Abnormal Interests

July 22, 2008

Ad Hoc Rituals for Canonical Gods?

Jim Getz has an abnormally interesting post on the Ugaritic ritual texts. At the end of his post, he asks a couple of significant programmatic questions that deserve a lot of study and thought. These questions rest on two equally important observations. First,

As best as can be discerned, the ritual texts at Ugarit are not canonical. There was no extensive editorial process of native self-selection that brought these texts together into an authoritative corpus of ancient Ugaritic life. Rather, these are simply the texts that have survived.

And, second, there was a canonical list of gods to whom sacrifices were offered at Ugarit. Go read Jim's whole post at Ketuvim. The questions he raises are abnormally interesting.

I also find it interesting, based on the lack of multiple copies, that the preserved Ugaritic myths and epics do not seem to be canonical in much the same way that the rituals are not canonical. In the case of this literature, some of this may relate to specific scribal traditions and training procedures. I wrote a little about how this might work and about van Soldt's ideas in one of my now ancient posts on identifying scribal schools. If you take the link, the discussion is under the heading "The Role of Literature in Scribal Training," about half way down the post. van Soldt suggested that oral tradition within the scribal community resulted in the written mythic and epic material at Ugarit. This process may have been part of scribal training. A similar process may be at work with the ritual material. But, if so, different goals and priestly rather than scribal considerations must have driven the process.

Reference:

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (3)
Posted by Duane on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 at 7:37 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Ugarit | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

July 20, 2008

East is East and West is West

Here is an abstract of a paper presented at the 72nd Annual Meeting of the Florida Academy of Sciences:

Tin trade failure in ancient Mesopotamia: The reason why the Late Bronze Age civilizations of Eastern Mediterranean fell. S. SAMEI. Department of Anthropology, University of Georgia, 250A Baldwin Hall, Jackson St., University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602. Archaeological evidence shows that at some point between 1200 BCE and 900 BCE Eastern Mediterranean civilizations such as the Hittites collapsed. Numerous reasons for this collapse have been presented, but none provide a sufficient answer. Of the possibilities presented, one seems to be the winner. Despite all its flaws and despite the fact that by itself it cannot explain the mystery, this theory is nonetheless a strong candidate. As societies highly dependent on bronze, such cultures as the Hittites had a high demand of tin, an alloy of bronze. Where this tin came from is an old controversy. However, archaeological and geological researches point to rich tin sources in the west, in the present day Iran and Afghanistan. These sources could have been a great candidate for the bronze made in the Eastern Mediterranean. Though no substantial metallurgical work has been done on the matter, the ancient literature of the Early and Middle Bronze Age city-states does support this theory, presenting Mesopotamian trade routes as the ones used to transfer the tin from the west to Eastern Mesopotamia. However, through an assessment of the political and economic changes of Mesopotamia, this conclusion can be reached that the instability caused by these changes led to the malfunctioning and the possible ultimate termination of the flow of tin from the west to the east, thus leading to the ultimate fall of the Eastern Mediterranean civilizations a few centuries later. [emphasis added]

The thesis may have merit but seems to lack direction. As Aydin Örstan, from whom I stole the meat and the bones of this post, remarked on Snail's Tales, "Hold it, hold it! The Hittites lived in the present day Turkey and Iran and Afghanistan are located to the east."

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (3)
Posted by Duane on Sunday, July 20, 2008 at 6:58 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Archaeology | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

A Good Person is Hard to Find

Yesterday, Alan Lenzi posted an abnormally humorous job advertisement, fictitious I think, for an entry level Hebrew Bible Instructor for the Department of True Theology and Other Religious Stuff at Our Lord of the Exclusive Way University. Go give it a read and have a laugh.

It reminded me of a real job search. One in which I was looking for a rather special employee. For a very short time while working for a large multinational company, a newly formed design center in Moscow (that's Moscow, Russia) was under my "leadership." Why? I have no idea. Being unqualified to manage such an enterprise, one of my goals was to recruit a competent manager. So, with the help of our amiable Human Resources Department, I put together a job description that had the following elements:

• BS (MS preferred) in electrical or electronic engineering
• 5 years experience managing remote design centers
• Fluent in written and spoken Russian and English
• 5 years experience in the design of digital processor based hardware and software for communication applications
• Familiarity with international and regional wireless and wire line communications standards
• Familiarity with Russian and American business practices
• Willing to travel 50% time

There were a few other minor requirements but these were the biggies. I wasn't sure we could find anyone that even came close to these requirements. Finding a good engineer or engineering manager who was willing to travel was hard enough. And just to make things more interesting, shortly after I posted the job offer, I got an internal letter from Human Resources informing me that my total operation was below guidelines on Hispanic staff and that I should delay interviewing candidates for the Manager of the Moscow Design Center position until at least two Hispanic applicants were in the applicant pool.

