Becoming Diaspora Jews

Becoming Diaspora Jews
Y7557-Toorn.indb i 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Th e Anch or Y al e Bi bl e R e f e r e n c e L i b r a ry
is a project of international and interfaith scope in which
Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish scholars from many countries
contribute individual volumes. The project is not sponsored by
any ecclesiastical organization and is not intended to reflect
any particular theological doctrine.
The series is committed to producing volumes in the tradition

established half a century ago by the founders of the Anchor
Bible, William Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman.
It aims to present the best contemporary scholarship in a way
that is accessible not only to scholars but also to the educated
nonspecialist. It is committed to work of sound philologi-
cal and historical scholarship, supplemented by insight from
modern methods, such as sociological and literary criticism.
John J. Collins
General Editor
Y7557-Toorn.indb ii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Th e Anch or Y al e Bi bl e R e f e r e n c e L i b r a ry
Becoming
Diaspora Jews
Behind the Story of Elephantine
karel van der toorn
new haven
and
AY B R L london
Y7557-Toorn.indb iii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

“Anchor Yale Bible” and the Anchor Yale logo are registered trademarks of
Yale University.
Copyright © 2019 by Yale University.

All rights reserved.
This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations,
in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S.
Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without written
permission from the publishers.
Yale University Press books may be purchased in quantity for educational,

business, or promotional use. For information, please e-mail sales.press@yale
.edu (U.S. office) or sales@yaleup.co.uk (U.K. office).
Set in Adobe Caslon type by Newgen North America.

Printed in the United States of America.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2019930737

ISBN 978-0-300-24351-2 (hardcover : alk. paper)
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence

of Paper).
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Y7557-Toorn.indb iv 5/7/19 11:50 AM

To my colleagues of the Biblical Colloquium
In gratitude and friendship
Y7557-Toorn.indb v 5/7/19 11:50 AM

This page intentionally left blank
Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Contents
Preface, ix
1. Elephantine Revisited, 1
2. The Aramean Heritage, 21
3. The Aramean Diaspora in Egypt, 42
4. The Origins of the Elephantine Jews, 61
5. A Military Colony and Its Religion, 89
6. Becoming Diaspora Jews, 115
Epilogue, 143
Appendix: Translation of Papyrus Amherst 63,

Adapted from AOAT 448, 149
List of Abbreviations, 189
Notes, 193
General Index, 255
Index of Ancient Sources, 261
Y7557-Toorn.indb vii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Preface
Reading ancient texts is not just a feat of philology. Over the years
it has become for me a way to get closer to people who are far away.
They are dead. They lived in a different world. But as the young girl
said in one of the greatest books of the twentieth century, once they
were alive like you and me. I am referring to the preface of Giorgio
Bassani’s The Garden of the Finzi-Continis. The girl was speaking of
the Etruscans whose graves she had just seen. The Jews who lived
on the Egyptian island of Elephantine in the fifth century BCE are
the near contemporaries of those Etruscans. They are, in a way, as
strange to us as those Etruscans—even though Jews are still among
us and Etruscans are not. But these Jews seem a rare variety. I first
read about them many years ago and wondered who they were.
What was their story? Would they still have something to tell me?
It seemed the kind of curiosity that comes and goes. Mentally you
make a note, then forget about it. But the Elephantine Jews refused
to be forgotten. They seemed to be waiting for me once I had the
chance to return to a scholarly life after years of university adminis-
tration. I wanted to discover their story.
I could never have anticipated spending three years or more de-
ciphering a papyrus in Demotic characters in order to get closer to
the Elephantine Jews. I knew Hebrew and cuneiform. Why should
I want to read Egyptian? But it turned out that the descendants of
the Elephantine Jews had used the Demotic script to write down
some of their ancestral traditions. By good fortune, the language was
Aramaic—perhaps not my favorite, but one I felt at ease with. Pa-
pyrus Amherst 63 proved to be an amazing source on the traditions
of the Aramaic-speaking diaspora communities in Persian Egypt.
To me, the Elephantine Jews had been a phenomenon without a
history. They were something that just happened, without a before
ix
Y7557-Toorn.indb ix 5/7/19 11:50 AM

x Preface
or after. The after is still unclear, but the Amherst papyrus has plenty to say
about the before. It is now possible to tell the story of the Elephantine Jews
instead of looking at snapshots.
Some of us like to think of history as a way to get into the skin of those
who preceded us. I am incapable of such feats. I do believe, however, that we
can get closer and identify patterns of behavior. The latter reflect, at some
distance, what is going on in the collective mind of a community. When I
was younger I thought we should all aim for authenticity. To be your real
self seemed like the highest achievement. As I grow older I find that the
real self is quite elusive. We are part of a pattern even as we cherish the il-
lusion of being unique. The Elephantine Jews conformed to a pattern too.
The pattern I pay attention to in this book is that of an emerging Jewish
identity. As the Aramaic text in Demotic characters shows, the ancestors
of the Elephantine Jews came from Samaria, found shelter in an Aramean
society toward 700 BCE, and moved to Egypt some hundred years later.
These migrants to Egypt did not claim a Jewish identity when they came.
Under the double impact of the diaspora experience and the Persian poli-
tics of ethnic diversity, they became the Elephantine Jews. This merging of
particular historical identities into larger ethnic communities was a pattern
in the Persian Empire. Judaism as the world would come to know it was
still in the making, but the Jewish people had entered the scene.
This book is about the Elephantine Jews rather than the Elephantine
Judeans. Let me explain why. The Aramaic term yĕhûdāy makes no distinc-
tion between “Judean” and “Jew”; it allows of both translations. By dis-
tinguishing between “Judean” and “Jew,” then, we have, in a way, created
our own dilemma. The choice between the two alternatives corresponds, in
what is perhaps the dominant perception, to the difference between ethnic-
ity and religion. It is the difference between les Juifs and les juifs in French
orthography. The Juifs with a capital J are an ethnic community, like les
Français and les Américains. The juifs with a lowercase j, on the other hand,
are a religious group, like les catholiques and les protestants. From the per-
spective of the Jews or the Judeans of the fifth century BCE, this is a false
opposition. They did not really distinguish between ethnicity and religion,
as though the one could be isolated from the other. We, however, have
to make a choice. As a translation, neither “Judean” nor “Jew” is entirely
felicitous. The former emphasizes Judah as place of origin, whereas the lat-
ter seems primarily a reference to religion. After some deliberation, I have
chosen to translate yĕhûdāy consistently as “Jew” or “Jewish.” There are two
Y7557-Toorn.indb x 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Preface xi
reasons. One consideration is the fact that the original nucleus of the Ele-
phantine Jews had its roots in Samaria. To call them Judeans is misleading
inasmuch as they are precisely not from Judah. My other reason has to do
with the meaning of the terms “Jew” and “Jewish.”
To say that there were no Jews before the invention of the Jewish reli-
gion feels to me like a strongly ideological statement. It misrecognizes the
fact that religion is part of culture and subject to constant change. Is the
Judaism of the second century BCE the real Judaism, or should the Juda-
ism of the Talmud be our norm? Or is Jewish religion an invention of the
Western Enlightenment? In my mind, Jewish identity is a mix of ethnicity
and culture. Religion is certainly part of that culture, but you don’t need
to be religious in order to be a Jew. “Jew” and “Jewish” refer to ethnicity
first and to a religious tradition secondarily. It is true that in former times,
religion was so much part of culture that the two were inextricable. Like
everybody around them, the Elephantine Jews had religion—though they
would not call it by that name. To many Jews of a later age, this religion
was perhaps hardly Jewish. The Elephantine Jews worshipped Yaho as their
ancestral god and several Aramean deities besides him. By our standards,
they were polytheists. But that does not make them any less Jewish. Un-
less one subscribes to an essentialist view of what it means to be a Jew, the
religion that Jews have been practicing through the ages has gone through
many transformations. Historically, Jewish identity exhibits great variety.
The Elephantine Jews represent their segment of the spectrum.
Though research feels at times like a lonely journey, it never is. We are al-
ways part of a community of scholars. There are those before us—our teach-
ers and their teachers—and there are those whose time is yet to come—our
students and their students. We are, as they say, standing on the shoulders
of giants. And one day others will take our discoveries and show that there
are ways to go beyond them. We are rooted in a tradition. Such knowledge
is at once a lesson in modesty and a source of pride. In the meantime we
enjoy the company of our contemporaries. This book has benefited from
the input of many colleagues. I could draw up a long list of names of those
who helped me over the past few years. Instead I dedicate this book to the
members of the Biblical Colloquium. They sum up what it means to me to
be part of a scholarly community where people speak without fear, ques-
tion without condescension, and share in a spirit of intellectual passion and
curiosity.
Y7557-Toorn.indb xi 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Becoming Diaspora Jews
Y7557-Toorn.indb xiii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

1 Elephantine Revisited
The discovery of the Elephantine Jews occurred more than a hundred years
ago. It caused a sensation. The Aramaic papyri and potsherds that came
to light during the first decade of the twentieth century documented the
existence of a group of Jewish men and women who had lived in the deep
south of Egypt all through the fifth century BCE. Never before had schol-
ars come across such early records of Jewish history. Aside from a few He-
brew inscriptions from Jerusalem and other places, there were no written
remains from the people of the Bible other than the Hebrew Bible itself.
The Elephantine papyri promised direct and unbiased access to a Jewish
community as it had been in real life. Such access was particularly welcome
after a century of critical scholarship that had turned the traditional ways
of reading the Bible upside down. According to the new views, the law of
Moses was a late invention, and the exclusive worship of Yahweh came at
the end of a long period of religious evolution. Elephantine provided the
opportunity to put such theories to the test. Scholars flocked to the new
finds. The sheer number of publications on the papyri between 1905 and
1915 conveys a sense of the excitement that characterized the early days of
Elephantine studies.
A full century has passed since Eduard Sachau’s edition of the Ele-
phantine papyri in 1911. Over the past hundred years, other discoveries
have made the headlines. The Dead Sea scrolls, found in 1947, have had the
greatest impact. Yet despite major new finds from the world of the Bible,
the interest in Elephantine is still very much alive. For a time it seemed that
the definitive monograph had been written when Bezalel Porten published
his Archives from Elephantine (1968). As it turned out, Porten’s study was the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 1 5/7/19 11:50 AM

start of a stream of follow-up publications. Elephantine studies continue to

flourish in the twenty-first century. Counting monographs only, the sec-
ondary literature is expanding by almost one book a year. An important
impetus for the ongoing investigations is the time frame of Elephantine.
All the papyri are from the Persian period. That is precisely the era that
biblical scholars have come to regard as crucial in the formation of ancient
Judaism. Although many authors have no new evidence to bring to the de-
bate, they feel that the data do merit a reassessment. Even if it is the same
deck of cards, a reshuffle may reveal a new pattern.
New Light on the Elephantine Jews

This is neither the first nor will it be the last book on the Elephan-
tine Jews. Yet it does stand apart from previous studies because it presents
important new evidence. This evidence consists of a twenty-three-column
papyrus scroll. It comes from Egypt, though it is neither from Elephantine
Island nor from the fifth century BCE. According to the earliest reports,
it was part of a stash of papyri found at Thebes. The script of this scroll is
Demotic and probably dates to the mid-fourth century BCE. Named after
the English lord who acquired the scroll in the 1890s, Papyrus Amherst 63
has long been a riddle. It was hard to crack its code because the script was
at odds with the language. While the characters are Egyptian, the language
of the compositions is Aramaic. Biblical scholars have been aware of the
existence of this mysterious papyrus since the 1980s, when two teams of
scholars identified a song to Yaho in the compilation that seemed to be
almost a copy of Psalm 20. Other parts of the papyrus prove to have refer-
ences to the gods Nabu, Nanay, Bethel, and Anat. As experts already sus-
pected in the 1980s, this compilation consists of literary traditions from the
Aramaic-speaking diaspora communities in Persian Egypt. In Elephantine
and Aswan, there had been temples for Yaho, Bethel, and Nabu—the very
gods who are addressed in the ritual songs of the Amherst papyrus.
Although scholars solved the riddle of the Amherst papyrus in the
1980s, no one so far has really explored the text for the light it might throw
upon the origins and history of the Elephantine Jews. The reason is obvi-
ous. In the absence of a full-fledged edition of the text, it has been practi-
cally impossible for noninitiates to use it. All they had were treatments of
selected parts, and the interpretations these offered often seemed uncertain.
In 1997, Richard Steiner, a pioneer of the papyrus, published a translation of
the complete text in a widely used anthology of writings from the ancient
Y7557-Toorn.indb 2 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Elephantine Revisited 3
Near East. It took twenty more years before Steiner made his translitera-
tion and translation available in an online edition. A year later, I published
an edition of the text with translation, commentary, and photographs. (My
translation, with slight modifications, appears as the Appendix to the pres-
ent volume.) Another scholar who has long been working on the papyrus,
Tawny L. Holm, will soon publish her transliteration and translation in the
SBL series Writings of the Ancient World. It is only recently, then, that
this long-mysterious papyrus has become available in a manner that allows
others to critically check the suggested readings. A comparison of the three
translations shows differences of interpretation that are sometimes consid-
erable. Since the text is notoriously difficult, this was to be expected. No
doubt further scrutiny by the wider scholarly community will eventually
resolve many of the problems and uncertainties that characterize Papyrus
Amherst 63.
Meanwhile, the Amherst papyrus already warrants some conclusions
that impact our perception of the Elephantine community and its Aramean
neighbors in ancient Aswan (Syene). As will be demonstrated more fully
in Chapter 4, the ancestors of the Elephantine Jews were Samarians rather
than Judeans. Moreover, their connection to the Aramean community pre-
dates their migration to Egypt. During most of the seventh century BCE,
these Samarians had lived at close quarters with two groups of Arameans,
one from Babylonia and the other from Hamath. The three communities—
Samarian, Babylonian, and Syrian—had found shelter in a caravan city at
an oasis in the desert. Its identification with Palmyra is plausible. But what-
ever the precise place where they met, there can be no doubt about the early
connection between the three communities. It explains several features of
the Elephantine Jews that scholars have found puzzling, such as the use of
Aramaic as their colloquial language and the presence of various Aramean
gods in their religion. Clearly, the evidence from the Amherst papyrus ne-
cessitates a thorough revision of the story of Elephantine as it has been told
until now. This book offers such a revision. In order to put the new insights
into a proper historical perspective, we have to begin with a review of the
scholarship on the Elephantine Jews.
The Discovery of Elephantine

The story of the discovery of the Elephantine Jews is the story of the El-
ephantine papyri. Someone closely involved in the first encounter with the
papyri was Mary Cecil, daughter of Lord Amherst and later 2nd Baroness
Y7557-Toorn.indb 3 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Amherst of Hackney. Her father was a longtime collector of things of

beauty and had spent much of his considerable fortune on Egyptian anti-
quities. By the beginning of the twentieth century, Lord Amherst himself
no longer had the stamina to travel to Egypt. But his daughter Mary was
still under fifty. She loved to spend the winter in the South. She had first
visited Egypt as a young woman and had fallen in love with the country.
Following in the footsteps of her father, she became a collector of Egyptian
antiquities in her own right. Unlike him, she looked for them not only
on the market but also in the Egyptian sands. Lady Cecil—“May” to her
close friends—was an amateur archaeologist. During the winter seasons of
1901–1902 and 1903–1904, she ran her own excavation in the vicinity of As-
wan. The season of 1903–1904 had not been very successful, until a group of
peasant farmers—fellahin, in the local dialect—paid her a visit and offered
to sell a batch of papyri. We have a report of this discovery in a letter from
Howard Carter to Lord Amherst, dated March 24, 1904:
An important find of Aramaic papyri was made this season by some na-
tives at Aswan; either in the sabach works at the south end of the Island of
Elephantine, or in the mounds of the ancient town of Aswan between the
Railway Station and the Cataract Hotel when a new road was made early
in the winter. These documents are apparently of a lady—betrothal deeds—
dating in the time of Artaxerxes I to Darius II. They are most important,
they being in the original Biblical language, and mentioned the citadel and
fortress of Aswan as well as the mixed courts (the Hebrew court being men-
tioned). As far as I am able to tell these are the only Aramaic papyri existing,
excepting perhaps a few fragments now at Berlin.
Today, Howard Carter is a name in Egyptology. He discovered the

tomb of Tutankhamun in 1922, a find that turned the hitherto tepid public
interest into a fit of Egyptomania. When he paid Lady Cecil a visit in 1904,
however, those days were yet to come. Carter was a friend and protégé of
the Amherst family. Their collection of Egyptian antiquities at Didlington
Hall had been his first encounter with Egypt. The “Assuan papyri,” as they
were known at first, confronted Carter with a side of Egypt with which
he was unfamiliar. There was something strange about them. They were,
for the most part, in excellent condition. The script presented no particular
difficulty. But the language of the texts and the names of the people were
at odds. Those names were Hebrew; they seemed to come right out of the
Bible—Hosea, Isaiah, Uriyah. But the language was Aramaic. In his letter
Y7557-Toorn.indb 4 5/7/19 11:50 AM

to Lord Amherst, Carter called it “the original Biblical language,” but in

this respect he was wrong. The Bible is largely written in Hebrew. There are
some parts in Aramaic, but those are either very late (Daniel 2–7, from the
second century BCE) or official documents from Persian times, fictitious or
real, inserted into the biblical narrative (Ezra 4:8–6:18, 7:12–26). The names
in the papyri showed that these people were Jewish. But it seemed odd that
they should be using Aramaic as their language.
The papyri Lady Cecil bought in 1904 were in fact not the first pa-
pyri from Elephantine. In 1899, the Strasburg expedition to Egypt had
acquired an Aramaic papyrus from a dealer at Luxor (Thebes). Two years
later, Archibald Henry Sayce, professor of Assyriology at Oxford, bought a
papyrus from an Aswan dealer. Both papyri were from Elephantine. They
were published in 1903. But the Assuan papyri of 1904—the ones offered
for sale to Lady Cecil—made the real impact. There were more than ten
of them, and they clearly established the existence of a Jewish colony at
Elephantine. Suddenly the island became a focus of interest. At the time
that Lady Cecil made a deal with the sellers of the papyri, a German clas-
sicist by the name of Otto Rubensohn was leading a mission of the Ger-
man Papyrus Cartel. When Rubensohn got word of a batch of Aramaic
papyri offered for sale at Aswan, he hurried to get there. As it turned out,
the papyri had already changed hands. Rubensohn went to the sellers and
asked them where they had made their discovery. They took him to Ele-
phantine and indicated a place at the western edge of the ruin hill on the
south side of the island. Rubensohn decided the German syndicate should
try to acquire by excavation what it had failed to obtain through the mar-
ket. The Germans received an excavation permit in 1905 and started digging
in the early days of 1906.
When the distinguished French archaeologist and Orientalist Charles
Clermont-Ganneau heard about the German expedition, he was beside
himself with rage. Would the “Prussians” beat the French in the race for
what could well be the most spectacular archaeological discovery of the
twentieth century? “What is our famous École in Cairo doing? . . . We
continue to lag behind across the board, both in Egypt and in Syria. All this
is extremely disturbing and discouraging. We are left to gather the crumbs
of other people’s banquet.” Clermont-Ganneau had worked as a diplomat
in Jerusalem and Constantinople. Since 1890 he had taught at the famous
Collège de France in Paris. The discoveries at Aswan had piqued his inter-
est. He pleaded with the French authorities, both academic and political,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 5 5/7/19 11:50 AM

and obtained permission to lead a French expedition to Elephantine start-

ing in the winter of 1906–1907, almost one year after the Germans had
begun theirs. The Egyptian Service of Antiquities decided that the French
should dig on the east side of the ruin mound, while the Germans would
work on the west side. There was little contact between the two teams. They
were competitors rather than collaborators, the one always worrying about
the tricks of the other, each party afraid the enemy would discover an item
of interest. The Germans conducted three campaigns, leaving Elephantine
Island in 1908. The French completed four campaigns, concluding the last
one in 1911. A few years later, the armies of the two nations would pursue
a different campaign in different trenches.
During the first days of the second campaign, the German expedition
made a major discovery. Not far from the spot where the earlier papyri
had been found, at the place indicated by the fellahin, they discovered three
other papyri. Their content was astonishing—so astonishing, in fact, that
Rubensohn decided their publication could not be delayed. Without noti-
fying the Egyptian authorities, he shipped the papyri to Berlin and asked
Sachau to publish them. The Berlin professor of Semitic languages agreed.
He presented his translation on July 25, 1907, during a session of the Royal
Prussian Academy. Two papyri were drafts of a petition sent out by the
Jewish community to Bagohi, the governor of Judah. They describe in detail
the destruction of the “temple of Yaho” in Elephantine at the hands of lo-
cal Egyptian priests in the summer of 410 BCE. The third papyrus, much
shorter, was a copy of a memorandum from Bagohi and his Samarian col-
league in support of the temple’s reconstruction. The impact of the new
papyri was tremendous. Henceforth, the name of Elephantine would be
associated with historic violence against the Jews and their temple.
The news of Rubensohn’s discovery reached the French team only in
the late summer of 1907. In an angry letter written on September 2, the
field director of the French expedition reported rumors about the German
find and the fact that the papyri had been smuggled out of Egypt. As the
contents of the papyri would show, the French did have cause for worry
and envy. During the four years their expedition lasted, they would make
no find that could match the German papyri. The few Aramaic papyri that
they did discover still await publication. Most of what the French found
were potsherds. These potsherds were inscribed, and they do offer impor-
tant testimony of the presence of Jews at Elephantine in the first quarter of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 6 5/7/19 11:50 AM

the fifth century BCE. The French found hundreds of such ostraca. Some-
how the finds felt like a silver medal. The gold had gone to the Germans.
Two superb publications sum up the first harvest of Elephantine dis-
coveries. In 1911, Sachau published Aramäische Papyrus und Ostraka aus einer
jüdischen Militär-Kolonie zu Elephantine, with photographs of the texts that
are still a wonder to behold. In 1923, Arthur Cowley published Aramaic
Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. This was, for a long time, the definitive edi-
tion of the Elephantine papyri and continues to be a frequently cited refer-
ence. After Cowley, nothing new came to light at Elephantine for a long
time. In 1929, the French discovered the tablets from Ugarit (today’s Ras
Shamra, on the Syrian coast of the Mediterranean), written in alphabetic
cuneiform signs. The discovery marked the beginning of a new discipline.
Ugaritologists have been able to significantly increase our knowledge of
the Canaanite background of the Hebrew Bible. The stream of new texts
is still flowing. In 1947 the world learned about the discoveries at Qumran,
in the rocky hills west of the Dead Sea. The Dead Sea scrolls turned out
to be the most significant discovery by biblical archaeologists in the twen-
tieth century. The scrolls’ importance for our knowledge of the history of
the Bible and early Judaism still has not been fully explored. The signifi-
cance of the Elephantine papyri paled by comparison. New generations of
scholars focused their attention on Ugarit and Qumran. Elephantine was
yesterday’s news.
In the meantime, the story of the Elephantine papyri had not come to
a close. Hidden away in the vault of a museum or the attic of an old family
home, there were still other papyri waiting to be discovered, like the lost
work of some old master. In the 1890s, ten years before Lady Cecil made
her purchase, Charles Edwin Wilbour had acquired a batch of papyri that
perplexed him. Nobody knew of their existence. Wilbour was an Ameri-
can journalist, lawyer, entrepreneur, and amateur Egyptologist who spent
several winters in Egypt. In 1893 he bought fifteen papyri from peasant
farmers at Elephantine Island. After a few fruitless attempts at decipher-
ing them, he gave up trying. When he died in a Paris hotel in 1896, the
staff found the papyri tucked away among his papers and other belongings.
They were sent to his family in the United States. Nobody paid them any
attention until Wilbour’s daughter bequeathed her father’s collection to the
Brooklyn Museum in 1947. Their importance was quickly established, and
publication followed in 1953.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 7 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The longest delay to date between discovery and publication concerns

the Padua papyri. An Italian explorer from Padua—one Giovanni Battista
Belzoni—had come into possession of two Aramaic letters from Elephan-
tine sometime between 1815 and 1819. They ended up in the collections
of the civic museum of Belzoni’s native city and were published only in
1960. These Padua letters are of singular importance because they docu-
ment the contacts between Jews from the Nile delta and the community at
Elephantine.
The archaeologists had left Elephantine Island shortly before World
War I. But elsewhere in Egypt, excavations were still going on. Aramaic
papyri were not the aim of these excavations, but once in a while they did
turn up. Two such discoveries proved to be relevant for our knowledge of
Elephantine. In Hermopolis, situated over six hundred kilometers down-
stream from Aswan, the 1945 excavations found a stash of eight papyri in
an earthen jar. The texts were in Aramaic. Publication followed in 1966.
The papyri proved to be letters by Syrian soldiers on a mission in Memphis,
seat of the Persian satrap, that were sent to their family members in Syene
(Aswan) and Thebes. (Previously, information about Syrian soldiers from
Syene had been based exclusively on evidence from Elephantine.) The let-
ters never reached their destination. For reasons unknown, the courier who
carried them left them halfway. Thankfully the letters never reached Syene,
since excavations are not really feasible in modern Aswan. The texts would
have disappeared, along with a lot of other information that we will prob-
ably never retrieve.
The second discovery did not consist of papyri but of sheets of leather.
They contain official letters written by—or in the name of—Arsames, the
Persian satrap of Egypt, away at the time for business and consultations
in Babylon or Susa. They cover the years 410 to 407 BCE, when the Jew-
ish community had just lost its temple. During his absence from Egypt,
Arsames was in frequent correspondence with the steward of his Egyptian
estate. Thirteen of these letters, plus fragments of five or six others, were
offered for sale on the Cairo antiquities market in the early 1930s. First
acquired by a German archaeologist in 1932, they were subsequently sold
to the Bodleian Library at Oxford in 1943–1944. Ten years later they were
published. The significance of these letters lies in their Persian perspec-
tive. Even if most of the matters that Arsames touches upon relate to his
own household, his letters provide an insight into the trappings of the Per-
sian satrapy in Egypt.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 8 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Written between 498 and 399, the Elephantine papyri span the en-
tire fifth century BCE. It took most of the twentieth century for scholars
to discover, assemble, and publish them. In 1999, Bezalel Porten and Ada
Yardeni published the fourth and final volume of their Textbook of Aramaic
Documents from Ancient Egypt. This masterful edition crowns a century of
Elephantine scholarship. The 2006 publication of the French collections of
Elephantine ostraca by Hélène Lozachmeur closes the era of Elephantine
discoveries. It is true that many scraps of papyrus are still unpublished.
An international team of specialists based in Berlin aims to make all Ele-
phantine texts available in an online database in the context of a research
project on four thousand years of cultural history. Both at the island and
in Aswan, German and Swiss archaeologists are still making new finds.
But the time of the big discoveries is past. Additional evidence might well
turn up in the future, but it is unlikely to change the picture dramatically.
Only the long-mysterious Papyrus Amherst 63, now published, brings a
new perspective to the history of the Elephantine Jews.
From a Chapter of the Bible to a Jewish Story

