7,Jer2:20,5:7,Ezek16:31,Mic1:7).SeealsoLittauer appeartorefertogarmentswornbyadivinestatue,but
etal.(1990:15–23). theiruseasbandagesforthemummificationofOsirisis