The Director of Human Resources' office was about fifty feet from mine and I was in his doorway in less than ten seconds. The good news is that shortly after this little bureaucratic fracas, I was able to trick a good friend of mine, a real engineering manager, into taking over responsibility for this endeavor. He was somehow able to find the required Design Center manager. I guess his operation had enough Hispanics on staff. The better news is that he is still my friend.

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (0)
Posted by Duane on Sunday, July 20, 2008 at 9:06 AM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Odds and Ends | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

July 19, 2008

Linguistic Dating Colloquium

An abnormally interesting online colloquium on linguistic dating of Biblical Hebrew is underway on the Biblical Studies Discussion list. If you haven't signed up for the list, you'll need to. The colloquium starts with the work of Ian Young, Robert Rezetko and Martin Ehrensvärd and their forthcoming Linguistic Dating of Biblical Texts. Volume 1: An Introduction to Approaches and Problems. Volume 2: A Survey of Scholarship, a New Synthesis and a Comprehensive Bibliography. BibleWorld. London: Equinox Publishing, 2008. Rezetko has posted a very useful summary of part of their two volumes. You can access the whole summary via the Biblical-Studies Discussion list. The following caught my eye,

The 500 words of the Arad inscriptions exhibit an accumulation of nine LBH features—more than the accumulation that led Hurvitz to consign the Prose Tale of Job to the postexilic period! In fact, as you can see from the table, the preexilic Arad inscriptions from c. 600 BCE have a higher accumulation of LBH features than Ben Sira and Pesher Habakkuk, sources from the last two centuries BCE. Chronology is clearly not the explanation for these accumulations of LBH features, but rather that some authors have a stylistic preference for them. There is a strong case that many, if not most, LBH linguistic features already existed in preexilic Hebrew. If so, there is no reason why a preexilic author—like Qoheleth as Young has argued—could not produce a work with an accumulation of LBH features. Thus it is a reasonable suggestion that even in the preexilic period LBH could have been a co-existing style of Hebrew with EBH.

I am following the colloquium with abnormal interest. I also look forward to the appearance of the two-volume study. I may even have a few things to say on this subject at some point.

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (2)
Posted by Duane on Saturday, July 19, 2008 at 2:59 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Hebrew Bible | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

July 18, 2008

Friday Loanword: asuppu

I intended to start this series last Friday. I even wrote most of this post last week, but stuff happened. In response to a question from Joel L. Watts about the usefulness of Akkadian cognates in understanding Hebrew lexemes, John Hobbins wrote the following,

yes, sometimes Akkadian cognates, and usage data peculiar to them, tip the scales a bit in favor of a particular construal of a Hebrew word in context. For example, you can learn a lot about how brit 'covenant' and shevu'a 'oath' were understood by looking at how the Akkadian terms biri, birit, mamit birini 'our mutual oath, tamu, etc. were used.

On the other hand, sometimes the information is interesting but no longer relevant. For example, the word in Hebrew for both 'palace' and 'temple' is hekal, which goes back to Akkadian ekallu = Sumerian E.GAL which means, etymologically, 'big house.' Very cool, but few if any Israelites knew that, and it would not have influenced how they used the Hebrew vocable.

But in addition to the occasional heuristic value of Akkadian cognates in understanding Hebrew, there are also Akkadian loanwords in Biblical Hebrew. John's reference to Akkadian ekallu may well be an example but I actually think it is a "culture word" rather than an ordinary loanword that came into Hebrew and other Semitic languages. It's origin is Sumerian. John's equal sign indicates that he thinks something like this too. I'll tackle this word in some later post, perhaps as part of a different series on words that came into various Semitic languages from Sumerian. A few years ago, Paul Mankowski wrote an entire book on Akkadian loanwords in Biblical Hebrew. I think Monkowski may have misidentify a few words but he sure gets a lot more right than he gets wrong.

Anyway, today I start a Friday series on Akkadian loanwords in Hebrew. I hope it will be abnormally fun. Over the course of the series, I'll discuss what a loanword is and what it isn't. Over time, I will define the differences between cognates, loanwords and, somewhat related, culture words. But I thought I'd start with a few reasonably certain examples of loanwords.

Today, I just want to say one word to you, just one word: "plastics" asuppu. Asuppu is an Akkadian word meaning something like "outbuilding" or "annex" or, as I would prefer, "shed." An asuppu can be an insubstantial standalone building, something build alongside of, and sharing one wall with, a more substantial building or such a makeshift structure on a roof. It often occurs in the phrase "bīt (É) asuppi," which might indicate that asuppu represents a kind of construction or construction material. One text (Dar 163:2) indicates that slaves were kept in such a structure. To begin with, it indicated more the method or material of construction than an exact kind of building or a usage. Perhaps, but just perhaps, by Neo-Babylonian times the word stood for a type of "sub-standard" structure with specific functions. But I don't see this as certain.