From the moment of their discovery, the Elephantine Jews have stirred
an inordinate amount of interest. The number of books about them is baf-
fling. It seems out of proportion with the historical role of this military
colony in a distant corner of the Persian Empire. Yet many authors felt they
were looking at an extraordinary piece of history. To them, the significance
of the Elephantine community was unrelated to its size (about five hundred
persons by a conservative count) or military importance (an unspectacular
frontier garrison). Their primary value resided in the fact that these were
Jews, and Jews, these authors believed, were not like others. They were the
sons and daughters of Israel, the people of the Bible. In the early twentieth
century, the Elephantine papyri were the oldest records available written by
people from the Bible. Some parts of the Bible itself were believed to be
older, but the earliest manuscripts were from centuries later. Even today,
after the discoveries of the Dead Sea scrolls, the oldest biblical manuscripts
are some three hundred years younger than the Elephantine papyri. This was
handwritten evidence from the fifth century BCE itself. As one author wrote
in 1912, “A Jewish community from pre-Christian times, not too far removed
from the days of the Babylonian Exile, consisting of contemporaries of Ezra
and Nehemiah, has woken up from its Sleeping Beauty slumber.”
Y7557-Toorn.indb 9 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Elephantine was special because it had been home to a Jewish com-

munity. Yet in the early twentieth century, many people in the West had
mixed feelings about Jews. After all, the two nations that financed archaeo-
logical expeditions to Elephantine Island were Germany and France—the
Germans started digging in early 1906, and the French later that year. In
France, the Dreyfus affair had just come to a close. It entered the history
books as one of the most blatant examples of anti-Semitism in modern
times. What anti-Semitism could lead to would be demonstrated in Ger-
many a few decades later. These were not nations particularly fond of their
Jewish minorities. But somehow the Jews of Elephantine were an entirely
different matter. They were Jews from the biblical era, before the religion of
Israel had turned into Judaism. Christians could claim these Jews as their
spiritual forebears. They had been the channel through which the Bible
came into being. They had taught the world the truths of monotheism and
human rights (“Love thy neighbor as thyself ”). Those values were the cor-
nerstones of Western civilization. The earliest response to the Elephantine
discoveries shows that, to people of the Christian persuasion, these Jews
derived their significance primarily from their relation to the Bible. They
were, in Sachau’s words, “a new chapter of the Old Testament.”
Carter’s identification of the Aramaic of the Elephantine papyri as the
language of the Bible may have been erroneous, but it was quite in tune with
the mood of the time. In an article for an archaeological journal, Clermont-
Ganneau, the leader of the French mission to Elephantine, waxes lyrical
about the possible results of their excavation. Who knows, they might find
in the very near future a copy of the original Bible:
It is not from the Sinai—his cradle—nor from Jerusalem—his throne—it
is from a place quite distant from there, at the border between Egypt and
Nubia, just a few minutes from the tropic, on the edge of a small island in
the first cataract of the Nile, at a spot where you wouldn’t expect to encoun-
ter this God in exile, that the old Jehovah . . . rises and speaks, to tell us new
things by the mouth of his worshippers transplanted with Him—things
that might well change the face of orthodox exegesis. . . . From now on we
have the certainty that the Temple of Jehovah did stand . . . on the very is-
land of Elephantine, most probably in the Jewish quarter whose location has
been revealed by our characteristic ostraca. Just a few more spades, and we
shall uncover its venerable remains, as well as—who knows?—a copy of the
Sacred Book, sleeping in some secret geniza, used for the cultic ceremonies,
a Bible from five centuries before Jesus Christ.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 10 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Clermont-Ganneau’s enthusiasm—“we are burning,” as he writes in the

same article—had been kindled not so much by the discovery of a group
of Jews as such but by their connection to the Bible. His hope was to find
“a copy of the Sacred Book, sleeping in some secret geniza.” The sources of
the Nile were elsewhere. But at Elephantine Island, explorers believed that
they had come close to the sources of the religion that the Western world
held sacred.
A curious event that happened in 1883 is indicative of the fascination
at that time with anything historically related to the Bible. An antiquities
dealer from Jerusalem had traveled to London and contacted the British
Museum. The man, Moses Wilhelm Shapira, offered to sell the remains of
a parchment scroll he had allegedly bought from a group of bedouin near
the Dead Sea. It was a spectacular text. Displaying distinct similarities to
the book of Deuteronomy, it contained a version of the Ten Command-
ments that differed from the familiar Decalogue because it contained an
additional eleventh commandment: “Thou shalt not hate thy brother in
thy heart; I am the Lord thy God.” The museum was granted permission
to display two strips of the scroll. The exhibition made headlines and drew
crowds of visitors. The Shapira Bible was the talk of the town. Clermont-
Ganneau was suspicious. He knew Shapira and, on an earlier occasion, had
exposed the man as a fraud for selling forged antiquities. Personal exami-
nation of the two strips in London confirmed Clermont-Ganneau’s worst
fears. Shapira had done it again. Other experts soon concurred with the
verdict of the Frenchman. This Deuteronomy scroll was a forgery. Shapira’s
Bible was a fake, and his reputation as a serious antiquities dealer was de-
stroyed. Shapira left London through the backdoor. A few months later, he
shot himself through the head in a Rotterdam hotel.
The nineteenth century has been described as the period of the secu-
larization of the European mind. Philosophers had been attacking the
truths of religion even before the French Revolution. The Industrial Revo-
lution had brought dramatic changes to traditional lifestyles. Charles Dar-
win published his study On the Origin of Species in 1859. The world was no
longer the place it used to be. In this general atmosphere of uncertainty, the
public was looking to scholars to bring more comforting news. Discover-
ies from the Middle East might fulfill their hopes. In 1875 George Smith
had published The Chaldean Account of Genesis, according to its subtitle,
“containing the description of the creation, the fall of man, the deluge,
the tower of Babel, the times of the Patriarchs, and Nimrod.” On the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 11 5/7/19 11:50 AM

basis of cuneiform tablets from Babylonia, Smith seemed to offer evidence

that proved the truth of the Bible. Britain’s leading newspaper, the Daily
Telegraph, sent out an expedition to Iraq to find more. The Shapira affair
occurred a few years later.
In the first paragraphs of “Jehovah at Elephantine,” Clermont-Ganneau
recalls the public’s disillusionment when Shapira’s Bible proved to be coun-
terfeit. This time, though, he is confident they are very close to finding the real
thing, that is, “a Hebrew Bible less disappointing than the Shapira Bible, yet
as authentically ancient as the latter claimed to be.” More than a century
has passed since Clermont-Ganneau wrote these lines. No Bible has been
found at Elephantine. And while absence of evidence is not evidence of ab-
sence, it would seem that Julius Wellhausen was right when he qualified the
Elephantine Jews as a “vestige of Hebraism from before the Torah.” Edu-
ard Meyer concurred: the religion of the Elephantine Jews was completely
ignorant of the book of Deuteronomy, with its emphasis on “One God,
One Temple.” To the mind of critical Bible scholars of the early twentieth
century, the Elephantine Jews were a relic from pre-Deuteronomic times.
This survival hypothesis suited the purpose of enlightened academic circles.
Wellhausen greeted the evidence from Elephantine as a “welcome corrobo-
ration of what had already been established as the result of the critical in-
vestigation of Israelite religious history.” In like manner, August von Gall
celebrated the Elephantine Jews as “the most brilliant corroboration of the
results of the modern scholarship of the Old Testament.”
The initial response to the discovery of Elephantine showed a com-
parative lack of interest in the actual Jews in the texts. They seemed merely
actors in a play whose main function was to supply biblical scholars with
evidence of the religious developments of the Israelites. To the first genera-
tion of Elephantine scholars, Elephantine was about the Bible. Or more
precisely, it was about the Old Testament, since the term “Hebrew Bible”
had yet to come into fashion. The Western bias is hard to ignore. After all,
the term “Old Testament” makes sense only if there is a New Testament.
Israelite religion was regarded as an extended prologue to Christianity, in
which humankind’s religious aspirations had found their highest fulfill-
ment. The papyri from Elephantine seemed to offer scientific support for
the theory of religious evolution. They reflected a stage in a developmental
history that would lead from polytheism to monotheism and ultimately to
the triumph of Christianity.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 12 5/7/19 11:50 AM

In the second wave of Elephantine studies, beginning in the 1960s,

the focus shifted to the diaspora experience of the Elephantine Jews. Their
story began to be told from a Jewish perspective. The new approach re-
ceived an important impetus from the new political realities in the Middle
East. In 1948, the State of Israel had come into being. After the Holocaust,
there was no moral excuse to refuse the demand for a Jewish homeland.
The new state based its legitimacy on the Bible: “The Land of Israel was the
birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political
identity was shaped. Here they first attained to statehood, created values of
national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book
of Books.” These words are from the Declaration of the Establishment of
the State of Israel, dated May 14, 1948. Save for the people who had lived
there before its foundation, the State of Israel had only Jewish citizens.
Ethnicity and religion were the parameters. In the words of the Law of
Return, “The rights of a Jew . . . are given to the child or grandchild of a Jew,
the spouse of a Jew and spouse of a child and grandchild of a Jew. Except
a person who was born Jewish and out of his own free will changed reli-
gion.” By this definition, Jewish identity is matter of roots and religion.
Jewish citizenship is the prerogative of anyone born of Jewish parents but
may be forfeited by conversion to a non-Jewish religion. Ethnic Jews who
converted to Christianity have lost their title to Jewish citizenship. They are
Jews no more.
The institutions of higher education in the State of Israel had depart-
ments for the history of the Jewish people (“the people of Israel”) that were
independent of the general history departments. Their official mission was
to study the history of the Jews as dispassionately as possible, with all the
rigor that scholarly research demanded. But the fact that they had been set
up as separate departments meant their study of the past was of national
importance. They were to highlight the antiquity of the Jewish nation. The
evidence from Elephantine served the purpose handsomely. Here, in the
diaspora, there had been Jews who were faithful to their ancestral god and
who ended up being victims of anti-Jewish violence. No matter that they
spoke Aramaic and had also worshipped Aramean deities, their core iden-
tity was Jewish. In the post-Holocaust climate, their story became a typical
Jewish story instead of a tale involving Jews but ultimately about the Bible.
The champion of the new approach is Bezalel Porten. It is not difficult
to disagree with him when it comes to the interpretation of the evidence,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 13 5/7/19 11:50 AM

but the world owes him a huge debt of gratitude for his epoch-making
monograph on the Elephantine Jews, as well as a superb edition of nearly
all the Aramaic texts from ancient Egypt. To those who make his acquain-
tance in a professional capacity, Porten presents himself as “Mister Ele-
phantine.” More than any other scholar, he deserves the title. His version
of the story of the Elephantine Jews has been hugely successful. The thrust
of his argument is that the Elephantine Jews were truly Jewish by ethnic-
ity and religion. The argument for Jewish ethnicity is most explicit in his
discussion of the designation “Aramean” given to many of the Elephantine
Jews. Porten believes that the ancestors of the community were from Judah
and settled in Egypt toward the end of the seventh century BCE. As a re-
sult, their identification as Arameans cannot apply to their ethnicity; there
were no real Arameans at Elephantine. The Jews were so designated be-
cause of their speech; they belonged to the larger Aramaic-speaking group.
But language is an acquired trait, whereas ethnicity is in the blood. By ius
sanguinis, the Elephantine community was Jewish.
According to the definition of a Jew applied by the State of Israel, Jew-
ish ethnicity and Jewish religion are indissolubly linked. If a Jew converts
to another religion, he stops being a real Jew. Porten agrees. It therefore
matters to demonstrate that the mixed marriages at Elephantine, as well
as the references to the respect paid to other gods, are not grounds for
casting doubt upon the Jewish identity of the community. Non-Jews who
married into the community must have gone through a ceremony in which
the newcomer indicated abandonment of polytheistic practices and adop-
tion of Judaism. The respect paid to other gods was a formality. Greetings
by Bel, Nabu, Shamash, and Nergal were the equivalent of a Christmas
card—a polite nod of recognition that in no way implied an actual belief in
these deities. And the attribution to Aramean deities of a substantial sum
of the returns of the Yaho temple collection in 400 BCE “may have been
no more than a goodwill gesture on the part of the Jews to their Aramean
neighbors.” In religion, the Elephantine Jews were actually perfectly Jew-
ish: “The religious influence of the Arameans was nominal and that of the
Egyptians negligible.” They were devoted to their ancestral deity Yaho, and
Shabbat and Pesach were regular features of their religious life.
The field of Elephantine studies today, half a century after Porten’s Ar-
chives from Elephantine, offers a more diffuse picture. Many scholars criti-
cize what to them seems an apologetic way of handling the evidence. For
the public at large, Porten’s version of the story of the Elephantine Jews still
Y7557-Toorn.indb 14 5/7/19 11:50 AM

stands. Critics have found it easier to point out the deficiencies of his ap-
proach than to present a compelling alternative—but not for lack of effort.
In fact, recent years have witnessed a renewed interest in Elephantine. It
has translated into a substantial number of publications with a particular
focus on the religion of the Elephantine Jews. There is a growing consen-
sus among scholars that the Persian period was crucial to the development
of Judaism. Against this background, the evidence from Elephantine takes
on special significance, as it constitutes the most extensive documentation
of a purportedly Jewish community in the diaspora of the time. But this
case leaves us with more questions than certainties: Just how representa-
tive were the Elephantine Jews of the Jewish community at large? Where
did they come from, and what was their history? Who actually were the
Elephantine Jews?
Jews or Judeans?
Following a longstanding practice in Elephantine studies, this chapter
has referred to the “Elephantine Jews” as though the appellation were un-
problematic. It is not. Aside from the fact that the Jews of the island referred
to themselves more often as Arameans than as Jews, the use of the term
“Jew” instead of “Judean” has become quite controversial. In recent scholar-
ship, the debate has focused on the use of the Greek term Ioudaios (plural
Ioudaioi) rather than the Aramaic yĕhûdāy (plural yĕhûdāyin, yĕhûdāyēʾ).
The reason for the focus on the Hellenistic period is related to the fact that
the very term “Judaism” (Ioudaïsmos) makes its first appearance in writing in
the second century BCE. From this linguistic observation, many authors
draw the inference that Judaism as a phenomenon developed only in the
Hellenistic era. If we define a Jew as one who practices Judaism, then the
translation “Jew” for yĕhûdāy in the Elephantine records is an anachronism,
since technically there were no Jews in the fifth century BCE. A survey of
translations of the Aramaic term in more recent Elephantine studies shows
that a majority of scholars now prefer the term “Judean.”
But for the Ioudaioi of the Hellenistic period, the translation “Jews” is
also contested. Steve Mason is the strongest critic. He argues that “there
was no category of ‘Judaism’ in the Graeco-Roman world, no ‘religion’ too,
and . . . the Ioudaioi were understood until late antiquity as an ethnic group
comparable to other ethnic groups, with their distinctive laws, traditions,
customs, and God. They were indeed Judaeans.” Mason does not stand
Y7557-Toorn.indb 15 5/7/19 11:50 AM

alone in his views. If he is right, the translation of yĕhûdāy as “Jew” would

be an error. On closer inspection, Mason advances a package argument.
Once we disassemble it, we find it consists of three distinct propositions:
(1) a Jew is someone who practices the Jewish religion; (2) there was no reli-
gion in antiquity; and (3) in the absence of Jewish religion, we should speak
of Judeans instead of Jews. Each of these propositions is controversial. Let
us go over them one by one.
The notion that a Jew is someone who practices the Jewish religion
seems a rather ideological statement. It does not reflect the way that con-
temporary writers use the term. “All Jews are atheists. Except for the ones
who aren’t, of course.” It is a phrase Paul Auster puts into the mouth of one
of his Jewish characters in The Brooklyn Follies. One could make the argu-
ment that atheism is just another form of religion, but that would be play-
ing with words. The point is that many contemporary Jews do not practice
the Jewish religion, yet this does not stop them from being Jews. Jewish
identity is a mix of culture and descent. Religion is part of that culture, but
a Jew does not need to be religious. Also, by binding Jewish identity to the
Jewish faith, one automatically raises the question of which variety of Jew-
ish faith qualifies as the Jewish religion. Religion is not a thing but a generic
term embracing a variety of phenomena and practices. There is no objection
against its use in scholarly discourse as long as it is understood that Jewish
religion designates a wide range of beliefs and practices of Jews in both the
past and the present. In other words, there is no Jewish religion without
Jews. It does not exist as an abstract entity. “Jew” is a term of ethnicity first,
with religion in a subsidiary role.
The second reason why Mason refuses to translate Ioudaios as “Jew” is
his belief that there was no religion in antiquity. One might argue that there
is no need to attack this proposition, since we have defined “Jew” as a term
of ethnicity. However, religion is an ingredient of culture and a significant
marker of Jewish ethnicity. So let’s consider the “no religion” argument.
Mason’s second proposition is consonant with the thesis put forth by Brent
Nongbri in his book Before Religion. Nongbri argues that religion is a
modern and not an ancient concept and therefore that it should not be
applied to premodern phenomena. Neither Mason nor Nongbri would
deny that people of the ancient world believed in gods, offered prayer and
sacrifice, and performed all sorts of rituals that most of us would qualify as
religious. Their point is that the ancients did not think of these beliefs and
practices as religion, because to them religion was not a separate province
Y7557-Toorn.indb 16 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of human culture—as it has become in modern times. The ancients had no

word for religion because they did not perceive it as religion. So the “no
religion” argument must be redefined: there was no concept of religion.
Thus reformulated, the argument is valid. It actually reiterates a thesis put
forth by Wilfred Cantwell Smith in the early 1960s. But the fact that the
ancients did not have a concept of religion does not mean they did not
have religion. Their languages have all sorts of words for religious worship.
Their world was full of gods. They did have religion—not as a private mat-
ter but as a reality that was inseparable from everything else in their lives.
Now why should we speak of Judeans rather than Jews, as Mason’s
third proposition says? Even if they did not think of it as “religion,” the
Jews had a cultural tradition that included religious beliefs and practices.
Such was also the case before the term Ioudaïsmos came into currency. This
cultural tradition was not the exclusive possession of Judeans. Samarians
could rightfully claim the tradition too. The books of Tobit and Judith do
not employ the term Ioudaios. Therefore, they might seem irrelevant when
it comes to the issue of Jewish versus Judean. Yet both of them raise an is-
sue that affects our understanding of the boundaries of the ethnic commu-
nity those terms refer to. Their heroes are not from Judah. They are from
Samaria, that is, the territory formerly known as the kingdom of Israel.
Tobit comes from Galilee, while Judith has her home in the northern city
of Bethulia. Both are truly Jewish heroes, however. They honor the temple
in Jerusalem, observe the purity laws, and are full of zeal for the Lord and
his people. The stories celebrate these heroes for the example they set. To
the inhabitants of Jerusalem, Judith is “the great pride of our people” ( Jdt
15:9). The very same word, “people,” is used in Tobit. It refers to an ethnic
group that embraces both Samarians and Judeans. The book of Judith
designates this ethnic community with the archaizing expressions “the sons
of Israel” and “the house of Israel,” for the term “Judeans” would have too
territorial a ring to it. But the heroine of the story is Judith, meaning
“Jewess,” a programmatic name that militates against the narrow under-
standing of Ioudaios as “Judean.”
At Elephantine, many of the men and women that are referred to as
“Jews” had their genealogical roots in Samaria too. The Amherst papy-
rus still calls them “Samarians,” as opposed to a man “from Judah” who
acts as their interpreter. If the Samarians of Elephantine are qualified as
yĕhûdāyēʾ (“Judeans, Jews”), it is not on the basis of a genealogical error but
because culture had become the principal and most practical parameter of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 17 5/7/19 11:50 AM

ethnicity. The most appropriate translation of the term yĕhûdāyēʾ in this

context is “Jews,” precisely because it transcends the division between Ju-
dean and Samarian. As this book will argue in Chapter 6, the insertion of
the Samarians in a Jewish diaspora network in Egypt brought into relief an
aspect of their identity that they had in common with migrants with a Ju-
dean background. They were Jews. At some point in the fifth century BCE,
the Persian authorities decided to officially recognize the “Jews”—a term
they knew from the Judean diaspora in Babylonia—as a separate ethnic
group. This entitled the community to follow its own traditions, includ-
ing in the areas of religion and law. This privilege extended to the diaspora
Jews of Egypt too. Under the impact of this policy, men and women who
had formerly been Samarians officially became Jews. It was their ethnic-
ity rather than their religion. Yet in practice, religion was one of the main
markers of ethnicity.
A Diaspora Story
In 2013, the historian Simon Schama published the first volume of The
Story of the Jews, a companion to his documentary series of the same name.
The first chapter is devoted to Elephantine. It reads like an adaptation
of Porten’s 1968 monograph for a television series—which, in a way, it is.
Schama generously acknowledges his debt to Porten. But he does take the
story one step farther. As he writes in the foreword of his book, “What the
Jews have lived through, and somehow survived to tell the tale, has been
the most intense version known to human history of adversities endured by
other peoples as well. . . . It is what makes this story at once particular and
universal, the shared inheritance of Jews and non-Jews alike, an account of
our common humanity.”
The world did not wait for Schama in order to appropriate aspects of
the Jewish experience. One of the central concepts that Porten highlights
in his story of the Elephantine Jews has come to be applied to others as
well. This is the notion of diaspora. It has lent its name to departments of
diaspora studies, as well as to a journal entirely devoted to the phenom-
enon. The transfer of the term is based on the assumption that there is an
analogy between the Jewish diaspora and the experience of other peoples.
Mirroring the Jewish diaspora, there are Greek, Armenian, Indian, Chi-
nese, African, and many other diasporas. What was once a particular expe-
rience has turned out to be a universal phenomenon.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 18 5/7/19 11:50 AM

As a technical term, “diaspora” entered academic discourse in the 1970s

and became a widespread and influential concept in the 1980s. “Diaspora”
is not a neutral term. It is borrowed from the Septuagint, the Greek transla-
tion of the Hebrew Bible, and means “dispersion.” The term has an ominous
ring to it. People in the diaspora have been uprooted from their own land.
They are refugees rather than expatriates. The connotations of the term
come from the Jewish diaspora—the mother of all diasporas. It is no coin-
cidence that, as a concept, diaspora made its appearance in academic dis-
course at about the same time the term “holocaust” came into use. “Holo-
caust,” too, is a Greek word taken from the Septuagint, where it refers to a
burnt offering, the sacrifice of a living animal burnt whole to please God.
Once the world recognized the atrocities of the Nazi death camps—we are
talking of the early 1960s, when Primo Levi’s Se questo è un uomo (published
in English as If This Is a Man and Survival in Auschwitz) found a readership
of millions—it fixed its choice on the term “holocaust” as the most ap-
propriate word to capture the horror of what had happened. It may be the
worst of misnomers, for though the Jews were gassed and burned whole, it
was not for the glory of God. The systematic ethnic cleansing took place in
a universe from which God had withdrawn long ago. But the term “holo-
caust” was there to stay. And the notion of diaspora followed in its tracks.
In a way, the Jewish people own the copyright to the terms, even as those
terms have been employed to turn the experience of a particular people into
universal categories. The story of the Jews has turned into a universal tale;
their fate has embodied and captured the human condition.
Read against this background, Porten’s version of the story of the Ele-
phantine community falls perfectly in line with the master narrative. Here
was a community of Jews, forced out of their homeland, clinging to their
religion on foreign soil, loyal to the masters they served, but ultimately vic-
tims of an anti-Semitic pogrom at the hands of their Egyptian neighbors.
When their temple had been destroyed, they turned to their brothers in
Jerusalem for help. On the face of it, the story has all the ingredients of an
edifying diaspora tale. It is true they spoke Aramaic and not Hebrew—but
that was just for practical purposes. It is also true that they were not per-
fect monotheists but worshipped Aramean gods on the side—but that may
have been a mere formality. And they may have married Egyptian men and
women—but those were probably converts. Obedient to the master nar-
rative of the Jewish diaspora, the dominant view of the Elephantine Jews
Y7557-Toorn.indb 19 5/7/19 11:50 AM

pictures them as the first documented case of a Jewish community abroad.

They were an icon of the early Jewish diaspora.
Ethnicity and religion are central elements in the concept of diaspora.
To speak about the Jewish diaspora normally presupposes that the subjects
of the experience were Jews by ethnicity and religion at the time they were
forced to leave their homeland. This is indeed what Bezalel Porten implies
when he calls the Elephantine Jews a diaspora community. When other
authors invoke the notion of syncretism to explain the “mixed” religious
culture of the Elephantine Jews, they add the element of assimilation. The
diaspora community is, by definition, exposed to the danger of compromis-
ing its identity by assimilating to its new environment. Study of the data
extant in Papyrus Amherst 63 alongside those of the Elephantine Ara-
maic texts reveals a very different pattern. Instead of being Jews before they
came to Egypt, it was their experience at Elephantine that turned them
into Jews. In the place where they lived during the seventh century BCE
(presumably Palmyra), they had been Samarians. At Elephantine, in the
course of the fifth century BCE, the community changed into a nucleus
of the Jewish people abroad. They became part of the Jewish diaspora, as
Chapter 6 will demonstrate.
The story of the Elephantine Jews is a diaspora story but not in the
way it has traditionally been presented. It is a story about becoming Jews
abroad rather than remaining Jews abroad. Instead of preserving a Jewish
identity, the group of Samarians that had settled on Elephantine Island de-
veloped a Jewish identity. They became Jews, initially not by choice but by
circumstance. Through their place in the network of Jewish communities in
Egypt, the diaspora experience made Jewish ethnicity their most distinctive
identity. Once the Persian authorities had recognized the separate status of
Jews in their empire, the Elephantine community came to be qualified as a
Jewish settlement abroad. Religion served as a practical parameter of eth-
nicity. Jewish identity was not based on birth or genealogy but on worship
of the god of the Jews. Modern scholars conventionally refer to the deity
as Yahweh, but at Elephantine they called him Yaho. In combination with
the legacy of Hebrew personal names, the presence of the temple of Yaho
on the island sufficed to turn the community into a group of Jews abroad.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 20 5/7/19 11:50 AM

2 The Aramean Heritage
The debate about the Judean versus the Jewish identity of the Elephan-
tine community might easily lead to a neglect of its non-Jewish elements.
Chapter 6 will return to the Jewish identity of the colony. But the debate
about the correct translation of the term yĕhûdāy should not make us oblivi-
ous to the Aramean background of the Elephantine Jews. They had Jewish
names, and their temple was devoted to the ancestral Jewish god. Yet they
spoke Aramaic, used Aramaic wisdom literature to hone their scribal skills,
venerated several Aramean gods besides Yaho, and referred to themselves
as Arameans. In terms of culture, they seem to have been as much Aramean
as Jewish, if not more. They apparently had a mixed heritage. In order to
reflect this double identity, several scholars call them “Judeo-Arameans.”
It is a curious coinage. Does it refer to language, like the term “Judeo-
Greek”; are we to think of a common religious tradition, on the model of
the construct “Judeo-Christian”; or does it mean something else? Whatever
its precise meaning, the binomial does serve as a reminder of the complex
background of the Elephantine Jews. This chapter explores their Aramean
heritage. They have come to be defined as Jews. Perhaps they were not so
Jewish during an earlier period of their existence.
Aramaic and the “Original Biblical Language”

The archaeologist Howard Carter had no doubt in his report to Lord
Amherst: the Jews of Elephantine wrote their papyri “in the original Bibli-
cal language.” It confirmed him in the conviction that the Elephantine
colony consisted of descendants of the people of the Bible. The fact of the
21
Y7557-Toorn.indb 21 5/7/19 11:50 AM

matter is that the Elephantine papyri are in Aramaic and not Hebrew.
There is nothing particularly biblical about Aramaic. It was certainly not
the original language of the Israelites. The oldest text that Lady William
Cecil had acquired turned out to be a contract from 464 BCE. Among the
other papyri offered for sale at the time was one from 471 BCE. The dates
are known because these are legal documents, written by notary scribes who
carefully dated the texts. Did they write in Aramaic because it was the of-
ficial language of the Persian Empire and therefore standard in contracts?
Shortly after Lady Cecil made her purchase, excavations started on Ele-
phantine Island. The French team found hundreds of inscribed potsherds
in the Jewish neighborhood. These ostraca were from the first quarter of the
fifth century BCE. They were older than most of the papyri, and their lan-
guage was Aramaic too. Nearly all the ostraca contained private messages
exchanged between family members and colleagues. If the correspondents
were Judeans, why didn’t they write in Hebrew? Had they completely for-
gotten their ancestral tongue?
If the bulk of the Jewish colony in Elephantine had come from Judah
in the sixth century or before, we should expect them to speak Hebrew.
By the witness of the Lachish letters and the inscriptions from Arad, the
Judeans spoke Hebrew up till the time of the fall of Jerusalem. But the
Elephantine Jews did not. At home, they spoke Aramaic. At some point,
they must have adopted that language as their own. Opinions differ as to
when this linguistic change took place. The dominant view holds that the
Jews turned to Aramaic while in Egypt. That is very unlikely. The Jews only
came into the employ of the Persians after 525 BCE. Before that date, “in
the days of the Egyptian kings,” they would have had no reason to abandon
Hebrew for Aramaic. The Egyptians did not speak Aramaic but Egyptian.
The main reason that Egyptians of Elephantine never occur as witnesses
to the Aramaic contracts of their Jewish neighbors is the fact that most
of them did not speak the language. It seems the only valid explanation,
for until the final decades of the fifth century BCE, the relations between
Jews and Egyptians were generally good. It is telling, too, that the corre-
spondence between the Persian satrap of Egypt and the Elephantine-based
priests of Khnum was in Egyptian. There were Egyptian soldiers in the
Persian forces, but they had their own battalions precisely for reasons of
language. During the time that the colony served Egyptian masters, Ara-
maic would have been of little use. If the Jews adopted Aramaic to better
serve their Persian masters, it must have happened after 525 BCE. Again,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 22 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Aramean Heritage 23
the ostraca are from the first decades of the fifth century. One generation
seems a very short period for a new language to become the private vehicle
of communication. The comparative evidence from other migrant commu-
nities, contemporary and ancient, argues against it. Linguistic assimilation
is normal in interactions with the population of the host country, but the
total extinction of the native language within the community usually takes
generations.
Since the Jews of Elephantine Island spoke Aramaic among them-
selves, they must have been familiar with the language for a considerable
amount of time. This means that Aramaic must have been their daily ve-
hicle of communication well before 525 BCE. If they did not switch to Ara-
maic in the line of duty as soldiers of the Persian Empire, what prompted
them to adopt Aramaic? Was it collaboration with the Aramaic-speaking
communities of Syene? Theoretically this is possible. However, it is hard to
see why they would have chosen to speak Aramaic rather than Egyptian
when they were in the employ of the Egyptians. There is another possibil-
ity, seldom entertained because it seems to contradict the Jewish identity of
the community. What if these Jews spoke Aramaic even before they came
to Egypt? That hypothesis would explain the linguistic practices reflected
in the papyri and the ostraca. On the other hand, if these people had been
speaking Aramaic for generations, they cannot have come directly from
Judah. It is not certain that Samarian origins offer a more plausible expla-
nation for the use of Aramaic. Though the ethnic and linguistic variety in
Samaria after 721 BCE may have favored the turn to Aramaic, there is no
compelling evidence to this effect. For the time being, then, we must limit
ourselves to the conclusion that the colloquial use of Aramaic points to a
period in the early history of the community during which it had been liv-
ing in an Aramaic-speaking environment.
Literature
In the Jewish quarter of Elephantine Island, the German excavators
found two literary texts. One is an Aramaic translation of a Persian royal
inscription. The Persian original was carved in the high rocks of Behis-
tun in Persia. The text is a legitimation account of the Achaemenid dy-
nasty. Owing to the protection of Ahura Mazda, the Persian high god,
King Darius successfully suppressed all insurrections against his rule. The
copy of the Aramaic version must have circulated in the Jewish colony,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 23 5/7/19 11:50 AM

as the blank space on the backside of the scroll was used for a record of
memoranda from the Yaho temple. The presence of this piece of political
propaganda reminded the soldiers that they were there to defend the Per-
sian interests in Egypt. The second literary composition is far longer and,
in some ways, more spectacular. It is the earliest copy to date of the Life
and Sayings of Ahiqar. An Aramean sage and scholar who rose to emi-
nence at the Assyrian court, Ahiqar held the office of seal bearer under the
kings Sennacherib and Esarhaddon. Unjustly calumniated by his nephew
and adopted son Nadin, whom he had groomed to be his successor, he
had to go into hiding, but eventually made a triumphant comeback to the
royal court. Attached to this narrative frame is a compilation of Aramaic
proverbs. The composition gained wide popularity in the ancient world.
Scholars knew it already from translations into Armenian, Syriac, Slavonic,
Greek, Arabic, Ethiopian, and Old Turkish before they encountered the
earlier Aramaic version.
The Life and Sayings of Ahiqar provides an intriguing insight into the
cultural background of the Jewish community. It deserves a more detailed
discussion. But prior to an assessment of the significance of this Aramean
composition, one has to take stock of the texts that the excavators had
expected to find but did not. Charles Clermont-Ganneau, the leader of
the French archaeological expedition to Elephantine, had been the most
explicit. He had been hoping to find the earliest copy of the Bible—per-
haps not the whole Bible, but at least those parts that made up the core of
the Jewish religion. A version of the Ten Commandments would have
sufficed, as would a precursor of the doctrine of monotheism that Jews all
over the world know as the Shema: “Hear Israel, the Lord is our God, the
Lord is One.” Nothing of the sort turned up in the excavations. Theoreti-
cally, of course, the Elephantine Jews might have recited those texts. Maybe
they knew them by heart and had no need of a written reminder. But the
presence of several Aramean deities in the temple of Yaho in Elephantine
casts a strange light upon the expected monotheism of these Jews. And if
the Bible was their holy book, how come not a single fragment of it came
to light during the excavations?
We don’t know the exact purpose of the two literary compositions
that the German mission did discover. The most likely explanation is that
they were used for the instruction of apprentice scribes. For Ahiqar, at any
rate, this is the most plausible hypothesis. The notion that one would read
for personal enjoyment and edification is out of tune with the culture of
the time. There was neither a book market nor a book culture. There were
Y7557-Toorn.indb 24 5/7/19 11:50 AM

neither public libraries nor a reading public. There were scribes, and there
was scribal education. Wisdom texts had long been the staple diet that
student scribes were exposed to in order to hone their writing skills, to
refine their rhetorical abilities, and to familiarize them with the ethics of
the scribal profession. The encounter with Ahiqar introduced them to a
“skillful scribe” whose unfailing loyalty to his foreign masters had saved him
from disgrace. The figure of Ahiqar was put before them as an example to
emulate; he was a role model. Like them, he had lived in the diaspora. Their
new home was Egypt, then under Persian rule. His new home had been
Assyria. The difference was not all that great. Even abroad, either in Assyria
or Egypt, there was a way to achieve greatness.
A couple of centuries later, the book of Tobit would present Ahiqar
as a man of Israelite extraction. The book of Tobit is a Jewish novella that
never made it into the Protestant Bible but is part of the Catholic version
of the Old Testament because the latter is based on the Greek translation of
the Hebrew Bible (the so-called Septuagint). In technical jargon, the book
of Tobit is deuterocanonical, not part of the real Bible but nevertheless
worthy of special consideration because it can aid believers in their devo-
tion to God. The work is from the early third or second century BCE. It
was not written for the sake of Protestants or Catholics but for the Jewish
community in the diaspora. It tells the tale of Tobit, a man from Samaria,
deported to Assyria, who faithfully observed the precepts of the Jewish
religion. According to this Jewish tale, Ahiqar was Tobit’s nephew (“the
son of my brother”). But in the earliest copy of the story of Ahiqar—the
one found at Elephantine—Ahiqar was not a Jew but an Aramean. He may
actually have been a historical figure and not just a fictional hero. Accord-
ing to a later Babylonian text, Ahiqar had been the second-in-command
of King Esarhaddon. His official name had been Aba-Ninnu-dari, “but
the Arameans called him Ahuqari.” The hero of the Ahiqar story was an
Aramean. Later Jewish tradition transformed him into a Jew, but that fact
merely demonstrates the extent to which the story had become part of Jew-
ish literary culture.
The Life and Sayings of Ahiqar consists of two originally independent
parts. The older one is a collection of proverbs, the younger one the Ahiqar
story. The tale of the famous Aramean scholar came to serve secondarily
as the narrative frame of the proverbs, in much the same way as the West
Asian tradition put all sorts of precepts and admonitions in the mouth of a
legendary sage of the past. The proverbs are from North Syria, and their
original language was a local form of Aramaic. The Ahiqar story is in
Y7557-Toorn.indb 25 5/7/19 11:50 AM

official Aramaic, and there is no compelling reason to suspect the original

was in Akkadian. Yet it is clear that its author was familiar with the life of
scholars at the Assyrian court. The plot of the story, too, may well go back
to a Mesopotamian model. It is the tale of the slandered scholar. As a new
king comes into office, the sage experiences a fall from grace through the
insinuations and libel of envious colleagues. In response to his prayers, the
gods restore the scholar to his former position as confidant of the king. This
is the plot of Ludlul bēl nēmeqi (I will praise the Lord of Wisdom), a classic
of Babylonian wisdom literature. Letters from Assyrian scholars are full of
allusions to and complaints about the competition between sages serving at
the royal court. Scribal careers were precarious.
The Life and Sayings of Ahiqar departs from the Mesopotamian model
insofar as the protagonist of the story is a not a native. In this respect,
Ahiqar foreshadows later court novellas about foreign scholars, such as the
books of Daniel and Tobit. But the author of Ahiqar was apparently the
first to use the traditional motif of the slandered scholar as a topic for a
diaspora story. One difference between Ahiqar and the later Jewish tales is
the absence in the former of the references to devotion and divine interven-
tion so emphatically present in the latter. Another peculiarity of Ahiqar is
the treacherous role of Nadin. The troubles for the Aramean scholar do not
come from his Assyrian colleagues but from a man of his own people, in
fact the very son of his sister. With family like that, who needs enemies?
While perfidious behavior by ungrateful relatives is a well-known folk mo-
tif, its presence in a diaspora story is striking. Though this is an Aramaic tale
about an Aramean hero, it cannot be constructed as a chauvinist narrative.
The message of the story is that diligence and loyalty are scribal virtues that,
in the end, will always carry the day, even at the court of a foreign king.
There is nothing supernatural about that; it is just a matter of sticking to the
code of professional scribal ethics.
Although the only surviving copy of the Aramaic text of the Life and
Sayings of Ahiqar is from the Jewish community of Elephantine Island,
the work must have been popular among the Aramaic-speaking diaspora
throughout Egypt—Arameans and Jews. At some point Egyptian scribes
adopted the Ahiqar tradition and prepared an Egyptian version of the text,
written in Demotic script. The surviving fragments are all from Roman
Egypt and date to the first century CE, but there is reason to assume that
the borrowing took place at a significantly earlier date. In all likelihood the
Demotic Ahiqar goes back to the Persian period. Interestingly, it reflects
a variant of the Ahiqar story that is closer to the Syriac version of Ahiqar
Y7557-Toorn.indb 26 5/7/19 11:50 AM

than the Aramaic. It means that already in the fifth century BCE, there
were two versions of the Aramaic Ahiqar story and that the scroll from
Elephantine contains one of them and not necessarily the oldest. Also,
the Demotic Ahiqar fragments indicate that there was great fluidity in the
collection of sayings attributed to the Aramean sage. The Egyptian scribes
freely deleted and added sayings, a phenomenon found in proverb collec-
tions from many parts of the early Middle East. It corroborates the impres-
sion of a rather loose link between the Ahiqar tale and the sayings.
The fact that a work from the Aramean diaspora in Assyria should be
the main literary text discovered in the Jewish quarter of Elephantine is food
for thought. By what channels did this composition get there? The copy was
prepared in Egypt, but the mother text must have been brought by Arame-
ans. André Lemaire has argued that the scribal training at Elephantine
was not Jewish but followed the official curriculum of the Aramaic schools
in Egypt under Persian supervision. This is possible but speculative. The
two orthographies of the name “Yaho” (yhw and yhh) reflect the existence
of different scribal traditions within the Jewish colony. This suggests that
scribal training followed the model of the master-trainee type of education
rather than that of the school. If Ahiqar was not part of the standard cur-
riculum, its more occasional use in scribal training at Elephantine might
also be interpreted as an indication that the literary culture of the Jewish
community there was more Aramean than Jewish. There is no evidence to
show that they borrowed the text from their Aramean colleagues at Syene.
For all we know, they might have considered Ahiqar as part of their own
tradition. The later transformation of Ahiqar into a Jew—from Samaria!—
suggests that the Elephantine Jews never thought of him as someone be-
longing to a different ethnic group than their own. In a way, the identity
change that Ahiqar experienced in the book of Tobit is a literary reflection
of the changing identity of the Elephantine community. When they came
to Egypt, they were so much like Arameans that they might be taken for
Arameans. In the course of their stay at Elephantine, they became Jews.
Religion at Elephantine
Another significant part of the Aramean heritage of the Elephantine
Jews was their religion. As in several other areas, they displayed a double
identity in their religious practice. By the reference to their place of wor-
ship as “the temple of Yaho,” the settlers at Elephantine put themselves
squarely in the Jewish tradition, since Yaho was the god of the Jews. The
Y7557-Toorn.indb 27 5/7/19 11:50 AM

connection was supposed to be exclusive; only Jews worshipped Yaho, and

their worship was directed to Yaho alone. As it turns out, however, the Jew-
ish temple on the island had room for other gods as well. There is additional
evidence for the worship of non-Jewish gods, both inside and outside the
temple. Such data have led several scholars to speak about “the pantheon” of
Elephantine. The term may not be wholly appropriate because it conveys
the notion of a divine constellation that embraces all gods acknowledged as
such by the community. But by today’s terminology, the Elephantine Jews
were certainly polytheists. You might call theirs a “relative” polytheism, but
such mitigations do not annul the fact that the community worshipped
other gods besides Yaho. As we shall see, the particular nature of their
polytheism has a bearing on the identity of the Elephantine Jews. But prior
to an assessment in terms of identity, the contours of the religion of the
Elephantine Jews have to be established.
The close to four hundred ostraca from Elephantine Island are the ear-
liest evidence concerning the religion of the Jewish colony, much of which
seems consonant with the beliefs and practices described in the Bible.
Many men and women mentioned in the ostraca carry names that refer to
Yaho, on the model of “Yeho-yishma” (Yaho will listen), a woman’s name,
and “Uriyah” (Yaho is my light), the name of a priest. Porten takes these
names as a direct echo of the devotion of the Elephantine Jews and even
uses them to delineate some of their actual beliefs and convictions. The
latter is a hazardous exercise, given the practice of naming children after
relatives, owing to which names often run in a family. It is doubtful whether
the bearers of these names were still mindful of their literal meaning. But
one could make the case that the Yaho names do reflect traditional reli-
gious loyalties. Stronger evidence for traditional religious loyalties is extant
in the references to “the house of Yaho.” Aside from the fact that this
temple is located on an Egyptian island rather than in Jerusalem, the at-
mosphere feels Jewish. The short messages written on the potsherds also
mention Shabbat and Pesach, familiar terms from the Jewish calendar.
The repeated occurrence of such biblical phrases as “by the life of Yaho
(I swear)” and “the Lord of Hosts” completes the impression of scenes from
the Bible transplanted to Egypt. References to other gods (Khnum, Bel,
Nabu, Nergal, and Shamash) are rare. They occur only in greeting formulas
and could be explained as mere rhetorical flourishes. If the ostraca were all
we had to go by, there would be little reason to question the Jewish identity
of this community.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 28 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The papyri, however, open a different window onto the religious prac-
tices of the Jews. Their most striking revelation concerns the religion that
was practiced in the temple. The first Jewish temple at Elephantine was de-
stroyed during an Egyptian insurrection in 410 BCE. It took the Jews almost
a decade to build a new one. In 400, there was a collection to raise money
for new furniture. Each family unit paid 2 shekels. The final compilation of
lists with names of contributors makes the addition. In all, 318 shekels are
to be divided between Yaho (126 shekels), Eshem-Bethel (70 shekels), and
Anat-Bethel (120 shekels—2 shekels have gone missing). In the present
connection this administrative document is important for its candid admis-
sion of the fact that there were three gods in the temple—although “ad-
mission” is the wrong word because the Jews had nothing to hide. Yaho, it
would seem, needs no further introduction. His companion gods are more
enigmatic. “Eshem-Bethel” and “Anat-Bethel” are both compound names
related to the god Bethel. In two Neo-Assyrian treaty texts from the first
half of the seventh century BCE, Anat-Bethel occurs as Bethel’s consort.
The treaties show that Bethel and Anat-Bethel were Syrian deities that had
been incorporated into the Assyrian pantheon. Other evidence, too, points
to Syria as the place where the worship of Bethel originated. A debt record
from Sefire, a town close to Aleppo, is full of personal names containing
a reference to the god Bethel. Zeus Betylos (“the God Bethel”) is “the
ancestral god of those that dwell along the Orontes,” as a later inscription
from Dura-Europos has it. The connection of Eshem with Bethel also
goes back to this area, in view of the occurrence of the god Symbetylos in
an inscription from northern Syria. “Symbetylos” is the Greek transcription
of Eshem-Bethel.
Yaho is the god of the Jews. But at Elephantine, the god found him-
self in the company of two deities from the Bethel circle. Those gods are
Aramean. It is very unlikely they were an innovation introduced in the
final decade of the century. Since the new temple had to be a copy of the
previous one, it would hardly have been on the community’s mind to build
chapels for new gods. If the two Bethel gods were in the second temple,
they must have been present in the first one as well. Two other documents
from the late fifth century add yet another dimension to the religious plu-
ralism of the community. They are records of oath, one by Herem-Bethel
and the other by Herem the god and Anat-Yaho. There is no need to
elaborate upon the precise identity of these gods in order to establish their
Aramean background. Herem-Bethel is another god whose compound
Y7557-Toorn.indb 29 5/7/19 11:50 AM