Now let's look at בֵּית הָאֲסֻפִּים , "the annex houses," in I Chronicles 26:15, לָאֲסֻפִּים, "to the annexes," in I Chronicles 26:17 and בַּאֲסֻפֵּי הַשְּׁעָרִים, "in the annexes of the gates," in Nehemiah 12:25. While I use "annex" as a neutral term, the common translation is "storehouse" or the like. But this common translation likely rests on a false etymology. See below. The LXX renders the Hebrew word, εσεφιν, little more than a greekized transliteration of the Hebrew consonants. The LXX translators likely didn't know what it meant in Greek beyond the Hebrew usage in Hebrew. They may have even thought it a proper name. Here's what Mankowski, 37, says about this word,

The qatull- shape of the Hebrew noun is a prima facie indication that it is a loanword, and phonologically it replicates Akkadian asuppu. BDB (p. 63) attempted to assimilate the word to the root אסף, "gather," glossing it as "what is gathered, store, hence בֵּית אֲסֻפִּים store-house," but there is no evidence whatever for this derivation. Driver rightly compared Akk. bīt asuppi and proposed the Hebrew as a loan.

In a footnote, Mankowski reminds us that qatull- forms are "not uncommon" in Hebrew adjectives, but "it is not an indigenous pattern for substantives."

How much of the method or material of construction meaning of the Akkadian word one should read into the Hebrew is not clear. CAD, A/2, 349, indicates that the loan in Hebrew is evidence for a functional connotation rather than a "construction method" connotation but Mankowski does not seem so certain. I think that we would not miss the mark too far if we translated the Hebrew loan from the Akkadian as "shed" or if that's too crude for your taste, "outbuilding" without indicating the function of such a shed or outbuilding.

Reference:

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (0)
Posted by Duane on Friday, July 18, 2008 at 3:31 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Hebrew Bible | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

July 17, 2008

Some Questions About Unpublishing

Deven Desai discusses an abnormally interesting case of the removal of a post from Boing Boing. You can read about this case at Concurring Opinion. In the course of his discussion, Deven makes this observation, "For the law folks, the event raises questions about norms and perhaps who owns the posts." I want to reflect on these questions myself but from a somewhat different perspective. I offer no answers, abnormal or otherwise.

As bloggers we have the ability to at least partially un-ring a bell once rang. We can delete a post or a whole blog. I've done it twice. Once I deleted a post about ten minutes after I put up some pure nonsense, not that other posts I've kept up weren't. Another time, I deleted a post after several months when it became apparent that that post put someone at risk. The second case may seem rather melodramatic but there was a real danger. I hope someday I can explain it. It will make a truly abnormal post, one worth keeping. If you should comment here or elsewhere, I ask that you not speculate about this second case.

I said we can "partially un-ring a bell" because once Google and the other caching databases get hold of a post, there is very little one can do about it.

At one level, I feel that my posts belong to me and I can do with them as I like. But does that change when someone else links to them? Does that change when someone cites a post in a paper or includes it in a syllabus? I think these events do change things. Such posts are no longer mine alone. And how about the case of hosting a web carnival? Does such a post belong only to the host or does it belong to the blogging community it represents?

Now, I don't think blogs are forever or even should be. They have an ephemeral quality that is undeniable. They come and go like the wind. That said, what are our responsibilities to preserve posts that are to some extent no longer ours? What is our responsibility to maintain our content even after we retire from this noble pastime or die? Any thoughts?

PS I think one of the science bloggers wrote a great post on this sometime ago but I can't find it. Perhaps he or she took it down!

PSS I'm not thinking about retiring from blogging or dying just yet.

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (2)
Posted by Duane on Thursday, July 17, 2008 at 8:47 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Odds and Ends | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

July 16, 2008

There's Nothing Like a Schlüsselszene

The latest Journal of Near Eastern Studies is out. In addition to the usual numerous review articles, it contains two papers. For me, the most interesting is Jan Keetman, "Der Kampf im Haustor. Eine der Schlüsselszenen zum Verständnis des Gilgameš-Epos." I always enjoy a Schlüsselszene particularly when it involves fighting over who has first dibs on new brides. I'm guessing it is this scene from Gilgamesh Tablet II that Keetman discusses.

Since I don't have free direct access to here at home, I'd better stop guessing and get myself to the library.

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (0)
Posted by Duane on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 at 7:31 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Akkadian | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

Is There a Divine Curse on Our House?