name links him with Bethel. And Anat-Yaho seems to be the twin sister or
alter ego of Anat-Bethel. For the time being, these gods are a mystery. They
are names whose meaning will have to be elucidated on the basis of other
evidence. But their Aramean connection seems certain. The Jewish ven-
eration of Bethel, Eshem, and Herem is reflected in some of the personal
names from the papyri. A marriage contract from the last third of the fifth
century has one Herem-natan son of Bethel-natan, as well as Bethel-natan
son of Yeho-natan, among the witnesses. Jewish marriage contracts from
Elephantine consistently employ Jewish witnesses only. The fact that one
Bethel-natan is the son of Yeho-natan confirms the former’s Jewish iden-
tity. Presumably, then, Herem-natan son of Bethel-natan was Jewish too.
Some of the other personal names containing the divine names “Bethel,”
“Eshem,” and “Herem” were also Jewish.
Across from Elephantine, on the east bank of the Nile, there was an
important military colony of Syrians. They had a temple for Bethel and
the Queen of Heaven. One would have expected to find Anat-Bethel and
Eshem-Bethel on their side of the river. As it turns out, however, these Syr-
ian gods had found a home among the Jews. It is further proof of the de-
gree to which the cultural heritage of these Jews was Aramean, even more
than the worship of the compound Bethel deities lets on. The more or less
contemporaneous references to Anat-Yaho (402 BCE) and Anat-Bethel
(400 BCE), plus the absence of any mention of the god Bethel himself,
convey the suggestion that Yaho was actually identified with Bethel. Per-
haps that should not come as a complete surprise. A later passage in the
book of Jeremiah denounces the worship of Bethel as one of the deviations
of Israel ( Jer 48:13). Elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, too, there are allusions
to this Syrian God. “Bethel” occurs with some regularity in Israelite per-
sonal names too. The evidence from Elephantine, at any rate, shows that
the Jewish community worshipped several Aramean gods related to the god
Bethel on the tacit assumption that “Bethel” and “Yaho” were names for the
same deity. The Elephantine Jews were polytheists and Aramean in their
religious outlook. Ultimately, the combined witness of language, literature,
and religion calls into question the ethnic identity of the Elephantine Jews.
Ethnicity at Elephantine
The Elephantine Papyri contain one particularly promising lead that
can be used to establish the ethnic identity of the community. Records
Y7557-Toorn.indb 30 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of sale, loan, litigation, or donation must always identify the parties in-
volved. To make sure there was no room for misunderstanding, the scribes
laid down the particulars of their clients in writing: name, father’s name,
ethnicity, place of residence, and army unit. For example, “Mahseyah son
of Yedanyah, Jew who is in the fortress of Elephantine, belonging to the
battalion of Varyazata.” Scribes might leave out one or another element
from the list, but they normally would not skip ethnicity. Since we possess
a significant number of contracts from the Jewish community of the island,
there would seem to be sufficient data to establish their ethnicity. As it
turns out, however, there is a strange discrepancy in the evidence. Where we
would expect to encounter unambiguous ethnic identity, we find conflicting
indications. There are several cases where one and the same person is iden-
tified one time as a Jew and the next as an Aramean, or first as an Aramean
and next as a Jew, as though the two designations were synonymous. But
that is a possibility that cannot be seriously entertained. Unless words are
meaningless, a Jew is not an Aramean. If one and the same man is both a
Jew and an Aramean, then there must be another explanation.
Prior to a search for explanations, the evidence needs to be laid out. The
contracts document five cases in which particular individuals are identified
now as Jews and now as Arameans. In none of these cases is there evidence
of a change in circumstance that might entail a change in identity. The texts
document double identity, not identity change. A sixth case of double iden-
tity emerges from a comparison between a contract defining someone as
Aramean and a letter in which the same man is referred to as a Jew. Because
the devil is in the details, the following survey of the documented cases
of double identity cites all the attested identity statements concerning the
person in question.
The first case of double identity is that of Mahseyah. Born toward the
end of the sixth century BCE, Mahseyah was still alive in 416, when he
acted as witness to a transaction between two of his grandsons. He be-
longed to the powerful family of Yedanyah son of Mahseyah, successive
generations of which served in the leadership of the Jewish community.
Mahseyah, also known as Mahsah, was identified as an Aramean in 471, as
a Jew in 464, and as an Aramean again in 449.
Mahseyah son of Yedanyah,
Aramean of Syene,
belonging to the battalion of Varyazata.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 31 5/7/19 11:50 AM


Jew who is in the fortress of Elephantine,
belonging to the battalion of Varyazata.
Jew having property in Elephantine the fortress,
belonging to the battalion of Haoma-data.
Jew of Elephantine,
belonging to the battalion of Haoma-data.
Mahseyah,
Aramean of Syene,
belonging to the battalion of Varyazata.”
Aramean of Syene,
belonging to battalion of Varyazata.
The first two texts that mention Mahseyah also refer to Qonyah. A
neighbor of Mahseyah, Qonyah is identified as an Aramean in 471, and as
a Jew seven years later:
Qonyah son of Zadaq,
Aramean of Syene,
belonging to the battalion of Varyazata.
Qonyah son of Zadaq,
Jew,
belonging to the battalion of Atropharna.
The third case concerns two of Mahseyah’s grandsons—both born

from the union of his daughter Mibtahyah with her Egyptian husband,
Eshor (also known under the name “Natan”)—who experience a similar
chameleonic change in the texts. While a 420 BCE contract calls them
Jews, they are called Arameans ten years later:
Yedanyah and Mahseyah, two in all,
sons of Eshor son of Zeha, by Mibtahyah daughter of Mahseyah,
Jews,
belonging to the same battalion (that is, of Iddin-Nabu).
Mahseyah son of Natan—one;
Yedanyah son of Natan—one; all told two;
Y7557-Toorn.indb 32 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Arameans of Syene,
belonging to the battalion of Varyazata.
The fourth case involves another prominent member of the Elephan-

tine community, Meshullam son of Zakkur son of Ater. Meshullam was a
trader. He sold houses, gave loans, and had a harem of Egyptian women,
one of whom he married out to a man who was steward of the Yaho tem-
ple. The proper name of Meshullam’s grandfather was Meshullam, “Ater”
being a nickname meaning “hunchback.” Meshullam was identified as a
Jew in 456, as an Aramean in 449, and as a Jew again in 427:
Meshullam son of Zakkur,
Jew of Elephantine the fortress.

Aramean of Syene,
belonging to the battalion of Varyazata.

Jew of Elephantine the fortress,
belonging to the battalion of Iddin-Nabu.
The fifth instance of double ethnic identity concerns Ananyah son of

Haggai son of Meshullam son of Besas. Ananyah (variant: Anani) was the
man who, in 420, married Yeho-yishma, daughter of Tamet and Anani, the
temple steward. Ananyah’s exact occupation is unknown, but he did receive
a ration from the treasury of the king. Texts identify Ananyah as Aramean
in 420 and 402, while another text written in 402 calls him a Jew:
Ananyah son of Haggai,
Aramean of Elephantine the fortress,
belonging to the battalion of Iddin-Nabu.
Anani son of Haggai,

Aramean of Elephantine the fortress,
belonging to the battalion of Nabu-kudurri.
Anani son of Haggai son of Meshullam,

Jew,
belonging to the battalion of Nabu-kudurri.
The sixth instance of a double identity differs from the ones previously
cited because this man is mentioned in one contract only:
Y7557-Toorn.indb 33 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Mattan son of Yashobyah,

Aramean, Syenian,
belonging to the battalion of [PN].
There is one other reference to Mattan, however, where it is implied that

he is a Jew. In 411 BCE, the secretary-treasurer of the Jewish community of
Elephantine wrote a letter to the leadership. The heading of his letter reads,
“To my Lords Yedanyah; Uriyah and the priests of Yaho the God; Mat-
tan son of Yashobyah (and) Berekyah son of [PN].” The address contains
a variant of this formula: “To my Lords Yedanyah; Uriyah and the priests;
and the Jews.” A comparison between heading and address indicates that
Mattan and Berekyah represented the Jews and were, by implication, Jews
themselves.
In all, then, there are six cases where one and the same member of the
Jewish community of Elephantine is successively identified as Jew and Ar-
amean—or vice versa. In order to obtain an overview of the formal markers
of identity, as well as the variations in their wording, the survey above has
listed all known identifications of the men in question. In fact, the over-
view is as good as exhaustive, since a perusal of the rest of the Elephantine
papyri yields only a few variants. The first variant consists of a combination
of the expressions “Syenian” and “property holder.” In a formal letter of
entreaty to the Persian authorities, five prominent members of the Jewish
community present themselves as “Syenians who are holding property in
Elephantine the fortress.” A second variant applies to the Jewish com-
munity as a whole. It is employed in a draft of a letter to the governor of Ju-
dah: “Your servants Yedanyah and his colleagues, and all the Jews living in
Elephantine.” Among the Jews whose names occur in the contracts, there
are many more who are identified as either “Aramean of Syene” or “Jew
of Elephantine the fortress.” It would be pointless to list them all, for this
would only confirm the fact of the double identity that has already been
established. The real question is about the meaning of this double identity.
Is this a dual ethnic identity, or are the two identities somehow different in
nature—the one being ethnic, the other something else?
In order to discover the meaning of the double identity of the Ele-
phantine Jews, we shall proceed by elimination. Several explanations have
been advanced. All of them deserve serious consideration even if, at first
sight, one seems a little more far-fetched than the others. One possibility
is to say that there is no double identity at issue. What we interpret as the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 34 5/7/19 11:50 AM

dual identity of one person is in fact distinct identities belonging to distinct

individuals who happen to carry the same name—a case of mistaken iden-
tity rather than one of double identity. A second solution holds that the
scribes used the term “Aramean” by error; it is a careless use of language,
triggered perhaps by the free association of thoughts. The third sugges-
tion is based on the association of Aramean as ethnicity and Aramaic as a
language. Jews could be said to be Arameans because they spoke Aramaic.
And the fourth way out of the dilemma assumes that the Jews were Jews by
ethnicity and Arameans in terms of the Persian administration, military or
otherwise. The four solutions have been listed in order of increasing prob-
ability. Ultimately, however, we will find that none of these solutions is
completely satisfying.
The solution of the mistaken identities is linked to the name of Edo-
ardo Volterra. In several publications, Volterra first suggested and later in-
sisted that all the alleged cases of double identity were based on homonymy.
Yet the admirable consistency of Volterra’s theory comes at the cost of utter
improbability. One case of mistaken identities is in the realm of possibil-
ity; two is an extraordinary coincidence; but six or seven is a stretch of the
imagination that cannot be sustained. The second theory promotes error
as explanation. It goes back to one of the great pioneers of Elephantine
studies, Arthur E. Cowley. He suggested that the Aramean identity of the
Elephantine Jews was due to a “loose” use of language. Cowley did in fact
accuse the scribes responsible for these mistakes of “mere carelessness.”
This is an unsatisfactory explanation. Scribes were also the notaries of an-
tiquity. It would be remarkable, to say the least, to find that they should be
careless when drafting legal documents. Avoiding ambiguity was part of
their training. A variant of Cowley’s solution lifts the blame off the shoul-
ders of the scribes and argues that the Elephantine Jews mistook them-
selves for Arameans. Though Judeans and Arameans were distinct ethnic
groups, the Elephantine experience had blurred the boundaries between
them. As a matter of consequence, the Jews began to think of themselves
as Arameans. This variant of the error theory is hardly more likely to be
correct. As a rule, the diaspora experience does not diminish a group’s sense
of ethnic identity.
The third solution uses a semantic twist. Several authors hold that
the term “Aramean,” when applied to Jews, does not define ethnicity but
refers to language. As Bezalel Porten argues, “The designation ‘Aramean’
was probably due to the fact that the Jews were considered members of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 35 5/7/19 11:50 AM

the larger Aramaic-speaking group.” Other authors have taken a simi-

lar stance. The language theory does not withstand critical examination.
Other mercenaries in the service of the Persian army spoke Aramaic too.
The case of the Iranian community at Elephantine is an example. Yet none
of them, other than the Elephantine Jews, were systematically referred to as
Arameans, as the discussion of the identity tags of the Iranians will show.
Perhaps one could make the argument that other mercenaries spoke Ara-
maic as their second language, whereas the Elephantine Jews spoke it as
their first. Witness the ostraca: Aramaic is what they spoke at home. Con-
ceivably, the Persian authorities identified the Jews as Arameans because
Aramaic seemed to be their native tongue. In that case, however, language
would have served as a marker of ethnicity, and the term ʾărāmāy would
refer to ethnicity.
The fourth solution holds that the Jews were Arameans because they
belonged to the Aramean garrison. Pierre Grelot draws a comparison with a
practice from later times: “Likewise, in the Ptolemaic Era, Jews will qualify
themselves as Macedonians because they serve in a Macedonian battalion.”
For Grelot, the Jews were not ethnic Arameans. Their Aramean identity
was purely military-administrative. The administrative theory deserves to
be developed in some more detail, as it links up with the fact that there is
a privileged relation between Arameans and Syene, on the one hand, and
Jews and Elephantine, on the other. Oversimplifying matters, we might say
that in the Elephantine papyri, an Aramean is by definition “an Aramean of
Syene,” and a Jew, “a Jew of Elephantine.” The Jew-Elephantine connection
occurs in four variants:
1. “Jew of Elephantine”
2. “Jew who is in the fortress of Elephantine”
3. “Jew having property in Elephantine the fortress”
4. “All the Jews living in Elephantine”
The variety occurring in the connection between Arameans and Syene is
lower. The normal expression is “Aramean of Syene,” but it is equally possi-
ble to refer to someone as “an Aramean, a Syenian.” Now the Elephantine
Jews refer on occasion to themselves as “Syenians.” Individually, many
a “Jew of Elephantine” is at the same time an “Aramean of Syene.” The
military-administrative theory holds that the Jews lived at Elephantine and
were ethnically Jews but were administratively reckoned among the Ara-
mean forces stationed at Syene. The odd reference to a Jew as an “Aramean
Y7557-Toorn.indb 36 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of Elephantine the fortress” might seem to invalidate this theory but could
arguably combine military-administrative identity with a reference to the
place of residence. In fact, the written evidence on the members of the
Jewish community provides no decisive argument against the military-
administrative theory. In order to test its plausibility, we must look at a
counterexample. The case of the Iranian community of Elephantine offers
a promising parallel.
The Countercase of the Iranian Community

The Iranian community of Elephantine Island also consisted of military
families in the employ of the Persians. They were conversant with Aramaic
and administratively part of the Syenian garrison. If the Jews were Arame-
ans in terms of the Persian military administration, it is to be expected the
Iranians were Arameans too. The following is a list of the identity formulas
encountered in connection with the Iranians of the island: Horesmians,
Caspians, Bactrians, Medes, and Magians. It exhibits both similarities to
and contrasts with the Jews:
Dargamana son of Harashayana,
Horesmian stationed in Elephantine the fortress,
belonging to the battalion of Artabanu.
Barbari son of Dargi,
Caspian stationed [in Elephantine the fortress].
Bagazushta son of Bazu,
Caspian,
belonging to the battalion of Namasava.
Ubil daughter of Shatibara,
Caspian woman of Syene,
belonging to the battalion of Namasava.
Ubil daughter of Shatibara, and [her husband] Bagazushta,
Caspians of Elephantine the fortress.
Barzanarava son of Artabarzana, that is Patu,
Bactrian [st]ationed in Elephantine the fortress,
belonging to the battalion of Marya.
Yanabulliya son of Misdaya,
Caspian who holds property in Elephantine.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 37 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Elsewhere in the Elephantine papyri and potsherds there are other occur-
rences of Caspians and Horesmians. They lived in close proximity to the
Jews and would frequently serve as witnesses to their contracts. However,
there is no other identification formula aside from the seven quoted above.
They suffice to make some observations about the similarities and the con-
trasts between the Iranian and the Jewish identity.
In terms of similarities, there is the general structure of the identifica-
tion tags of the Iranians in the legal documents. They, too, are normally
identified by name, name of the father, ethnicity, place of residence, and
military detachment. As in the case of the Jews, both men and women have
a place in the military organization, women normally through the battalion
of their husband or their father. One striking detail is the double address of
Lady Ubil, daughter of Shatibara. Her husband and she are once qualified
as “Caspians of Elephantine the fortress.” Individually, however, Ubil was
also “a Caspian woman of Syene.” Does this mean Ubil had houses in
both Elephantine and Syene? Hardy so. The most likely explanation would
take “of Syene” as an administrative identity, in the sense that Ubil fell
under the purview of the Syenian garrison. Assuming her case is paradig-
matic for the Iranian group as a whole, their situation is similar to that of
the Jews. The Jews, too, though living in Elephantine, could be said to be
“Syenians” or “of Syene.”
Which brings us immediately to a significant contrast: Iranians are
never identified as Arameans. The scribes do sometimes hesitate about their
exact ethnicity. Was Dargamana a Horesmian (so according to one scribe)
or a Caspian (so according to another)? But Iranians do not have a double
ethnicity as the Jews do. Nowhere in the texts are they referred to as Ara-
means, even though they served in the Syenian garrison and were familiar
with Aramaic, as is clear from their role as witnesses to contracts written in
Aramaic. Another element that seems particular to the Caspian identity is
the phrase “stationed in Elephantine the fortress.” Porten speculates that
this expression indicates “a semipermanent status,” as opposed to those who
were “holding property” in Elephantine. While the phrase is indeed unat-
tested in connection with the Jews, it should not be overinterpreted. Some
of the Iranian men “stationed” in Elephantine did engage in real estate
transactions, which implies that they did hold property. In fact, the term
“holding property” also occurs in connection with a Caspian.
The Persians recognized the distinct ethnicity of the Iranian commu-
nity at Elephantine by the creation of a separate battalion. Battalions were
Y7557-Toorn.indb 38 5/7/19 11:50 AM

based on ethnicity, as indicated, for instance, by the reference to “the bat-

talions of the Egyptians.” The battalion that the Caspians were attached
to presumably included other Iranian soldiers as well, such as Horesmians,
Bactrians, Medes, and Magians. Each of the various battalions was usu-
ally named after its commander. For the Iranian battalion, those are Arta-
banu, Namasava, and Marya. It is no coincidence that there is no overlap
whatsoever with the names of the men commanding the battalions men-
tioned in connection with the Jews. Jews and Iranians lived as neighbors on
the island but served in different battalions. There were social interactions
and economic transactions between the two groups but no intermarriage.
In fact, the available evidence contains several echoes of ethnic tensions
between the Jews and the Iranian community of Elephantine.
The Aramean Ethnicity of the Jews

If the Jews were identified as Arameans, it was not by mistake, through
carelessness, for reasons of language, or on account of their place in the
military organization. In the eyes of the Persian administration, they were
truly part of the Aramean community. This was not only in the eyes of the
Persians; it was also how the Jews saw themselves. So far, the predomi-
nant assumption among scholars has been that the core identity of the
Elephantine Jews was Jewish or Judean. This has given a particular twist
to the problem of their double identity. Since their Aramean identity has
been seen as secondary, explanations have generally attempted to under-
stand this double identity in a nonethnic sense. As it turns out, however,
ʾărāmāy is really an ethnic term. And when we look at the evidence from
the papyri, we find that for most Elephantine Jews it was their ethnic iden-
tity by default. As Reuven Yaron argued in the 1960s, the Elephantine Jews
thought of themselves as Arameans first: “Amongst themselves they are
‘Arameans,’ but when they come into contact with outsiders, they tend to
describe themselves as ‘Jews’ (or are so described by others).” If Yaron is
correct, the Aramean identity was the default identity of the Elephantine
Jews. References to their Jewish ethnicity would have served the purpose of
a more particular identity. The Jews of Elephantine were Arameans, but not
all Arameans were Jews. In other words, the Jews were a distinct segment of
the Aramean ethnic community. A survey of the available evidence would
seem to support Yaron’s claim.
The ethnic identification of Jews in contracts exhibit a preponder-
ance of ascribed Aramean ethnicity over against ascribed Jewish ethnicity:
Y7557-Toorn.indb 39 5/7/19 11:50 AM

twenty-four instances to thirteen. In terms of documents, the breakdown

is only slightly different: nineteen to ten. Statistically, then, Yaron is correct
when he posits that Aramean is the default ethnicity—though it must be
admitted that the basis for a comparison is small. As far as can be ascer-
tained, nearly all cases in which the ascribed ethnicity is Jewish involve a
non-Jewish party in one capacity or another. In a contract from 464 BCE,
there are three persons defined as Jews. But the document is about litiga-
tion with a Horesmian, and the scribe is non-Jewish. Another document,
concerning a suit brought by one Jew against another, was drawn up in
Elephantine by a Jewish scribe, but it was brought before and was decided
by the Persian governor of the southern province and the Persian garrison
commander. A most interesting case is the record of a loan made by an
Aramean to a Jew. The Aramean (Pa-Khnum son of Besa, living in Syene)
was clearly not Jewish, and the contract was drawn up in Syene by a non-
Jewish scribe. Another contract, preserved very fragmentarily, involves a
Bactrian and a Jew. Not every case where Jewish ethnicity is mentioned
can be explained by the presence of a non-Jewish party. But the instances
just mentioned are significant. Apparently, then, the Elephantine Jews be-
longed to the larger group of Arameans and thought of themselves as Jews
when it came to their more specific identity.
The Jews who lived in Elephantine were Arameans first. It may not be
what one expects, but those are the facts of the case. The Aramean ethnic-
ity having been established, the logical follow-up is to ask what it actu-
ally implied. Those who wish to minimize the significance of the Aramean
ethnicity of the Jews could argue that, to the Persians, all the inhabitants of
Syria-Palestine were Arameans. When Herodotus traveled through Egypt
in the fifth century BCE, he also visited Elephantine Island. It is difficult
to conceive that he did not encounter the Jewish colony. Yet he makes no
mention of the Jews of Egypt. In fact, there is not a single reference to Jews
in any of the books of Herodotus’s Histories, not because Herodotus never
met Jews but because he did not identify them as such. One of Herodo-
tus’s theories is that the Phoenicians and the Jews adopted the practice of
male circumcision from the Egyptians. Herodotus calls the Phoenicians
“Phoenicians,” but he calls the Jews “Syrians of Palestine.” In his view,
Palestine was part of Syria, and the inhabitants of Palestine were therefore,
in his eyes, Syrians. This is not an idiosyncrasy on the part of Herodotus.
In fact, he followed a Persian practice. To the Persians, the entire terri-
tory south of the River (Euphrates) was Syria. It was one satrapy, including
Y7557-Toorn.indb 40 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Cyprus, Samaria, and Judah. The list of subject nations, written in Egyp-
tian hieroglyphs on the base of the statue of Darius I in Susa, does not men-
tion Phoenicia, Samaria, Judah, or Cyprus. They are simply included in the
general category of “Syria” (Eshur). Assuming the terms “Aramean” in the
papyri and “Syrian” in Greek and Persian sources refer to the same ethnicity,
the Jews were Arameans in terms of territory. According to this reading of
the evidence, the Jews were technically Arameans but, in reality, Judeans.
Considering their language, literature, and religion, however, it is
doubtful whether the Elephantine Jews were Arameans in a merely tech-
nical sense. In view of their personal names, the Jews were not Arameans
by birth but by adoption. Their culture betrays longtime exposure to an
Aramean environment. It is difficult to believe that this happened only in
Egypt. At some point in its earlier history, the Elephantine community
must have gone through a period of intense interaction with Arameans,
to the point where they came to identify themselves as Arameans. Neither
the papyri nor the ostraca tell us when and where this happened. What the
Aramaic documents from Egypt do reveal, however, is the presence of a
significant Aramean diaspora. Chapter 3 looks at the Aramean community
in Persian Egypt in an attempt to find a clue to the Aramean connection
of the Elephantine Jews.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 41 5/7/19 11:50 AM

3 The Aramean Diaspora
in Egypt
Across from Elephantine Island, on the east bank of the Nile, lies the city of
Aswan. The Greeks called it Syene, which was the name customarily used in
antiquity when referencing the town. Herodotus does not mention Syene.
To him, “Elephantine” stood for both the island and the town on the main-
land because he considered them as one conglomeration. Elephantine and
Syene have been called twin cities. The phrase is perhaps not entirely felici-
tous, as Syene had long been much larger than Elephantine, but the close
connection between the two goes back to a very early period. Syene and
Elephantine constituted the southern border of Egypt. They were garrison
towns manned by frontier soldiers serving, in the fifth century BCE, in the
Persian army. Though Herodotus speaks of Elephantine only, Syene was
the main location. The Persian garrison commander had his headquarters
in Syene. Other officials, such as Persian judges, also had their offices in the
city. And, naturally, the main body of the garrison was stationed at Syene.
The Jews lived on Elephantine Island. Most of the soldiers at Syene
were Arameans. Since the Elephantine Jews referred to themselves as Ara-
means too, there is reason to take a closer look at the Arameans of ancient
Aswan. By the witness of their literary and religious culture, the Jews had a
strong Aramean connection. The Arameans of Syene were their neighbors
on the mainland and their colleagues in the garrison. These Arameans may
provide help figuring out the Aramean connection of the Jews. This chap-
ter will focus on their origins and their relations with the Jews. Prior to a
discussion of the Aramean community of Syene, however, it is necessary to
consider the identity of the Arameans more generally. Though their lan-
guage ended up being spoken all over the Middle East—Jesus spoke Ara-
42
Y7557-Toorn.indb 42 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Aramean Diaspora in Egypt 43
maic—the Arameans themselves never reached prominence in the public

perception. Assyrians, Egyptians, Babylonians, and Jews—those are famil-
iar peoples. Such fame has not been the lot of the Arameans.
Aramaic, Aram, and the Arameans

Before the Hellenistic rulers implanted Greek as the new language of
western Asia and the eastern Mediterranean, the biggest linguistic trans-
formation in those parts of the world was the spread of Aramaic as the
common vehicle of communication. Like Hebrew, Phoenician, and Arabic,
Aramaic is one of the Semitic languages. There is no relation with Arme-
nian, in spite of the deceptive similarity of the names. First encountered in
stone inscriptions from the late ninth century BCE, all from the area of
Aleppo, Aramaic rose to prominence as an international language of com-
merce, diplomacy, and literature from the time of the Neo-Assyrian Em-
pire on. Under such Babylonian emperors as Nebuchadnezzar II, Aramaic
became the colloquial language of many peoples, in an area stretching from
southern Mesopotamia to the upper course of the Tigris and Euphrates
Rivers and down from there to the foot of the Lebanon Mountains. When
the Persians created an even vaster empire, they continued to use Aramaic.
The linguistic area came to include all of Syria and Palestine and reached
Egypt as well. The diffusion of Aramaic led to an innovation in the writ-
ing technology in Mesopotamia and other places. The language came with
an alphabetic script adopted from the earlier Phoenician. Like Hebrew,
the Aramaic alphabet has twenty-two letters. In fact, the Hebrew square
script is based on the Aramaic. Its use was far easier than that of Assyrian
and Babylonian cuneiform, a syllabic script that uses a basic group of some
two hundred characters. For cuneiform writing, the scribes wrote on clay
with a reed stylus. For Aramaic, the wax board was more convenient. For
longer messages, there was the scroll—in Mesopotamia, mostly made from
leather. On reliefs from the Neo-Assyrian period, there are representations
of two types of scribes serving at court: the traditional t.upšarru, who wrote
on clay, and the new sepīru, who wrote on wax or skin.
Aramaic is the language of the Arameans. These were pastoralists, who
moved their flocks from place to place and set up their camps for only a
few months at a time. It was a lifestyle that has been called seminomadic.
The corresponding social structures were those of the clan and the tribe.
In the first millennium BCE, the earliest Aramean kingdoms arose, most
Y7557-Toorn.indb 43 5/7/19 11:50 AM

44 The Aramean Diaspora in Egypt
of them in northern Syria. The new political organization reflected and

encouraged a more sedentary lifestyle for at least part of the population.
Most Aramean kingdoms, however, were dimorphic. This meant that some
inhabitants were settled, while others continued to be “wandering Arame-
ans” (see Deut 26:5). The Aramean states in Syria normally had their cen-
ter in a city and sometimes carried the name of that city. Hamath, on the
middle Orontes, is a case in point. More often, though, the kingdom would
be named after the leading tribe or the royal dynasty. Politically speaking,
the number and size of Aramean kingdoms yield an image of fragmenta-
tion. There never was one unified Aramean empire. Only when faced with
a common enemy would the Aramean kings enter into a coalition and only
for as long as it suited their purpose.
The spread of the Aramaic language followed the dissemination of the
Aramean people over the West Asiatic world. Aramaic ended up being
the main language of Babylonia for various reasons, one of them being the
longtime presence of Aramean tribes. By the count of modern researchers,
there were about forty Aramean clans and tribes in southern Babylonia.
Centuries of coexistence with the local population led to various forms
of assimilation. The Arameans retained their own language but adopted a
great number of loanwords. In religion, they honored their traditional gods,
such as the storm god Hadad, but paid tribute, too, to various Babylonian
deities, such as Nabu and Bel. To some degree, the cultural interaction went
the other way as well. Aramaic terms entered the Babylonian language,
and Hadad acquired a place in the Babylonian pantheon. The case of the
Babylonian Arameans is not unique. Elsewhere, too, there was interaction
between the Arameans and the local population. It led to a great diversity
among the various branches of the Arameans. They shared an ascribed eth-
nicity, mode of life, and language but exhibited variety in their religious
loyalties and practices—so much so that it would make little sense to speak
about Aramean religion as though it were a uniform set of beliefs and prac-
tices. Nor is there an Aramean pantheon, properly speaking. The Arameans
never were a nation in the modern sense of the term. There is no Aramean
national epic nor a shared Aramean mythology.
Confusion about the meaning of the term “Aramean” arises from the
fact that “Aram” was also the name of a territory. Whereas Assyrian sources
from the late second millennium BCE speak about “the land of the Ara-
means,” in the first millennium “Aram” became a topographical reference.
“Aram” was the name of various territories in north-western Syria, distin-
Y7557-Toorn.indb 44 5/7/19 11:50 AM

guished from one another by the addition of a tribal name or the name of a
city. Where the name “Aram” occurs without reference to political divisions,
it refers to the whole of north-western Syria, an area stretching from the
upper course of the Euphrates in the north to the foot of Mount Lebanon
in the south. Geographically, it consisted of Upper and Lower Aram, the
two parts constituting “all of Aram.” It ran from the border of Phoenicia
in the west to Palmyra (then Tadmor) in the east. This is the area referred
to in cuneiform sources as Ebir-Nari, “Beyond-the-River,” the river being
the Euphrates. In the administrative terminology of the Persian Empire,
this area was known as Syria, a term that came to include Palestine as well.
When the Greeks of the time, such as Herodotus, spoke of “Syria,” they
followed the Persian terminology.
Though Aramean was and remained a term of ethnicity, then, it could
also refer to inhabitants of the territory known as Aram, that is Syria-
Palestine. In that sense, even inhabitants of Judah might be referred to as
“Syrians.” Herodotus calls them “the Syrians of Palestine.” In the Aramaic
vernacular, they were “Arameans.” It was, one might argue, a purely ad-
ministrative identity. As the previous chapter has demonstrated, however,
the Elephantine Jews were Arameans in more than a purely administrative
sense. Much of their literary and religious culture was Aramean too. This
raises the issue of the nature of their relation to the other Arameans who
dwelt in Egypt, especially their neighbors who lived in Syene.
The Arameans from Hamath

By comparison with the Jews of Elephantine Island, our knowledge of
their Aramean neighbors on the mainland is modest. The Aramean soldiers
had come to Egypt at the same time as most of the Jews. Their number was
higher than that of the Jews, and yet their story is largely unknown. Due
to urban development in modern Aswan, large-scale excavations of the an-
cient city are impossible. By a happy twist of fate, we have come across a
bundle of Aramaic letters to Syene that never reached their destination,
as noted in Chapter 1. Found in a vase among the graves of Hermopolis,
still sealed and unread at the time of their discovery, these letters constitute
the main direct evidence of the Arameans of Syene. Other written evi-
dence comes from a handful of coffins, one from Saqqara and three from
Syene. In addition, there are many references to Arameans from Syene
in the Elephantine papyri and ostraca. These references, though, yield a
Y7557-Toorn.indb 45 5/7/19 11:50 AM

harvest primarily of names. The relative dearth of data is counterbalanced

to some degree by the Aramaic papyri found elsewhere in Egypt, especially
at Memphis and in its vicinity. As it turns out, the Aramean soldiers in
Egypt, though employed in different garrisons, had a similar background.
Thus it is possible to use the evidence regarding the Arameans in Memphis
and other places to supplement the data on the Arameans of Syene. But
even so, the available documents give access primarily to more names. They
reveal little to nothing about the story behind them.
Writing a history on the basis of names seems impossible. Yet if the fo-
cus is on origins, names do tell a story of their own. Many of the Aramean
personal names contain a reference to a deity. They read like religious state-
ments. Such names as “Bethel-natan” (Bethel-has-given) are fossilized ex-
pressions of religious belief. The name need not reflect the private convic-
tion of the parents who gave it. It may simply have been the name of a
grandfather or some other family member. Most names run in a family. But
if particular gods are a frequent element of personal names of people from
one community, they do provide a lead in establishing that community’s
origins. Gods point to origins because gods are localized. They are never
homeless. Bethel, for instance, was worshipped mostly in central Syria.
Many gods enjoyed more than mere local popularity. But even so, the local
origins of their worshippers can often be narrowed down on the basis of a
particular constellation of deities. A god and a goddess, as a pair, constitute
a nuclear constellation. When other gods are associated with them, the
constellation of deities will often point to a more specific place of origin.
The Hermopolis letters show that the Aramean community at Syene
had a particular veneration for Bethel and the Queen of Heaven, on the one
hand, and Nabu and Banit, on the other. Each pair of deities had its own
temple. The fact that the Arameans had more than one temple reflects
the composite nature of their community. One group focused its devotion
on Bethel and his consort, whereas the other was traditionally attached to
Nabu and his spouse. The difference in religious orientation is presumably
linked to a difference in local origins. We should expect to see the duality
reflected in personal names. People belonging to the Bethel group are likely
to have names referring to Bethel or to gods from Bethel’s orbit. In the
Nabu group, on the other hand, names referring to Nabu or to gods associ-
ated with Nabu are popular. In order to let the names tell their story, there-
fore, we must seek to group them. The basis for so doing will be family con-
nections. If a father named Bethel-natan has a son named Herem-natan,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 46 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Bethel and Herem are likely to belong to the same constellation. Working
along these lines, we must try to identify the gods of the Bethel group and
the gods of the Nabu group separately. Due to intermarriage and other
forms of cohabitation, there may be some overlap. On the whole, however,
we should expect to find a clear boundary between the two components of
the Aramean community in Egypt.
The nucleus of the personal names current in the Bethel group are
those in which “Bethel” serves as the central element. The names read like
short statements of belief or hope. Among the Arameans of Syene, the fol-
lowing Bethel names are attested:
Bethel-[ . . . ]
Bethel-ʿaqab (“Bethel-has-protected”)
Bethel-dalah (“Bethel-has-rescued”; reading uncertain)
Bethel-nadar (“Bethel-has-guarded”)
Bethel-natan (“Bethel-has-given”)
Bethel-nuri (“Bethel-is-my-light”)
Bethel-reʿi (“Bethel-is-my-shepherd”)
Bethel-shezib (“Bethel-deliver!”)
Bethel-taden (“Bethel-you-will-judge”)
Bethel-taqum (“Bethel-you-will-arise”)
Bethel-zabad (“Bethel-has-given”)
Bethel names also occur outside Syene, among the Arameans stationed at
Memphis and other places in Egypt:
Bethel-[xx] (Abydos)
Bethel-[ . . . ] (Memphis)
Bethel-nuri (“Bethel-is-my-light”; Memphis)
Bethel-śagab (“Bethel-has-protected”; Memphis)
Bethel-sharah (“Bethel-has-released”; Memphis)
Bethel-shezib (“Bethel-deliver!”; Memphis)
Bethel-shezib (“Bethel-deliver!”; Thebes)
Bethel-taqum (“Bethel-you-will-arise”; Memphis)
Bethel-zabad (“Bethel-has-given”; Memphis)
Linked to the circle of Bethel are the gods Herem and Eshem and the
goddess Anat. Herem and Eshem can be connected to Bethel on account
of certain patterns in family names. The occurrence of “Herem-natan son
of Bethel-natan” may be taken as an indication of a family’s veneration for
Y7557-Toorn.indb 47 5/7/19 11:50 AM

both Bethel and Herem. “Bethel-zabad son of Eshem-ram” establishes a

similar pattern for Bethel and Eshem. The link between Bethel and Anat
can be established on the basis of the occurrence of an Anat name among
the people associated with the Bethel temple. Given the relatively low fre-
quency of the Herem and Eshem names, the survey groups together names
from Syene with those from other places:
ʿAnati
Herem-natan (“Herem-has-given”)
Herem-natan (“Herem-has-given”; Cairo)
Herem-natan (“Herem-has-given”; Memphis)
Herem-shezib (“Herem-deliver!”; Memphis)
Herem-shezib (“Herem-deliver!”; Dahshur, forty kilometers south of
Cairo)
Her<em>-zabad (“Herem-has-given”; Wadi Tumas, south of Aswan)
Eshem-ram (“Eshem-is-exalted”; Memphis, Nile delta)
Eshem-ram (“Eshem-is-exalted”)
Eshem-shezib (“Eshem-deliver!”)
Even though the sample of Syrian names from Egypt is limited, a sur-
vey of the names of the Bethel group does exhibit specific patterns. All
names in this group begin with a reference to a god. Not once do we find
the name of the god in the second position. Furthermore, all names are
distinctly Aramaic. The verb, the adjective, or the noun that qualifies the
meaning of the god for the bearer of the name (or, more likely, for the par-
ents) is always Aramaic. As might be expected, names compounded with
“Bethel” are clearly in the majority. Also, we encounter them in Syene as
well as in other places in Egypt, most notably Memphis. Apparently, the
composition of the Syrian community in both Syene and Memphis in-
cluded a “Bethel” component. These people originated from a place in Syria
characterized by the combined worship of Bethel, Anat, Herem, and Es-
hem. The low number of names that refer to a goddess is striking. There is
no reference to the Queen of Heaven in any of the names and just a single
reference to Anat.
On the basis of an analysis of the names of the Arameans in Egypt,
Noël Aimé-Giron concluded in 1931 that most of the Aramean soldiers sta-
tioned at Syene and Memphis originated from the area of Hamath on the
Orontes. His reasoning was simple and clear. Given the fact that Bethel
Y7557-Toorn.indb 48 5/7/19 11:50 AM

and Eshem are part of one constellation, the local origins of Eshem are
a clue to the origins of the worship of Bethel. According to the Hebrew
Bible, Eshem was the god venerated by the deported population of Ha-
math (2 Kgs 17:30). The name occurs in the Bible as “Ashima,” which Aimé-
Giron took to be the female counterpart of Eshem. Since Eshem was the
god of the population of Hamath, the Bethel Syrians must have come from
Hamath. Aimé-Giron’s straightforward logic has since been corroborated
by the occurrence of a reference to Bethel (Zeus Betylos) as “the ancestral
god of those that dwell along the Orontes.” The connection of Eshem
with Bethel was also familiar to Syria in view of the occurrence of the god
Symbetylos (Eshem-Bethel) in an inscription from Kafr Nebo in Syria.
The absence of the “Queen of Heaven” from the personal names is easily
explained by the fact that it is a title of Anat. The goddess, who occurs only
once in the personal names, was known as Anat-Bethel on account of her
role as Bethel’s consort. The pair occurs twice in Neo-Assyrian treaties. A
link with the territory of Hamath may be found in the occurrence of the
name Abdi-Anati, carried by one of the kings of Siyannu, a city-state later
incorporated in the kingdom of Hamath.
The Arameans from Babylonia

On the assumption that the Nabu group is the most significant other
component of the Aramean community at Syene, here follows a survey of
the Nabu names encountered at Syene:
Nabu-ʿaqab (“Nabu-has-protected”)
Nabu-barak (“Nabu-has-blessed”)
Nabu-dalah (“Nabu-has-rescued”)
Nabu-h.ay (“Nabu-keep-alive!”)
Nabu-kas.ir (“Nabu-gives-strength”)
Nabu-kudurri (“Nabu-[protect]-my-firstborn”)
Nabu-nadin (“Nabu-gives”; possibly to be read as Nabu-nuri)
Nabu-natan (“Nabu-has-given”)
Nabu-reʿi (“Nabu-is-my-shepherd”)
Nabu-sum-iskun (“Nabu-has-given-a-heir”)
Nabusha (short for Nabu-shezib, “Nabu-deliver!”)
Nabu-shezib (“Nabu-deliver!”)
Nabu-ushallim (“Nabu-has-kept-in-good-health”)
Nabu-tukulti (“Nabu-is-my-trust”)
Y7557-Toorn.indb 49 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Nabu-zer-ibni (“Nabu-has-created-offspring”)
Iddin-Nabu (“Nabu-has-given”)
Mushezib-Nabu (“Nabu-saves”)
Outside Syene, there are a significant number of Nabu names attested
at Memphis. Their occurrence should be no cause for surprise since we
know that the Aramean community at Memphis had a temple for Nabu
in the city. The presence of both a Bethel group and a Nabu group at
Memphis is an indication of the fact that the Aramean diaspora in Egypt,
spread over the country, originated from a limited number of geographical
horizons:
Nabu-ah.a-bullit. (“Nabu-keep-the-brother-alive!”; Memphis)
Nabu-ʿaqab (“Nabu-has-protected”; Memphis)
Nabu-dalah (“Nabu-has-rescued”; Memphis)
Nabu-yahab (“Nabu-has-given”; provenance unknown)
Nabu-natan (“Nabu-has-given”; Wadi Hammamat, between Thebes
and the Red Sea)
Nabu-s.adaq (“Nabu-is-righteous”; Memphis)
Nabu-sharah (“Nabu-has-released”; Memphis)
Nabu-shezib (“Nabu-deliver!”; Memphis)
ʿAl-Nabu (“Nabu-has-entered”; Memphis)
Mannu-ki-Nabu (“Who-is-like-Nabu?”; Memphis [Abusir])
An analysis of the Nabu names finds one specific point on which they
distinguish themselves from the Bethel names. All the Bethel names are
in pure Aramaic. Among the Nabu names, on the other hand, the majority
consist of outright Babylonian names: Nabu-ah.a-bullit. , Nabu-kas.ir, Nabu-
kudurri, Nabu-ushallim, Nabu-sum-iskun, Nabu-tukulti, Nabu-zer-ibni,
Iddin-Nabu, and Mannu-ki-Nabu. On the other hand, some of the Nabu
names are Aramaic: Nabu-ʿaqab, Nabu-barak, Nabu-yahab, Nabu-natan,
and Nabu-s.adaq. Nabu is a Babylonian god. His presence in purely Baby-
lonian personal names suggests Babylonian origins for the people carrying
them. The presence of Aramaic Nabu names, however, implies an Aramean
background.
At Syene, there was a close connection between the “house of Nabu” and
the “house of Banit,” the two “houses” most likely being shrines within the
same temple compound. Like the “Queen of Heaven,” “Banit” is originally
not a personal name but a title. It is the Babylonian word for “beautiful” and
Y7557-Toorn.indb 50 5/7/19 11:50 AM

serves as the standard epithet of Nanay, traditionally the consort of Nabu.