According to J. Grank Swank Jr., there just might be. Here is a section of the top shelf of one bookcase in our living room.

Back in January, Swank wrote,

For instance, I believe there presently is a divine curse on the White House. Why? Because President George W. Bush placed the Koran in that house's library. The occasion was a much-celebrated Ramadan dinner where both Muslim males and females were guests.

With much fanfare Mr. Bush announced his placing the Koran in the White House library.

Taking biblical data into consideration, one can conclude that God was very angry at that move. I believe He has brought a curse the White House because of placing the Koran alongside the Bible in the White House library. God cannot tolerate those who place other gods alongside Him.

By the way, we have two other Korans in the house but this is the only one actually alongside the Bible. For those who might not be sure, there are several Bibles visible is to the left of the Koran. I don't care what anyone tells you to the contrary, Wright and Holliday are not Bibles and neither is Gesenius. On the other hand, The Canon of Greek Authors and Works might be. I think it likely that Swank may have been using "alongside" to mean in the same library but one can never be too careful when it comes to curses.

Now, I have suspected for sometime that the White House was cursed, not by having a Koran in its library alongside the Bible but by the person who put it there. I am somewhat surprised that the White House library didn't already have a Koran. If it didn't, then President Bush did something right while in office.

Also, we did not steal the volumes with catalog numbers on their spines. A long time ago, you know, back in the sixties and early seventies, we used a standard card catalog system to keep track of our books. Shirley meticulously pinned each book's catalog number in its spine and glued a little pocket with a proper identifying card inside its front cover. Now we use a specialized electronic database that does not require catalog numbers or 3 by 5 cards to keep track of our books and we use the old author, title and subject cards to take notes on.

Via Dispatches from the Culture Wars

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (4)
Posted by Duane on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 at 1:52 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Religion | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

July 14, 2008

Mark Twain Loafed Here

Mark Twain stayed at the Mediterranean Hotel in Jerusalem, arriving on the afternoon of September 23, 1876 and checking out for the last time on September 29. Concerning his first afternoon in Jerusalem, Twain noted, "Loafed all afternoon in the Mediterranean Hotel." But until recently, no one knew exactly where in Jerusalem this, at the time quite famous, hotel was. Now the mystery is solved. Researchers and archaeologists have identified the site of the old Mediterranean Hotel as that of the Wittenberg House in the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem's Old City. The Ateret Cohanim Yeshiva currently uses the Wittenberg House for classrooms. Haaretz has the story of the discovery. However, contrary to the Haaretz story, Twain spent a total of four nights at the Mediterranean, not just two. His party was there for two nights before leaving for Bethlehem and Jericho and another two nights after their return.

Via PaleoJudaica

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (0)
Posted by Duane on Monday, July 14, 2008 at 10:05 AM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Mark Twain | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |

July 13, 2008

You Know, Ummm, Ahhh

Finally, a coherent explanation of the differences between President Bush and John McCain's economic policies: Here is John Amato's rough transcription, with a little editing by me, of Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina explaining that difference to Wolf Blitzer,

Blitzer: Are there any significant economic differences between what the Bush administration has put forward over these many years as opposed to now what John McCain’s supports?

Sanford: Yea, I mean for instance take, you know, ummm, ahhh, take for instance the issue of, ahhhh. (knocks on table) I’m drawing a blank. I hate it when I do that, particularly on TV. Take for instance the contrast between NAFTA. I mean, I think the bigger issue is credibility in where one is coming from. I mean, to that position are they consistent where they come from? John McCain has consistently stood against earmarks throughout his tenure in the US Senate. Regrettably, the President has not been exactly busy with the veto pen.

Blitzer: Let me get back to, you raised the issue of NAFTA. He’s a huge supporter of free trade John McCain. The Bush administration supports free trade. I don’t see a big difference between the two.

Sanford: No, I was going to go to a point, I was going to go to a point which is what you’d want is consistency with regards to that position.

Blitzer: that's a major difference between Obama and the President, but as far as NAFTA is concerned McCain and Bush are on the same page.

Sanford: They are—for free trade. . . .

You see the major difference between McCain and Bush is that they are both for NAFTA and free trade and they differ on earmarks (maybe). You need to watch the video of this conversation at Crooks and Liars. The transcript doesn't quite tell the whole story: you know, ummm, ahhh!

A note to those who might care: I'm also for free trade. But I'm not for every provision of the current NAFTA agreement.

Please Leave an Abnormal Comment (0)
Posted by Duane on Sunday, July 13, 2008 at 6:59 PM (UTC-08:00)
| Read more on Current Events | Abnormal Archive Link | Checkout any Track Backs (0) |