In Neo-Babylonian personal names, especially among women, the epithet
bānītu occurs regularly as the name of a goddess. Such names as “Banitu-
dannat” (Banitu-is-strong), “Banitu-et. irat” (Banitu-saves), and “Banitu-ra-
mat” (Banitu-is-elevated) are good examples. A comparison between the
names “Nanay-bel-us.ri” (Nanay-protect-the-lord) and “Banitu-bel-us.ri”
(Banit-protect-the lord), on the one hand, and “Nanay-kilīli-us.ri” (Nanay-
protect-my-wreath) and “Banitu-agâ-us.ri” (Banit-protect-the-crown), on
the other, are suggestive of the close correspondence between Nanay and
Banitu. There can be little doubt that, in the eyes of the Arameans from
the Nabu group, Nabu and Banit/Nanay belonged together. Makki-Banit,
one of the writers of the so-called Hermopolis letters, was the grandson
of Nabu-natan. Another Syrian called Banit-sar was a nephew of Nabu-
sha. This Nabusha—his full name was Nabu-shezib—had a sister called
Nanay-h.am. “Banit” and “Nanay” appear quite frequently as divine ele-
ments in personal names at Syene and elsewhere in Egypt.
Banit (fem.; possibly Israelite)
Banit (masc.; Memphis)
Banit-<ʿ>eresh (“Banit-has-requested”)
Banit-sar (“[May]-Banit-[protect]-the-king”)
Banit-sar-el (“May-Banit-[protect]-the-king”)
Makki-Banit (“Who-is-like-Banit?”)
Nanay (masc.; Korobis, Middle Egypt)
Nanay-h.am (fem.; “Nanay-is-mistress”)
Nanay-shuri (“Nanay-is-my-protective-wall”)
Using the criterion of family connections between people each having
a different deity as a name element, the gods of the Nabu group include:
Eshem (“Eshem-ram son of Nabu-n[atan]”); ʿAttar (“ʿAttar-shuri son of
Nabu-zer-ibni”); El (“Śaka-El son of Nabu-kas.ir”); Nushku (“Nushku-
ʿidri son of Nabu-natan”); and Sin (Sin-kashir son of Nabu-sum-iskun).
The following occurrences are attested:
Eshem-[ . . . ] (Wadi Hammamat)
Eshem-kudurri (“Eshem-[protect]-my-heir”)
Eshem-ram (“Eshem-is-exalted”)
Eshem-ram (“Eshem-is-exalted”; Abydos)
Eshem-zabad (Eshem-has-given”)
Y7557-Toorn.indb 51 5/7/19 11:50 AM

ʿAttar-dimri (fem.; “ʿAttar-is-my-protection”; also known in the

shortened form ʿAttar-di)
ʿAttar-malki (“ʿAttar-is-my-king”)
ʿAttar-śaga (“ʿAttar-has-multiplied”; Memphis)
ʿAttar-shuri (“ʿAttar-is-my-protective-wall”)
Berik-El (“Blessed-by-El”; Memphis)
[Mi]ka-El (“Who-is-like-El?”)
Reʿi-El (“My-shepherd-is-El”; Memphis)
Śaka-El (“El-is-my-hope”)
Shezib-El (“Rescue, El!”)
Nushku-ʿidri (“Nusku-is-my-help”)
Sin-ʿerish (“Requested-from-Sin”; southern province?)
Sin-iddin (“Sin-has-given”)
Sin-kashir (“Sin-gives-compensation”)
Apparently, Eshem is the only god whom the two components of the
Syrian population at Syene have in common. As a matter of consequence,
it is often unclear whether we should attribute a given Eshem name to the
Bethel or the Nabu group. On account of the filiation with Nabu-natan,
there was definitely one Eshem-ram in the Nabu group. The Babylonian
element kudurri in the name “Eshem-kudurri” qualifies it as a name also
belonging to the Nabu group. Other Eshem names might be ascribed to
the one or the other group.
Nabu and Nanay (Banit) are Babylonian gods. Many of the personal
names of the Arameans belonging to the Nabu group are, grammati-
cally speaking, perfectly Babylonian too. The Babylonian connection of
this part of the Aramean community in Egypt explains the reference to
one “Hadad-nuri, the Babylonian.” The name of this man refers to the
Aramean storm god, but his origins are apparently in Babylonia. In the
written record, there are several Aramaic names that refer to a Babylonian
god. The clearest instances are “Marduk-ʿidri” (Marduk-is-my-help), “Bel-
habeh” (Bel-give-him), and “Bel-natan” (Bel-has-given). In addition,
there are other names from Syene that are clearly Babylonian; some of
them refer to a Babylonian god, while others do not:
Bel-ibni (“Bel-has-created”)
Nergal-iddin (“Nergal-has-given”)
Y7557-Toorn.indb 52 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Nergal-ushezib (“Nergal-has-rescued”)
Nur-Shawash, (“Light-of-Shamash”)
Shamash-nuri (“Shamash-is-my-light”)
Ahatsunu (“Their-sister”)
Ahuni (“Our-brother”)
Ahushunu (“Their-brother”)
Ahutab (“The-brother-is-good”)
Mannuki (“Who-is-like?”; short for “Who is like god DN?”)
The people who carried these names had their origins in a place that
was permeated by the linguistic and religious culture of the Babylonians.
In 1931, Aimé-Giron concluded that the Bethel Arameans originated from
the territory of Hamath in central Syria. As for the Nabu component of the
community, he felt less confident. In view of the extension and persistence
of the veneration of Nabu in North Syria, however, Aimé-Giron surmised
that a good deal of the Nabu Arameans came from the region of Aleppo or
Edessa. But the mix of Babylonian and Aramean elements is typical not
only for the border zones of the Babylonian Empire but also for the very
heartland of Babylonia, where there had long been an Aramean commu-
nity. Like so many other people in antiquity and today, they had a double
identity. The reference to “Hadad-nuri, the Babylonian” in one of the Ele-
phantine papyri suggest that the Nabu group had its roots in Babylonia.
The analysis of the personal names of the Arameans at Syene, com-
pleted and corroborated by the inventory of Aramean names attested
elsewhere in Persian Egypt, shows that the community consisted of two
components. There was a Bethel group and a Nabu group. Each group had
its own temple compound. The one group had the temple of Bethel and
the Queen of Heaven; the other, the temple of Nabu and Banit. In view
of the particular constellation of gods from the Bethel group, the Bethel
Arameans hailed from central Syria. Their place of origin can be more nar-
rowly defined as the former kingdom of Hamath on the Orontes River.
They are the Syrian Arameans. The Nabu Arameans were not Syrians. They
were devoted to Babylonian gods—most prominently Nabu and Nanay, the
goddess being worshipped under her title “Banit” (beautiful)—and many
carried Babylonian names. Yet the presence in their personal names of Ara-
maic features, as well as the occasional occurrence of Aramean gods, is evi-
dence of Aramean origins. These are the Babylonian Arameans.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 53 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Jews and Arameans, Jews and Egyptians

In the fifth century BCE, the Persian army in southern Egypt em-
ployed Arameans from Syria, Arameans from Babylonia, and Jews. The
latter identified themselves as Arameans too. Their language was Aramaic,
and their literary and religious culture bore an Aramean slant. Now the
question is whether the Aramean identity of the Elephantine Jews was due
to their exposure to the Aramean culture of their neighbors and colleagues
from Syene or whether it had older roots. A first step toward an answer is
to look at the nature of the contact between the Aramean communities
on the mainland and the Jews of the island. If the Aramean culture of the
Jews was the result of syncretism on Egyptian soil, their contact with the
Aramean communities must have been more frequent and more serious
than their contact with any other ethnic group. There are comparatively few
traces of Egyptian influence on the religion of the Elephantine Jews. Un-
like their Aramean neighbors from Syene, as well as Arameans elsewhere
in Egypt, the Jews do not seem to have adopted Egyptian burial practices
and beliefs. Nor did they routinely invoke Egyptian gods the way that
Aramean letter writers did. When it comes to religion, there is the one
reference to Khnum in a greeting formula and the individual case of Lady
Mibtahyah taking an oath by Sati. Syncretism being the result of social
interaction, the hypothesis of Jewish-Aramean syncretism on Egyptian soil
can be put to the test by comparing the interaction between Jews and Ara-
means, on the one hand, and Jews and Egyptians, on the other.
There are various areas and degrees of social interaction. Perhaps the
most intensive form of interaction is intermarriage. Doing business together,
fighting in the same battalion, and being neighbors is all well and good, but
marriage creates a bond that affects your identity and that of your descen-
dants in ways that cannot be erased. In the hundred years for which we
have written documentation, there were only a few cases of Jewish-Aramean
intermarriage. The most significant one was that of Ahutab, a woman whose
name occurs, time and again, in the ostraca. She is somewhat of a mystery.
Her name shows that she came from the community of the Babylonian Ara-
means. She must have married a Jewish man, apparently one in a position
of command, considering her prominence at Elephantine. The best guess is
that she married Yedanyah, then the leader of the Jewish community and the
great-grandfather of Yedanyah son of Gemaryah, whom we know to have
been the leader of the Jews during the final decades of the fifth century.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 54 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The only other indubitable case of Aramean-Jewish intermarriage in-

volves an Aramean man and a Jewish woman, as attested by the case of
Malkiyah son of Yathom son of Hadad-nuri. By the witness of his name
and a scribal notice from 464 BCE, Hadad-nuri was an Aramean from
Babylonia. Had this Babylonian man joined the Jewish community? In
the patrilineal society of the time it was the woman who normally moved
to the community of her husband. For Ahutab, it was normal to live at
Elephantine, once she had become the wife of one of the leading men of
the community. As a rule, a man would not do so. The reason why Hadad-
nuri’s offspring belonged to the Jewish community may have to do with
his personal history. The name of his Jewish son is “Yathom” (orphan). It
suggests that the father had died before or not long after Yathom’s birth.
Children would often receive their official name toward the age of three,
when they were weaned. Assuming that Hadad-nuri was the real father, his
Jewish wife might have returned to her Elephantine family after his death.
In addition to these two cases of Jewish-Aramean intermarriage, the
papyri document three instances of Jews with a possibly Aramean filiation:
Hosea son of Bethel-nuri, Zephanyah son of Makki, and Yedanyah son
of Anati. “Bethel-nuri,” “Makki,” and “Anati” are Aramean names, but
it is not impossible that they had been given to Jewish children. After all,
names composed with “Bethel,” “Eshem,” and “Herem” all occur among
the Elephantine Jews. Even if we assume that the filiations do indeed re-
flect Jewish-Aramean intermarriage, its incidence was relatively low—pos-
sibly five documented cases in all of the fifth century BCE. By comparison,
Jewish-Egyptian intermarriage was a far more frequent phenomenon. The
most famous case is the marriage of Lady Mibtahyah to Eshor son of S.eha.
Born to one of the leading families in the Jewish community of Elephan-
tine, Mibtahyah first married the son of the main priest of the temple.
Her second marriage was to Eshor, an Egyptian architect in the service of
the Persian government. Theirs was an upper-class marriage with social
benefits for both sides. Most mixed marriages concerned Jewish men who
took an Egyptian wife. There were no religious objections. In 449 BCE, the
steward of the Yaho temple married an Egyptian girl who was a servant in
the house of Meshullam son of Zakkur, one of the wealthiest Jews of the
island. Their children carried Jewish names and were respected members of
the community. A string of other Jewish men and women with an Egyp-
tian filiation indicates that Jewish-Egyptian intermarriage was quite com-
mon—more common, at any rate, than Jewish-Aramean intermarriage.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 55 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Jewish interaction with Egyptians was, in several respects, more

extensive than that with the Arameans of Syene. The Egyptians lived
nearby. The Jewish quarter was not a ghetto. Though it contained a concen-
tration of Jewish families, several of them had non-Jewish neighbors. Some
of those were attached to the temple of Khnum, situated just opposite the
Jewish quarter. Ananyah, the steward of the Jewish temple, lived opposite
Hor son of Peteisi, “a gardener of the god Khnum.” Lady Mibtahyah had
a house that was contiguous with the house of one Harwoz son of Palto,
“the priest of the god Kh[num].” Both houses directly faced the temple of
Yaho. Other Egyptians living in the Jewish quarter worked as boatmen.
Right across the street on which Qonyah and Mahseyah had their houses
was the house of Peftuaneith and his son Espemet. These were “boatmen
of the rough waters,” as the Aramaic expression has it, echoing the Egyp-
tian title “boatman of the bad water.” Espemet appears a few times in the
ostraca as well. The Jews of the quarter would frequently use his services.
There lived at least one other boatman family in the neighborhood. The
interaction between Jews and the Egyptian boatmen living nearby was
frequent. Transport over water was an Egyptian monopoly. Elephantine
Island was surrounded by water on all sides—more or less the definition of
an island. It had a harbor on the west side and one on the southeast, con-
nected to each other by the King’s Street. For their ferry rides to Aswan and
back, the Jews depended on the Egyptian boatmen. The same was true
for river travel over longer distances. The Egyptian boatmen, for their part,
depended on their Jewish clients for a good deal of their business. Jews did
business with Arameans as well, but their commercial dealings with the
Egyptians were more frequent.
Some Jews had an Egyptian spouse, some Jews had Egyptians ser-
vants, and some Jews had an Egyptian spouse and Egyptian servants. At
her death, Lady Mibtahyah left two Egyptian servants to her sons. As
noted in the previous chapter, one of the richest Jews of Elephantine was
Meshullam son of Zakkur. He gave out loans, sold houses, and acquired
several Egyptian slave girls. We know two of them by name: Tapamet
and Pakhoi. They were mothers of children who carried Jewish names.
Tapamet had a boy named Paltiyah (nicknamed Pilti), and Pakhoi had a
boy named Yedanyah (nicknamed Didi). In 449 BCE, the steward of
the temple of Yaho married Tapamet and got her son as part of the deal.
Was he actually Pilti’s father, and was the marriage the formalization of
an earlier relationship? The other Egyptian servant of Meshullam, Pakhoi,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 56 5/7/19 11:50 AM

never married. In 416, however, the main priest of the temple, one Uriyah
son of Mahseyah, adopted her son Yedanyah, after which the boy became
Yedanyah son of Uriyah. Once again, one wonders about the biological
connection. Judging by the number of references to Egyptian servants—in
fact a euphemism for slaves, for these people were branded with a property
mark like chattel—there may have been as many Egyptians in the Jewish
community through wedlock as through slavery. This paradox points to
the strong socioeconomic position of the Elephantine Jews. They may have
come as refugees but had risen to affluence and influence.
As far as we can tell from the available evidence, there were no Jew-
ish families with Aramean slaves. Would it have been something utterly
unthinkable? Perhaps. The asymmetric relationship between master and
servant would have been at odds with the overall equality between Ara-
means and Jews as brothers in arms and fellow Arameans. In addition,
there was one capacity in which Arameans occurred with some frequency
and Egyptians never. On occasion, Arameans acted as witnesses to Jewish
contracts, especially those drawn up in Syene. Egyptians never did. Was
this because their witness was void by law, like the witness of a woman? Or
was it simply because they did not understand Aramaic?
Although Jewish-Aramean intermarriage was infrequent, business
contacts were rare, and the Arameans lived in their own neighborhoods on
the other side of the river, there was one area in which the interaction was
intense. This was the army. Both the Elephantine Jews and the Arameans
of Syene served in the “Syenian garrison.” This term occurs in a 400 BCE
record of disbursements of grain to members of the garrison. In his discus-
sion of this text, Bezalel Porten implies that the Syenian garrison did not
include Jews: “The term ‘Syenian garrison’ probably indicates a preponder-
ance of non-Jews in Syene. Of eighteen wholly or partially legible names
in a ration record . . . of the Syenian garrison . . . , none can with certainty
be considered Jewish.” From Porten’s later edition of this text, however, it
is clear that the Syenian garrison did have Jewish members. One line men-
tions Haggai son of Shemayah, the well-known Jewish scribe, as a recipient
of one measure of barley. Other Jews may have been on the list (note the
reference to “[PN son of ] Natan”), but damage to the papyrus precludes
their identification. Owing to their connection to the Syenian garrison,
five prominent men of the Jewish community could refer to themselves as
“Syenians holding property in Elephantine the fortress.” This expression
shows that “Syenian” does not automatically imply residence at Syene. The
Y7557-Toorn.indb 57 5/7/19 11:50 AM

same reasoning may be applied to the far more frequent references to Jews
as Arameans “of Syene.” While Aramean was their default ethnic identity,
the Syenian connection was military-administrative. The Jews of Elephan-
tine could call themselves “Syenians” because they belonged to “the Syenian
garrison.”
The men serving in the garrison were divided into battalions and cen-
turies (groups of hundred). Attachment to a particular battalion or century
was based on language and ethnicity. The Egyptian soldiers had their own
battalions. The Iranians from Elephantine Island—mostly Horesmians
and Caspians—belonged to a separate battalion as well. In view of the bat-
talion commanders mentioned—Artabanu, Namasava, and Marya—there
was no overlap between the Iranian battalion and the battalion that the
Jews were attached to. The Jews served in an Aramaic-language battal-
ion, called the Varyazata battalion after its founder or first commander.
Among the successors of Varyazata, there were at least two Arameans, one
called Iddin-Nabu, the other Nabu-kudurri. It was a mixed battalion con-
sisting of both Jews from Elephantine and Arameans from Syene. The
centuries into which the Varyazata battalion was subdivided were under the
command of Arameans. We encounter references to Bethel-taqum, Nabu-
shalew, Nabu-shezib, Nabu-ʿaqab, and Sin-iddin, all Syrian and Babylo-
nian Arameans who served as leaders of centuries that were made up, at
least in part, of Jewish soldiers. Interestingly, there is not a single case of a
Jew in the position of head of a battalion or century. On occasion, Jews did
rise to influential positions within the Persian administration in Egypt, but
in the military they had to accept Arameans as their superiors.
Though separated by the river, the Arameans of Syene and the Jews of
Elephantine rubbed shoulders in the line of duty. They had a close collabo-
ration in the army. Not only did they belong to the same Syenian garrison;
they were also attached to the same battalions. Moreover, the centuries that
the Jews had been assigned to were under the command of Syrian and
Babylonian Arameans. Does this mean the Persian army was the melting
pot that transformed the traditional heritage of the Elephantine Jews into
a mishmash of Aramean and Jewish deities? This is hard to believe.
Conclusion
In the deep south of Egypt, there were three Aramean communities:
the Jews, the Syrians, and the Babylonians. They lived in close proximity to
Y7557-Toorn.indb 58 5/7/19 11:50 AM

one another and served in the same garrison. By the evidence of their lan-
guage, their official ethnic identity, and their literary and religious culture,
the Jews were as much Aramean as Jewish. What made them Jewish were
their names and their veneration of Yaho. But otherwise they come across
as a subgroup of the Aramean community in Egypt. The most frequent
explanation adduced for their Aramean culture is syncretism: due to the
long years of living together with the Aramean community at Syene, the
Jews would have adopted their language, their literature, and some of their
gods. A closer look at the social interaction of the Elephantine Jews does
not offer much support for this hypothesis. In their day-to-day existence,
contact with the Egyptians of the island seems to have been more frequent
than their contact with the Arameans. Most of the Jews did not adopt the
religious aspect of Egyptian culture, though. Why should they have con-
formed to Aramean practices if their contacts with the Arameans were less
substantial? Did their experience in the army, where Arameans were their
closest brothers-in-arms, have an impact beyond that of their daily com-
merce with the Egyptians? In the absence of positive evidence to this effect,
this speculative explanation lacks plausibility.
Nonetheless, the Aramean culture of the Elephantine Jews does sug-
gest that they were connected, in one way or another, to the Aramean sol-
diers in Syene. One of the two groups that constituted the Aramean colony
of Syene had its roots in Hamath. This is the Bethel group. In view of the
veneration of several gods from Bethel’s orbit in the Elephantine commu-
nity, the Jews were especially close to this group. Assuming that “Anat-
Bethel” and “Anat-Yaho” are two names for the same divine persona, the
Jews identified their own god with Bethel. By the witness of Jeremiah 44,
they worshipped the Queen of Heaven—Bethel’s consort in the Aramean
temple at Syene. The Elephantine papyri also mention Eshem-Bethel and
Herem-Bethel (also known as Herem), two other gods whose occurrence in
personal names (in the forms “Eshem” and “Herem”) bears witness to their
veneration by the Syrian Arameans. If the Jews did not adopt these gods in
Egypt, they must have done so at an earlier stage. On closer analysis, then,
the religion of the Elephantine Jews points in the same direction as their
use of Aramaic as their daily language. Even before they came to Egypt, the
ancestors of these men and women must have lived in a milieu permeated
by Aramean culture. And in view of the religion at Elephantine, that culture
must have borne the marks of the Aramean culture from central Syria.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 59 5/7/19 11:50 AM

For the time being, the hypothesis of Aramean influence upon the ante-
cedents of the Elephantine Jews is just that: a working hypothesis designed
to make sense of the available evidence and to orient further research. It is
a conjecture in need of corroboration. Until recently, scholars were inclined
to search for such corroboration by focusing on two spots on the map of
the Middle East: one in North Israel in the territory of what once was the
Assyrian province of Samaria, the other in the former kingdom of Hamath
on the middle Orontes. Hamath (modern Hama) had seemed the natural
place to start, since it was a center of worship of the gods Bethel and Anat-
Bethel. Invoking the evidence of several Yahu names of some of the kings
of northern and central Syria (notably Azri-Yaʾu and Yaʾu-bidi), several
scholars have argued there were Yahweh worshippers in Hamath. Con-
ceivably, the Elephantine Jews were the descendants of these people. Alter-
natively, the exposure to Aramean religious practices may have occurred in
Samaria after the Assyrians had turned it into a province of their empire.
According to 2 Kgs 17:24–41, the Assyrians settled several new population
groups in Samaria, Arameans from Hamath being one of them. Under
their influence, the Israelites of Samaria could have picked up the worship
of Eshem (“Ashima,” in the reading of 2 Kgs 17:30) and other gods from
Bethel’s orbit (cf. Jer 48:13).
If not for the decipherment of what has long been a mysterious papy-
rus, the Israel-Hamath connections adumbrated above would have been
the main avenues of investigation for any attempt to elucidate the histori-
cal background of the Elephantine Jews. The recent publication of Papyrus
Amherst 63 opens up a new vista. Now that the complete text has become
available in transliteration and translation, it is possible to explore the his-
tory of the Aramaic-speaking communities at Elephantine and Syene on
the basis of literary texts from their own tradition. Chapter 4 offers an as-
sessment of the contribution of the Amherst papyrus to our understanding
of the Elephantine Jews’ origins.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 60 5/7/19 11:50 AM

4 The Origins of the
Elephantine Jews
Since the early days of Elephantine studies, the origins of the Jewish colony
have been shrouded in mystery. There are two sides to the puzzle: When
did the migrants settle in Egypt, and where exactly did they come from?
On both scores, a consensus has yet to be reached. Most scholars date the
beginnings of the Jewish diaspora in Egypt to between the mid-seventh
and mid-sixth centuries BCE. Suggested dates before or after this period
have failed to rally any substantial support. Though none of the papyri
and ostraca predate the fifth century BCE, the Jewish community must
have been present before then. As noted in Chapter 1, a historical reference
in the petition to Bagohi, the governor of Judah, implies that the Jews al-
ready had a temple when King Cambyses II came to Egypt in 525 BCE. It
would seem that the archaeological record supports the claim. Yet neither
the written nor the archaeological evidence from Elephantine allows any
greater precision in determining the beginnings of the settlement. A similar
situation obtains with respect to the geographic origins of the community.
If there is a majority view, it favors Judah as the homeland. The principal
arguments adduced in support are the use of the ethnic label yĕhûdāy (in-
terpreted as “Judean”) and the biblical reference to a migration to Egypt
after the fall of Jerusalem. On the other hand, there have also been scholars
who argue for the Samarian origin of the migrants. They base their convic-
tion on the polytheistic practices of the Elephantine community, notably its
veneration of Eshem-Bethel, Anat-Bethel, and Herem-Bethel.
The nature of the written records from Elephantine is an important
cause of the continuing uncertainty about the origins of the Jewish commu-
nity. In his masterful introduction to ancient Mesopotamian civilizations,
61
Y7557-Toorn.indb 61 5/7/19 11:50 AM

62 The Origins of the Elephantine Jews
A. Leo Oppenheim divides the cuneiform documents into those that be-
longed to the “stream of tradition” and those that record day-to-day ac-
tivities. If this dichotomy is used for the classification of the Elephantine
documents, nearly all of them are records of day-to-day activities. They
constitute an incredibly rich source of information but one that leaves the
community’s origins in the dark. Normally, works from the stream of tradi-
tion are more forthcoming with information about the background of the
textual community. As it turns out, the two literary works discovered at
Elephantine—the Life and Sayings of Ahiqar and the Aramaic transla-
tion of the Behistun inscription—are not Jewish. Ahiqar is an Aramean
composition, and the Behistun inscription is Persian propaganda. To the
chagrin of the first explorers of Elephantine Island, they found nothing in
the way of Jewish literature. All of the written evidence from Elephantine
deals with the daily life of the community. In the absence of any historical
text, determining the origins of the Elephantine Jews has mostly been a
matter of guesswork.
The discovery of Papyrus Amherst 63 has totally changed the situa-
tion. Transcribed in Demotic characters, all of the Aramaic texts collected
in the papyrus belong to the stream of tradition. Though both the findspot
and the date of the papyrus are unclear, there can be no doubt that the
literary texts it contains go back to the Aramaic-speaking diaspora com-
munities in Egypt. Based on the form of the script, the papyrus is generally
surmised to have been written in the mid-fourth century BCE. The earli-
est reports said it was found, together with other Egyptian papyri, in a jar
in Thebes. Subsequent research has not confirmed this provenance. One
researcher has argued, with reference to the particular orthography of a
Demotic sign, that the papyrus must have been written at Aswan (Syene).
While the argument might not be completely compelling, the texts of the
papyrus betray obvious affinities with the religious situation encountered
among the diaspora communities of Syene and Elephantine. The papyrus
is a collection of ritual songs, laments, and historical narratives. The songs
address several gods who are familiar from the Elephantine papyri and the
Hermopolis letters. They mention Yaho, Bethel, Anat-Bethel, the Queen
of Heaven, Eshem-Bethel, Herem-Bethel, and Nabu—among other West
Semitic and Babylonian deities. There are also references made to places—
Hamath, Aram, Lebanon, Babylon, Judah, Jerusalem, Samaria—that have
been associated with the origins of the Arameans of Aswan and the Ele-
phantine Jews.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 62 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Origins of the Elephantine Jews 63
The story of the Amherst papyrus reads like a novel. Discovered in

Egypt in the late nineteenth century, it came into the possession of Lord
Amherst in the 1890s. Over the years, Lord Amherst had been patiently
building a collection of Egyptian antiquities, transforming his country
home into a private museum. Papyrus 63 would be one of the last addi-
tions. For many years the Amherst family solicitor had been diverting
funds to his own account to finance a gambling habit. When the matter
came to light, the family was forced to sell its collection to make up for
the losses. Lord Amherst died in 1909 at the age of seventy-three. In 1912
his daughter Mary, Lady William Cecil—the very one who had bought a
batch of Elephantine papyri in 1904 (see Chapter 1)—reached an agree-
ment with the New York banker J. Pierpont Morgan Sr. about the price.
The papyri were temporarily stored in the British Museum and found their
way to the Pierpont Morgan Library only in 1947. Unfortunately, over the
years one fragment of the Amherst papyrus had become separated from
the rest. It ended up at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, where it is
catalogued as Papyrus Amherst 43b. Photographs of Papyrus Amherst 63,
taken in 1901, circulated among a small group of Egyptologists. To them,
the text looked enigmatic. The signs it was written in were clear enough,
but the experts could not make head or tail of their meaning. It took the
collaboration of a specialist in Semitic languages and two Egyptologists
to discover that the Demotic script of the papyrus had been used to write
Aramaic. The first official breakthrough occurred in 1944, when Raymond
Bowman offered a translation of four lines of the text, which constituted
a small litany of blessings by Syrian and Babylonian gods. It took almost
forty years before another passage of the papyrus was deciphered. In the
early 1980s, more or less simultaneously, two teams of scholars identified
in column xii of the papyrus what was then referred to as “a pagan ver-
sion of Psalm 20.” Until the 1980s, biblical scholars had shown no inter-
est in the Amherst papyrus. But with the discovery of another version of
Psalm 20, “Amherst 63” became a buzzword in biblical studies. Members of
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints welcomed the discoveries
as proof of the existence of “reformed Egyptian,” the original language of
the Book of Mormon.
The unusual combination of Demotic script and Aramaic language is
one of the reasons why Papyrus Amherst 63 has long been inaccessible in
an authoritative scholarly edition. Richard C. Steiner published an English
translation of the entire text in the first volume of The Context of Scripture
Y7557-Toorn.indb 63 5/7/19 11:50 AM

(1997), an anthology of texts from the world of the Bible. It is a serious

work of scholarship but, as the author admitted, “with many uncertain-
ties and controversial elements.” Twenty years later, on February 28, 2017,
Steiner made his transliteration and translation of the text available online.
Though “still incomplete in various ways,” the publication of the online
edition was a major event. It is, in fact, the first edition of the complete
text. Considering the challenges presented by the papyrus, there will be
room for improvement, both in the readings and in the interpretations, but
the credit for the first edition goes to Steiner, one of the great pioneers of
the papyrus. Another Aramaic scholar working on the Amherst papyrus
is Tawny L. Holm. As the present volume goes to press, her translation of
the text is forthcoming from the Society of Biblical Literature’s Writings
from the Ancient World series. My first encounter with the text was in
2014, in the context of a research visit to the Pierpont Morgan Library. It
was soon clear to me that the Amherst papyrus was a very significant yet
largely untapped source on the culture and history of the Aramaic-speaking
diaspora communities of Syene and Elephantine. Through the kindness of
colleagues and curators I obtained two sets of photographs and used them
to prepare an edition that came out in 2018. For a detailed defense of the
interpretations here offered and a discussion of the alternatives, the reader
is referred to that edition.
The Three Communities and Their

Contributions to the Compilation
The story of the Amherst papyrus is fascinating, but the real signifi-
cance of the papyrus resides in its contents. They shed new light upon the
historical and cultural background of the Elephantine Jews. The only way
to get access to this new information is through a study of the papyrus as
a whole. Papyrus Amherst 63 is a scroll of about three and a half meters by
thirty centimeters. Each of its twenty-three columns consists, on average,
of 20 lines. With exactly 434 lines in all, the text of the papyrus is not one
unified literary work but a compilation. Some of the collected compositions
are quite long (the Tale of Two Brothers has 94 lines), and some are very
short (the prayer against enemies in column xi 16–20 covers only 5 lines).
Exactly how many literary units are in the papyrus is not absolutely clear,
since the scribes did not formally delimit the boundaries of each separate
composition. Also, many ritual songs have been gathered into cycles. But
Y7557-Toorn.indb 64 5/7/19 11:50 AM

by a conservative count, the papyrus contains some thirty-five composi-

tions. The texts have not been transcribed haphazardly onto the papyrus
but follow a particular sequence. In order to understand the nature of the
compilation and the meaning of its constituent parts, we need to be aware
of the way in which the scribes have structured the whole. Close inspection
reveals that the Amherst papyrus consists of five sections. The first three
sections each correspond to a particular segment of the textual community;
section 4 contains traditions from the time that those segments had come
together; and section 5 is an appendix.
Since the boundaries of the five sections have no formal markers, they
might easily go undetected. Steiner fails to recognize them. He takes the
papyrus as one extended liturgy for the New Year festival. The identifi-
cation of the sections does require an eye for detail, but it is not a feat of
magic. It is important to be aware of the fact that the titles “Lord” and
“Lady” are applied to many gods in the papyrus. They should not be taken
as proper names, for that would obfuscate the fact that each section focuses
on distinct deities. Sections 5 and 3 are more easily recognizable than the
other ones; they can serve as our point of departure. Section 5 is the appen-
dix. It consists of the Tale of Two Brothers, preceded by an introduction,
and runs from the beginning of column xviii to the end of column xxiii.
All students of the text acknowledge this as one unit. Another unit that all
scholars recognize comprises the three Yahwistic songs in columns xii–xiii.
Let us assume for a moment that the lament over a fallen city, with which
column xii opens, belongs together with the three psalms. This would mean
that section 3, the Israelite section, consists of columns xii–xiii and is recog-
nizable by the references to the god Yaho/Adonai.
The texts in the columns immediately preceding the Israelite sec-
tion focus on the god Bethel. His name occurs throughout columns vi–xi,
although he is more frequently referred to by the titles “Lord,” “God of
Rash,” “Resident of Hamath,” and “Guardian of Siyan.” Column vi opens
with another lament about the ravaging of the cities “in the land” and the
deportation of the staff of the god’s temple (vi 1–11). We can tentatively
identify columns vi–xi as section 2. On account of the central place of the
god Bethel and the references to Hamath, this is the Syrian section. Col-
umns i–v are quite clearly a unit too. They contain a cycle of songs to Nanay
and Nabu, celebrating the elevation of the goddess as Queen of Heaven at
the beginning of the New Year. This is section 1. Let us tentatively call it
the Babylonian section because Nabu and Nanay are, in origin, Babylonian
Y7557-Toorn.indb 65 5/7/19 11:50 AM

gods. This leaves us with columns xiv–xvii. What distinguishes these col-
umns from the rest is the plurality of gods and the particular combination
of deities, notably Eshem-Bethel in conjunction with Nabu (xvi 1–3) and
Herem-Bethel as the lover of Nanay (xvii 7–14). In addition, there is re-
peated reference to a caravan city in the desert, close to a perennial source
of water, and offering shelter and protection. This is section 4. Its compo-
sitions reflect a religious pluralism that is best explained as the consequence
of the encounter of the three communities in a common place of refuge.
Though the sections are not formally delimited, their identification is
essential for the correct understanding of the compilation. The textual com-
munity behind the papyrus is composite. The first three sections reflect its
composition: there are Babylonians, Syrians, and Israelites. Our papyrus
comes from Egypt. It is no coincidence that the three communities whose
traditions the Amherst papyrus preserves correspond to the main groups of
West Asiatic migrants in Persian Egypt. These diaspora communities could
be found throughout the country in all major garrison towns, especially at
the borders. We know them best through the Aramaic papyri and ostraca
from Elephantine, Hermopolis, and Memphis. Their religion echoes the
traditions contained in the Amherst papyrus. In the Jewish quarter of Ele-
phantine Island, there was a temple of Yaho. The Hermopolis letters refer
to temples in Syene for Nabu and Banit, on the one hand, and for Bethel
and the Queen of Heaven, on the other. The goddess Banit is none other
than Nanay. As noted in Chapter 3, her name comes from the Babylonian
word bānītu, “Beautiful One,” an epithet of Nanay. The consort of Bethel
is Anat (or Anat-Bethel); her epithet, “Queen of Heaven,” was also familiar
to the Jews of Egypt ( Jeremiah 44). The presence of three ethnic communi-
ties (Babylonians, Syrians, Jews) is also reflected in the personal names en-
countered in the West Semitic diaspora of early Egypt. The most frequent
theophoric elements of those names are “Nabu,” “Banit,” and “Nanay”
(among the Babylonians); “Bethel” (the Syrians); and “Yaho” (the Jews).
The Syrian Section

Though most of the compositions in the compilation are ritual songs,
there are also laments and historical narratives. The laments are about vio-
lence and destruction and about ravages done to cities and sanctuaries. They
preserve the memory of the catastrophes that impelled the forebears of the
community to leave their country and to look for shelter elsewhere. So the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 66 5/7/19 11:50 AM

different sections of the papyrus can lead us to the three communities’ places
and times of origin. Since this book is about the Elephantine Jews, our first
impulse may be to start with the Israelite section of the papyrus (columns
xii–xiii). However, the historical and geographic data of the Syrian section
(columns vi–xi) are more explicit. Wisdom counsels an approach that starts
with the section about the Arameans from Syria.
Chapter 3 demonstrated that a major component of the Aramean dias-
pora in Egypt had its roots in central Syria, more specifically in the region
of Hamath. Important evidence for this is the combined worship of Bethel,
Anat-Bethel, and Eshem. The Syrian section of the Amherst papyrus pro-
vides corroborating evidence, most explicitly Bethel’s title “Resident of
Hamath.” Another one of the god’s titles is “Guardian of Siyan.” Siyan
(modern Tall Siyānu) is the name of a town in Syria, about eighty kilome-
ters west of Hamath, located on the western flank of the Jebel Ansariya, the
mountain range that prolongs the Lebanon and leads up to Mount Zaphon
in the north. Under Tiglath-Pileser III (r. 745–727 BCE), the Assyrians
defeated the “land” or “city” of Siyan. The Hamath connection of the Ara-
means from Syria is implied, too, by a royal prayer, followed by a divine
assurance of support. Both the structure of the text and the content of the
oracle are strongly reminiscent of the Zakkur inscription. Zakkur reigned
as king of Hamath in the early eighth century BCE. His inscription com-
memorates an attack by a coalition of enemy kings and his delivery by the
god Baal-Shamayin. In response to the king’s call for help, the god gave an
oracle: “Do not fear. ( . . . ) I will deliver you.” Those words echo in the or-
acle that the unidentified king in the Amherst papyrus receives: “⌈PN⌉, my
servant, do not fear! I will deliver you!” The only partly legible opening and
closing lines that bracket the prayer in the papyrus seem to turn the oracle
into a promise for the future. What the god said in the past is still valid.
According to the Syrian section, the Arameans left their homeland to
escape from military violence. A chorus, connecting four Bethel songs into
a cycle, speaks about their present troubles and their hope for a brighter
future:
He will help us,
We shall rise again in peace.
May he keep watch, the Guardian of Siyan,
May he help us, the God of Rash.
I keep groaning and moaning.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 67 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Both my father and my generation

Shall magnify the Lord.
May the troubles of the fugitives
Become bright again!
Even amid the ravages
Let the crowd say, “Amen, amen.”
These Syrians have become “fugitives.” The reference to “my father and my
generation” suggests that the traumatic events they are looking back upon
are relatively recent. One song of this cycle describes a dream in which the
protagonist is transported back to the land of his youth. Apparently, not
more than one generation has passed since the catastrophe.
The lament that opens the Syrian section evokes the nature of the vio-
lence that the community has experienced:
[The ter]rors, Lord,
The t[errors,] we are howling,
The terrors [we have] se[en.]
They [ru]ined for you
All your cities.
Trembling dwells in the land.
The [dis]tressed ones turn to you,
The entire community
Of your consecrated ones.
The people of your sons
And your servant girls—
They put their hands in shackles,
All of them they carried and drove away.
There follows an enumeration of the various groups of temple personnel

that have been captured and deported: cooks, butchers, priests, musicians,
and cupbearers. The land of Hamath has gone through a period of military
violence. Cities have suffered damage, and the main temple of the land—
presumably the temple in Hamath—has ceased to function. The scenes de-
picted are typical in the context of warfare. Devastating victories and cap-
tured enemies are standard elements in Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian
royal inscriptions. Since the hostile attack occurred after the reign of Zak-
kur, the lament most likely commemorates the Assyrian conquest of Ha-
math in 720 BCE. Parts of Hamath’s population took flight and searched
for shelter elsewhere.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 68 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Israelite Section

At the heart of the Israelite section of Papyrus Amherst 63 are three
Yahwistic psalms. The term “psalms” is appropriate insofar as these songs
resemble the biblical psalms. In fact, the first song of the section is an Ara-
maic version of a text that was later reedited as Psalm 20. In all other
respects, the Israelite psalms do not really differ from the rest of the songs
in the papyrus. They are Yahwistic because they are addressed to Yahweh.
The god’s name was presumably pronounced as “Yaho,” in conformity with
the pronunciation reflected in the Elephantine papyri and ostraca. The di-
vine name “Yaho” alternates with the Hebrew title “Adonai” (Lord), which
occurs only in the three Israelite songs. At various places in the text, the
Hebrew substratum of the Aramaic is still visible. Clearly, the three Ara-
maic songs are translations of texts originally in Hebrew. The people who
contributed them to the collection had their roots in the land of Israel.
In view of the discussion about the precise meaning of yěhûdāy in con-
nection with the Elephantine colony—“Judean” or “Jew”—it would be
helpful to narrow down the origins of the community behind the Israelite
section. Is it Judean or Samarian? The three psalms do not offer many indica-
tions. Read as a single liturgical sequence, they celebrate Yaho’s kingship over
all the other gods. The New Year festival in autumn is their seasonal setting.
It is the time of the new wine and the determination of destinies. The most
vivid descriptions of this festival in the Hebrew Bible reflect its celebration
in central and northern Israel and thus pertain to its Samarian version.
However, the New Year festival itself was common to both Judah and Sa-
maria. So the fact that these songs celebrate Yaho’s kingship at the beginning
of the New Year does not provide any clues to their geographic origins.
Such a clue is available, however, in the reference to Yaho as “our Bull”
in the first of the three Yahwistic psalms:
Some by the bow,
Some by the spear—
Behold, as for us,
My Lord, our God is Yaho!
May our Bull be with us.
May Bethel answer us tomorrow.
The attribution of the title “Bull” is evidence of the Samarian origin of the
song. According to the book of Kings, King Jeroboam had set up images
Y7557-Toorn.indb 69 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of a golden calf, one in Bethel and one in Dan. They represented Yah-
weh: “This is your god, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of
Egypt!” (1 Kgs 12:28). The occasion on which Jeroboam inaugurated the
bull calf image at Bethel was precisely the New Year festival (1 Kgs 12:32).
This bovine god would henceforth be the god of Israel—the “Calf of Sa-
maria,” as Hosea says, embodying the “Yahweh of Samaria,” known from
an inscription from the Negev. This Samarian tradition contrasts with
the Jerusalem iconography in which Yahweh is the one “who is enthroned
on the cherubim.” The identification of Yaho and Bethel could be taken
as another indication of the song’s northern origins. The book of Jeremiah
speaks about the veneration of Bethel as an aberration of Israel, that is, the
Northern Kingdom ( Jer 48:13).
A historical narrative in the midst of section 4 confirms the Samarian
antecedents of the Israelite group that came to be included in the textual
community of the Amherst papyrus. The passage in question presents itself
as an eyewitness account of the arrival of a group of soldiers at the gates of
the city:
They [came (?)] toward the evening watch.
Broken men during [the mor]ning watch.
[With] my own eyes I saw
A troop of men co[mi]ng up.
The Samarians made their way
To my lord, the king.
—From where are you, young man?
From where are the [pe]ople of your dialect?
—I come from [ J]udah,
My brothers have been brou[ght]
From Samaria.
And now a man is bringing
My sister from Jerusalem.
—Come in, you, young man,
We will give you shelter.
Take a qab-measure of wheat
On your shoulder, boy.
We will know your people as a banner.
On your table
There will be put bowls.
And from every pitcher
Wine will be gulped down.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 70 5/7/19 11:50 AM

And from every vessel

There will be a plentiful measure.
The reference to this group as a “troop” (gayyās) suggests that it con-

sisted of soldiers. The same term occurs in the Tale of Two Brothers, where
it denotes a unit of the Assyrian army. Most of the men are from Sa-
maria, hence the plural šmryn, “Samarians.” In view of this plural, the
signs transliterated as ʾhy have to be understood as “my brothers” instead

of the singular “my brother” (“My brothers have been brought from Sa-

maria”). The Samarians were apparently under Judean leadership, since it
was a Judean who acted as their spokesman (“I have come from Judah”). All
this conveys the impression of Samarians as mercenaries in the service of
Judah. The arrangement of a group of Samarian military men under Judean
command could have occurred at various points in history, but there is one
period in particular where it fits: the time shortly after the fall of Samaria.
In the aftermath of 721 BCE, many Samarians moved to Judah. For men
who had lost their land, the army offered alternative employment. This
Samarian battalion under Judean command had apparently left Judah in
search of shelter. What defeat had led them to escape? The best guess puts
their flight in the time when the Assyrian campaign against Judah brought
Sennacherib’s army to the gates of Jerusalem (701 BCE).
The identification of the place of refuge that the Samarians reached is
one of the more tantalizing problems of the papyrus. According to the pas-
sage discussed above, it was a city where Hebrew was considered a foreign
language. Its actual location will be a subject of investigation later in this
chapter. At this point, it is interesting to take a closer look at the composi-
tion that immediately precedes the three Yahwistic psalms. It is about the
defeat of a city. If the structure of the Israelite section (columns xii–xiii)
corresponds to that of the Syrian one (columns vi–xi), this text is part of
section 3. If so, it must be a Samarian city that has been the victim of vio-
lence. The composition is framed as a lament by means of a few lines in
which the city itself speaks:
[She] lam[ents] the cal[amity:]
“Establish me again [and] raise (me) up!
[Esta]blish me in [my place] again,
make me stand!”
The account of the city’s devastation that follows is put in the mouth of the
conqueror:
Y7557-Toorn.indb 71 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Under tall cedars,

There [I saw y]ou.
Where you had firmly established yourself,
You whose people feasted on plenty. ( . . . )
—My brothers have mixed your bowl

On account of (your) filthy insolence.
A bowl plenty of filth,
And destruction and fury.
They will thoroughly pollute the source,
And its water shall perish in the channel.
Our anger has smitten you,

City full of people
And profanity and wickedness!
A wild ass is at its windows {its windows}.
Those that move about its walls (are)
The wild ass, the wild cat, and the snake.
The literary persona who speaks these words is most likely the army
commander. His “brothers” are the soldiers who take his orders. The city
they have ruined has no name. It was fortified (“its walls”), located in the
highlands (“under tall cedars”), prosperous (“whose people feasted on
plenty”), and dependent for its water supply on a well (or cistern) and a
channel. Richard Steiner has suggested that the reference is to the town
of Bethel. Sven P. Vleeming and Jan Willem Wesselius have speculated
that the text is speaking about Jerusalem or Tyre. Since the refugees are
from Samaria, the description most likely refers to a major city in the Sa-
marian highlands—perhaps the city of Samaria itself. Located on “the hill
of Samaria,” the city of Samaria was surrounded by walls. In view of Amos’s
reference to “the cows of Bashan on the hill of Samaria,” the prosperity of
Samaria’s citizens was, at one time, proverbial (Amos 4:1; cf. Amos 6:4–6).
The well or cistern could be “the pool of Samaria.” The identification re-
mains conjecture but fits the historical context. In 721 BCE, Sargon II be-
sieged and conquered Samaria. According to Assyrian sources, the Samar-
ians had been hostile and refused to bring tribute. The “filthy insolence”
our text speaks about may well refer to Samaria’s attempts to rid itself of its
vassal status.
The event that caused an Aramean exodus from central Syria was the
fall of Hamath in 720 BCE. The Israelite section of the Amherst papyrus
Y7557-Toorn.indb 72 5/7/19 11:50 AM

intimates—in the interpretation here offered—that the fall of Samaria in

721 triggered a comparable exodus of Samarians. They left their homeland
but did not forget it. The songs for Yaho collected in the compilation come
from one of the temples in the Samarian highlands. The lament over the
fallen city cultivates the memory of what had happened and hopes for a
turn for the better. Based on the account of an arriving troop of Samar-
ians under Judean command, the ancestors of the soldiers at Elephantine
had been serving as mercenaries in the Judean forces. Not long before 700
BCE, they had suffered a defeat and barely saved their own skins. The As-
syrian aggression had set them on a journey in search of a safe haven. Even-
tually they found it. The narrative of their arrival promises them prosperity.
What city offered them asylum?
A City of Sources, a Fortress of Palms

The narrative about the Samarians finding shelter is crucial for the un-
derstanding of the historical background of the Elephantine Jews. Since
the Amherst papyrus is a compilation of literary traditions from the Ara-
maic-speaking diaspora communities in Egypt, the Samarians whom the
papyrus speaks about were most likely the ancestors of the colony at Ele-
phantine. Like the Elephantine Jews, the Samarians were employed in the
military. Like them, they worshipped Yaho. Like them, they identified their
god Yaho with the Syrian god Bethel. Such parallels are not fortuitous but
point to a historical connection. The Samarians of the Amherst papyrus
left their legacy to the Elephantine Jews. The latter were their descendants,
even though we have come to know them as “Jews” rather than Samar-
ians. But the transformation of Samarians into Jews is a separate issue that
should not detain us in the present connection. How and why the diaspora
community developed a Jewish identity is the subject of the final chapter
of this book. At this point, we must try to trace their history from before
525 BCE, the year that Cambyses II turned Egypt into a part of the Persian
Empire.
According to the interpretation of the historical allusions in the Am-
herst papyrus here presented, the Samarians left their homeland after
721 BCE, hired themselves out to the Judeans as soldiers, then ran away
from Judah after suffering defeat at the hands of the Assyrians at the very
end of the eighth century. Around 700 BCE, their search for shelter came
to a close at a place that offered them protection and the promise of a
prosperous future. About the same time, the Aramean community from
Y7557-Toorn.indb 73 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Hamath was exiled from its homeland. They, too, were trying to escape the
Assyrian violence. At some point, the Samarians on the run and the Syr-
ian refugees found themselves in the same place. Their encounter was not a
transitory meeting but the beginning of a period of prolonged interaction.
They came to constitute two components of a society that included the
Babylonian Arameans as well. There is more to be said about the Babylo-
nian community and its background. For now, though, let us focus on the
locality where the refugee communities met.
In order to determine the place of asylum for the three communities—
Syrians, Samarians, and Babylonians—we have to sift through the evidence
contained in section 4 of Papyrus Amherst 63 (columns xiv–xvii). This is
where the architects of the compilation inserted the narrative about the Sa-
marians looking for shelter (xvii 1–6). It is the section that closes the com-
pilation, since section 5—the Tale of Two Brothers—is in fact an appendix.
What characterizes section 4 is an atmosphere of religious pluralism. It is as
though the three communities have pooled their traditions so as to create a
new religious universe. The traditional deities have not disappeared but have
been equated with others and find themselves in new constellations. The
only other part of the papyrus where this happens is in columns viii–ix (in
the Syrian section), which may also reflect the realities that obtained in the
new multicultural surroundings. Section 4 of the papyrus also contains a de-
scription of, and various references to, the place of refuge that the Arameans
had come to and where the Samarians found shelter. More or less in keeping
with the practice in other parts of the papyrus, this place of refuge remains
anonymous. Yet the descriptions do allow us to make an informed guess.
The most extensive description of the city is found in column xvi. It
pictures a city in the evening. The daily activities have come to a stop, and
humans and beasts are resting from their labor:
At sunset Haddu is strong,
The Overseer of Rash.
And the people have put themselves at ease
In the temple of the Lord.
The caravan of wanderers
Lies down in your guardroom.
The cattle have been sated,
Within you, at your source.
How should you ever be abandoned

Or be laid waste?
Y7557-Toorn.indb 74 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Nabu has made you illustrious.

He has adorned <you>
With stars of gold.
And he has placed you
In a fortress of palms,
That shall not be captured
And that hides no breach.
There will be occasion to discuss the role of the various deities men-
tioned here. At this juncture, the descriptive elements of the song deserve
consideration. The city is situated in a “fortress of palms.” It is evening,
and under the clear night sky, the stars put a special glow on the city. The
evocation of tranquility is almost idyllic. The caravan of wanderers—the
traders who have made the city their stopover—is lying in its quarters.
The cattle have been brought to rest at the source. The people have ceased
working and have gathered in the temple of the Lord. This is the picture
of a fortified city confident in its safety. It shall neither be abandoned nor
captured, and its walls hide no breach. Its location in the desert is hinted
at in two other phrases in section 4. The song to Nanay in columns xiv–xv
asks her to “order cold for the desert.” Once again, the song is set in the
evening, when the heat of the day makes way for the cool of the night.
Another reference to the city’s desert location is found in the request to
Baal-Shamayin to “build” the city that finds itself “next to the sun.” Water
sources are its major asset. It is “the land near the sources.” Some of the
songs of the fourth section of the Amherst papyrus exhibit a particular
focus on one source and its divine guardian. The god Hadad, invoked as the
city’s patron, is once referred to as the “Gatekeeper of the Perennial Source”
and twice as the “One who makes the perennial fountain murmur.” The
terms mqr (“source”) and ʾytn (“perennial fountain, perennial stream”) make
it clear that the reference is not to a cistern or a well but to a spring.
In the absence of a name, the identification of the city is a matter of
conjecture. While the descriptions could apply to several places, they rule
out many others—at least one of which has been suggested as the pos-
sible background of the narrative about the arrival of the Samarians. Two
experts on the papyrus have speculated that the story about the “broken
men” describes the migration to Egypt; the king who received the Judean
officer would have been the king of Egypt. Such a reading of the text is
possible only if the narrative about the Samarians were unrelated to the
rest of section 4. The latter assumption lacks plausibility in view of the
careful composition of the section. The Samarian soldiers were welcomed
Y7557-Toorn.indb 75 5/7/19 11:50 AM

to a caravan city, an oasis in the desert with palms and a perennial spring.
Some of these elements could apply to Aswan or Elephantine. However,
the absence of any reference to a river rules them out as candidates. For the
twin cities in the deep south, the Nile was a lifeline. It was bound to figure
in any description.
If the city that offered shelter was not in Egypt, where was it located?
In addition to the description of a caravan city at an oasis in the desert, sec-
tion 4 contains two other clues. One is the constellation of deities: the city
must have had sanctuaries for Nabu, Nanay, Baal-Shamayin, and Bethel
and his avatars. The other is the name of the land the city belonged to.
Haddu (Hadad), the patron of the city, is called the “Overseer of Rash.”
Nanay shines “from Rash” and is “the Queen over all of Aram.” Rash
and Aram designate a territory. By identifying that territory, we narrow
down the number of cities that the description in section 4 might refer
to. The territory of Aram runs from Aleppo in the north to Damascus in
the south, and from the Mediterranean in the west to Palmyra in the east.
Rash, on the other hand, is an unfamiliar name. What area does it refer to?
According to Steiner, the land of Rash mentioned in the Amherst papy-
rus is the land between Babylonia and Elam, which the Assyrians called
Rashu or Arashu. The strongest argument in favor of this identification
is the name. Also, the references to Elam and places in Elam could be
interpreted as supporting evidence. However, it is hard to believe that
the Samarians would have wandered all the way to the borders of Elam in
search of shelter. Also, the partial parallelism between Aram and Rash does
not point in the direction of southern Babylonia and Elam. There is reason
to question Steiner’s identification of Rash, then.
In order to properly evaluate the data about Rash, it is necessary to
differentiate between the five sections that make up the papyrus. The only
section in which the name “Rash” does not figure at all is the appendix (sec-
tion 5, columns xviii–xxiii). In all other sections, Rash occurs as the home-
land of the gods and the theater from which they operate. Nevertheless, a
statistical comparison between the four sections shows a significant con-
centration of references to Rash in the Syrian section (section 2, columns
vi–xi). Here we have nineteen mentions of Rash—not counting the refer-
ences to “the God of Rash”—versus three mentions of Rash in section 1
(columns i–v), one mention in section 3 (columns xii–xiii), and five men-
tions in section 4 (columns xiv–xvii). The Syrian section has a focus on the
god Bethel. Not only does Bethel operate from Rash, he is also the only god
Y7557-Toorn.indb 76 5/7/19 11:50 AM

in the papyrus to carry the title “God of Rash.” The latter phrase has almost
become a proper name in its own right. The orthography reflects the con-
ventional character of the expression. As demonstrated by this traditional
epithet, then, Rash is the home of Bethel first and foremost.
According to the Syrian section, Rash is a land with cities and towns.
The women who live there are “the daughters of Rash.” The occasional
reference to Darga-and-Rash suggests that the land of Rash is a moun-
tainous area, a highland of sorts. The word “Darga” means “staircase,
stairs” and is used metaphorically for an ascent or mountain slope. Rash
means “head” and is used metaphorically for striking elevations in the land-
scape. “Darga-and-Rash” may be tentatively translated as “Ascent-and-
Mountaintop.” This fits with the fact that Bethel is said to be “dwelling
on the mountains.” Once Rash occurs in parallel with Lebanon, which
supports the interpretation of Rash as the name of a highland:
From the Lebanon,
Lord, from Rash,
You strike the entire earth.
Finally, there is a parallelism, partial or complete, between Rash and Aram:

The land of your love, Lord,
The land of your love, and Rash,
The land of your love, Rash,
That celebrates in song
The Destroyer of the Sea—
May the Gods order for it old age.
Take away your yoke, Lord of Heaven,
Bring the wheat and barley close to you.
Raise them high on the soil of Aram.
Assuming that the name “Rash” does indeed refer to a mountaintop or a

mountain plateau, it cannot be coterminous with Aram but must be part of
Aram. In view of the close association with Mount Lebanon, Rash might
be tentatively identified with the Jebel Ansariya. Rash, then, would be the
central mountain range of Aram. Zaphon and Lebanon were known in an-
tiquity as dwelling places of the gods. Apparently, the Jebel Ansariya was
viewed as a divine abode as well.
If the city of sources lies within the territory of Aram, the most plau-
sible identification is with Palmyra (ancient Tadmor). The fit is almost per-
fect. Palmyra is a caravan city in the Syrian Desert. It lies at the border
Y7557-Toorn.indb 77 5/7/19 11:50 AM

but is still part of the territory known in antiquity as Aram (and earlier as
Amurru or Hatti). In the late Roman period, a succession of local kings
ruled over the city-state. It is also quite conceivable that Palmyra was
a monarchy at the time the Samarians arrived there. The oasis owed its
existence to the presence of a perennial spring called the Efca. Though all
the written evidence from Palmyra is from the late Hellenistic and Roman
periods, the city had been an important port of call on the trade route from
Damascus to the middle Euphrates since the third millennium BCE. Such
was its renown in antiquity that a late biblical source attributes its founda-
tion to King Solomon (2 Chr 8:3): “He built Tadmor in the desert.” Elabo-
rating upon this passage, Josephus provides a more detailed description in
his Antiquities of the Jews (late first century CE):
Solomon went as far as the desert above Syria, and possessed himself of it,
and built there a very great city, which was distant two days’ journey from
Upper Syria, and one day’s journey from the Euphrates, and six long days’
journey from Babylon the Great. Now the reason why this city lay so re-
mote from the parts of Syria that are inhabited is this: That below there is
no water to be had, and that it is in that place only that there are springs
and pits of water. When he had therefore built this city, and encompassed it
with very strong walls, he gave it the name of Tadmor, and that is the name
it is still called by at this day among the Syrians; but the Greeks name it
Palmyra.
The name of the city is intriguing. As Josephus indicates, the original

name was “Tadmor.” This is the name we find at 2 Chr 8:3 and which al-
ready occurs in Old Assyrian texts as “Tadmur.” The Greek “Palmyra” is
an adaptation of this name, presumably on the basis of Latin palma, “palm.”
The association between “Tadmor” and tāmār, “palm,” is already found in
the Bible. It is a folk etymology triggered by a prominent feature of the
oasis city. Palms were so characteristic of Palmyra that the city gave its
name to a genus (the Palmyra palm or Borassus). While the original mean-
ing of the name “Tadmor” is probably “fortress, watchtower,” in the popular
perception Tadmor was foremost the City of Palms. It was, as the Am-
herst papyrus says, “a fortress of palms.”
Other evidence in favor of the identification of the “fortress of palms”
with Palmyra is extant in the references to several gods whose connection
with Palmyra is not in doubt. The clearest instance is the occurrence of the
god Bol, who had once been the patron god of Palmyra. In Roman times,
the Babylonian god Bel had taken over his position. Yet the traditional
Y7557-Toorn.indb 78 5/7/19 11:50 AM

prominence of Bol still echoes in personal names from the period and in
such compound divine names as “Yarhi-Bol” and “Agli-Bol.” In the Am-
herst papyrus, the name of the god Bol occurs three times. It is written as
bʾl, and its pronunciation may have been /bāl/, similar to the appearance
of the god’s name in the Amorite personal name “Yamūt-Bāl” (Bāl-has-
died). The name “Bāl”/ “Bol” goes back to “Baal” (Lord), the standard title
of the West Semitic storm god Hadad. In the Amherst papyrus, the name
“Bol” (or “Bāl”) is used twice to address the god Bethel. In one other in-
stance, Nabu is called the “son of Bol,” which implies an early identification
of Bol with the Babylonian god Bel/Hadad. On the basis of this evidence,
it is legitimate to surmise that the Arameans from Syria and Babylonia ad-
opted the cult of Bol, identifying this Palmyrene deity with their own gods
Bethel (the Syrians) and Bel/Hadad (the Babylonians).
All the written evidence from Palmyra is from late Hellenistic and Ro-
man times. It would be naïve to suppose that the religious panorama reflected
in these later texts has a one-to-one correspondence with the situation in
Palmyra in the seventh and sixth centuries BCE. Nevertheless, there are
some striking parallels. Two major gods in section 4 of the Amherst papyrus
are Nabu and Baal-Shamayin. Both gods had sanctuaries in Roman Pal-
myra. As for Nanay, her name is attested in Palmyrene tesserae (entrance
tickets to religious banquets). In Roman Palmyra, Nanay was also known
under her title “Baʿaltak,” meaning “Lady of the Sanctuary.” It occurs in
the Amherst papyrus under the form “Mārat-ʾayāk,” which is the Aramaic
variant of the Assyrian “Belat-ayakki.” Two other goddesses of Roman
Palmyra can also be traced back to divine titles encountered in our papy-
rus. On the tesserae from Palmyra, there are references to Herta. “Herta”
means “the Spouse” and occurs in Amherst 63 as the title of the consort of
Bethel. Another Palmyrene goddess is Shalmat (variant Shalma). She
is likely related to the goddess Shalma, consort of Bethel in her manifesta-
tion as the evening star, also mentioned in Papyrus Amherst 63.
One could make the counterargument that Bethel and his avatars
Eshem-Bethel and Herem-Bethel never occur in Palmyrene texts. This
is true inasmuch as their names are absent. Whether this means that the
gods themselves were unknown is another matter. As demonstrated above,
the Syrians identified their god Bethel with the local Palmyrene deity Bol.
In the Palmyrene pantheon, the god Bol has two avatars: Agli-Bol and
Yarhi-Bol. The literal meanings of these names are “Calf-(of-)Bol” and
“Golden-Bol.” The former is Bol in his manifestation as the moon, the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 79 5/7/19 11:50 AM

latter as the sun. The sun god Yarhi-Bol was also the “Idol of the Source,”
meaning the Efca. In this capacity, the god was represented by a bethel.
In the Amherst papyrus, such a standing stone incorporates the divine
presence of Bethel (who draws his name from the symbol) and Hadad/Bel,
the “Bull-of-Babylon,” as one text calls him. According to the Amherst
papyrus, Hadad is the patron god of the “perennial fountain.” All this
confirms the identification of Bethel, Hadad/Bel, and Bol. It also shows
that Yarhi-Bol and Agli-Bol are not deities separate from Bol but distinct
manifestations of the latter. In this respect, there is a correspondence be-
tween Agli-Bol and Eshem-Bethel, since the latter is Bethel in his mani-
festation as god of the night. How about Yaho at Palmyra? Given his
identification with Bethel, the Israelite deity Yaho might be included in
Bethel’s identification with Bol. Perhaps, however, Yaho is to be identi-
fied with the anonymous god in the Palmyrene texts, “blessed be his name
forever,” “the merciful one,” “the god who is good and generous.” In this
connection, the one-time reference to “Throne-of-Yaho” in the Amherst
papyrus deserves to be noted, as a Palmyra dedicatory inscription calls the
anonymous god the “Lord of the Throne.”
Based on the description of the place that offered the Samarians shelter,
its identification with Palmyra is quite compelling. Corroborative evidence
may be found in the cultural and religious pluralism that marked the place
where Babylonians, Syrians, and Samarians came to live together and that
seems to foreshadow the multicultural conditions of Palmyra in the late
Hellenistic and Roman periods. Nevertheless, the identification with Pal-
myra is tentative and in need of attendant corroboration. The descriptions
and allusions do not totally exclude other places, such as Edessa in upper
Mesopotamia. But even if there is no absolute certainty about the identity
of the city the Samarians came to, the description does exclude a location
in Egypt. This means that Samarians must have been in close contact with
Aramean groups from Syria and Babylonia before they migrated to Egypt.
Assuming the Samarians came looking for shelter around 700 BCE, their
encounter with Syrians and Babylonians preceded the migration to Egypt
by at least half a century. It meant exposure to a language and a culture with
which they previously had not been familiar, during a period of two or more
generations. At the end of this chapter, we will probe the Amherst papyrus
for more information on the timeline, paying particular attention to the
date of the move to Egypt.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 80 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Babylonian Arameans

So far, the discussion has hardly touched upon the third component of
the textual community behind the Amherst papyrus. This is partly due to
the fact that some of the more explicit information on the origins of this
group appears in section 4; it would have been difficult to use it without
paying attention to the context into which it was inserted. Another reason
is the relative complexity of the issue. Whereas the Samarian origins of
the Israelites and the Syrian origins of the Bethel worshippers leave little
room for doubt, the Babylonian background of the group devoted to Nabu
and Nanay is more problematic. This has to do with the fact that Nabu
and Nanay, though Babylonian in origin, were quite popular in Assyria as
well. Even though the litany of blessings in column viii says that Nabu is
from Barsippa and Nanay from “the sanctuary” (presumably the Eanna
temple in Uruk), their Babylonian provenance did not prevent the Assyrian
kings from giving these gods a place of honor in their devotion. The fact
that an Assyrian paean to Nanaya enumerates a string of cult centers in
Babylonia shows that the Assyrians had accepted the Babylonian heritage
of these gods. Nanay’s title “Mārat-ʾayak” (Lady of the Sanctuary) was
quite familiar among the Assyrians as “Belat-Ayakki.” So the veneration
of Nabu and Nanay is not, by itself, proof of the Babylonian origins of the
community.
However, section 4 (the Palmyra section) opens with a composition
that puts an unmistakably Babylonian slant on the religion of the devotees
of Nanay and Nabu. The text covers two columns. It mixes hymn and la-
ment. The overt subject is the ravage done to the temple of Nanay, but the
actual significance of the text resides in the historical legitimation of a stele
representing Hadad/Bel, as well as the presence of an image of Nabu in the
renovated temple. One of the arresting elements in this song is the equation
of Hadad (Haddu) with Bel. In fact, the name “Bel” as such does not appear
in this text. Yet it lies at the basis of the Babylonian phrase “Mar-Bol” or
“Mar-Bāl” (Son of Bol), which occurs as a title of Nabu. In Babylonian
theology, Nabu is the son of Bel, so the expression “Mar-Bol” implies the
equation of Bel with Bol. The implicit identification of Hadad and Bel
is reflected in Hadad’s title, “Bull-of-Babylon.” According to the text,
Nanay and Hadad used to be a couple. Whereas Nanay “shines from Rash”
as “Queen over all of Aram,” Hadad is the “King of Rash.” He is the “hus-
band.” Nanay is “Cow Nanay,” and Hadad is “the Bull.” Ultimately, the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 81 5/7/19 11:50 AM

text is about a transfer of roles, it seems. As the Son-of-Bol, Nabu is to take

the place of his father as the guardian of the sanctuary. The rise of Nabu
to a position of equality with Bel is a traditional theme in the Babylonian
mythology of the first millennium BCE. In the Amherst papyrus, this
piece of mythological lore occurs in combination with the equation of two
gods with Bel: Hadad and Bol. Hadad is here the Aramean alter ego of Bel,
just as Nanay is the Aramean alter ego of Ishtar. An echo of the Babylonian
background of Hadad occurs in the Elephantine reference to one “Hadad-
nuri the Babylonian.” Bol, on the other hand, used to be the patron god
of Palmyra (see above). The composition reflects a rearrangement of names
and roles designed to adapt the traditional religion of the Arameans from
Babylonia to the cultic realities of Palmyra.
Additional confirmation of the Babylonian background of the third
component of the Amherst textual community may be found in the Tale
of Two Brothers. It tells the story of Assurbanipal and Shamashshum-
ukin, known in the tale as Sarbanabal and Sarmugi. The Assyrian king
and his brother were sons of Esarhaddon. According to Assyrian sources,
Shamashshumukin was the older of the two. Normally, he would have
succeeded his father to the throne. But Esarhaddon decided otherwise:
Shamashshumukin would be coregent in Babylon, whereas his younger
brother would reign as king of Assyria. After many years in Babylon,
Shamashshumukin eventually revolted against his younger brother. During
the military confrontation that ensued, the Assyrian army defeated Baby-
lon, and Shamashshumukin was killed. As a court novella, the Tale of Two
Brothers gives its own twist to these historical events. In its general outline,
it is based on Assyrian sources and betrays an Assyrian bias. It exoner-
ates Assurbanipal from fratricide by attributing his brother’s death to oth-
ers: Shamashshumukin was killed by his own troops, who threw him into
the fire in the temple of Marduk. In the Amherst papyrus, the scribes
have added an introduction. It is a lament that gives a Babylonian frame
to the story:
May the King observe my lament,
And may he take pity at this sound.
—What worry makes her moan,
Continually in my garden?
You (fem.) offer sweet scents among the cedars,
You (fem.) sing to the lyre sweet sounds.
—Baal-Shamayin, come out!
Y7557-Toorn.indb 82 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Wake up, my God, and observe!

I shall utter my lament and prolong it,
My lament, the lament of the marshlands.
This poetic dialogue between a woman and the god Baal-Shamayin

frames the tale that follows. In an important study of this passage, Ingo
Kottsieper has suggested the woman is a personification of the city of
Babylon. This is an attractive interpretation. It fits with the characteriza-
tion of this song as a “lament of the marshlands,” the marshlands being the
area south of Babylon. The narrative that follows makes it clear that the
civilian population of Babylonia had been a victim of the disproportionate
violence perpetrated by the Tartan (commander in chief ) of the Assyrian
army. Even if the Babylonian community of the Amherst papyrus had
left Babylon before all this happened, its members must have been sympa-
thetic to the tribulations of those who had stayed behind.
Finally, the religious landscape of Roman Palmyra betrays Babylonian
influence. The city venerated Bel as its supreme deity. In his temple, there
was a representation of the battle against the sea monster, a motif well
known from the Babylonian creation epic. Other Babylonian gods that
received worship in Palmyra were Nabu, Nanay, Nergal, and Shamash.
All this constitutes no proof, since the identification of the city of refuge
with Palmyra is likely but conjectural. But the fact that Bel, Nabu, Nanay,
Nergal, and Shamash are precisely the Babylonian gods that occur in per-
sonal names from Persian Egypt is food for thought. If the community
of Babylonian Arameans in Egypt had not come directly from Babylonia
but by way of an earlier settlement abroad, Palmyra is a plausible candidate.
The Origins of the Compilation

Papyrus Amherst 63 was found in Egypt. The scribes who produced it
used typically Egyptian writing materials and wrote in Egyptian characters.
Obviously, then, this text is an Egyptian product. Yet the fact that the one
copy of the compilation we have is from Egypt does not necessarily mean
the compilation itself originated in Egypt. Many of the individual texts col-
lected in the papyrus convey the impression of considerable antiquity. The
ritual songs to Nanay, Bethel, and Yaho are full of motifs and phrases that
bear the mark of a long tradition. In most cases it is difficult to rise above
impressions because there is no hard evidence to date the texts. But there
is one exception: The first ritual song of the Israelite section is an Aramaic
Y7557-Toorn.indb 83 5/7/19 11:50 AM

version of a forerunner of Psalm 20. The biblical text is the Judean edition
of an originally North Israelite composition. The most likely scenario to
explain the transmission and transformation of the text is the transfer of
traditional religious literature from Samaria to Judah in the aftermath of
the fall of Samaria (721 BCE). The Hebrew original underlying the Ara-
maic version in the Amherst papyrus, then, must go back to the eighth
century BCE or earlier. The songs to Bethel borrow several elements of the
Baal mythology known from the Ugaritic texts of the Late Bronze Age
(ca. 1400 BCE). The presentation of Bethel as the “Destroyer of Yamm”
and as the god of thunderstorms especially goes back to an early period.
The songs in question presumably date to the eighth century BCE as well,
if not earlier.
Assuming that several texts collected in the Amherst papyrus are from
the eighth century BCE or before, one wonders when they found their way
into the compilation. It cannot have happened before 700 BCE because the
Samarians would have had no incentive to transform their Hebrew psalms
into Aramaic songs prior to their integration into an Aramaic-speaking
community. As argued above, the most likely event that impelled them to
seek shelter in the caravan city in the desert was Sennacherib’s campaign
against Judah in 701. The analysis of the structure of the compilation yields
another argument in favor of a date after 700. The first three sections col-
lect individual traditions of the three separate communities (Babylonians,
Syrians, Samarians), while section 4 consists of material that reflects their
interaction in their newfound home. The logic of this structure implies
that the compilation of sections 1–4 took place after 700 BCE—the ear-
liest conceivable date of their encounter. One might argue that the post
quem date should be brought down considerably lower because the death
of Shamashshumukin, described in the Tale of Two Brothers, occurred in
648 BCE. Some decades may have elapsed between the events and their
integration into a court novella. This would bring the earliest date of
the compilation down to about 620 BCE. However, since the Tale of Two
Brothers is clearly an appendix, it should not be used to determine the date
of the compilation to which it has been attached. The Tale of Two Brothers
occupies a position comparable to that of tablet xii with respect to the rest
of the Gilgamesh Epic, Isaiah 37–39 with respect to the First Isaiah collec-
tion, or Jeremiah 52 with respect to the book of Jeremiah. In fact, it is also
possible to argue that the compilation of sections 1–4 must have occurred
Y7557-Toorn.indb 84 5/7/19 11:50 AM

before the Tale of Two Brothers came into circulation. On that premise, the
original compilation would have been made between 700 and 600 BCE.
A close look at the contents of Papyrus Amherst 63 yields a clue about
the occasion that may have impelled the scribes to produce the compila-
tion. This occasion may lead us, in turn, to the time of composition. Rich-
ard C. Steiner has characterized the Amherst papyrus as “the liturgy of a
New Year’s festival.” Though Steiner’s reading of the text prevents him
from seeing the way it was structured in sections, his observation that much
of it deals with the New Year festival is correct. The sections that contain
the separate traditions of the Babylonian, Syrian, and Samarian communi-
ties have a common focus on the celebrations of the New Year. The term
“New Year” occurs only in the Babylonian section, where the girls chant to
Nanay, “My gift is for you on New Year’s Day.” Yet much of the Syrian
and the Samarian sections is set in the New Year festival as well. Each sec-
tion has its particular accents. In the Babylonian section, the focus is on the
marriage of Nabu and Nanay, Nanay’s loving care for the king, and Nanay’s
elevation as Queen of Heaven, embodied by the rise of the evening star.
The Syrian section shares the focus on sacred marriage and the rise of the
evening star. Here the marriage is between Bethel and his queen in heaven,
which has a counterpart down below in the selection of a girl to be the god’s
priestess for the year to come. Both Bethel and his queen—no proper name
is given—are to manifest themselves in the sky, one as the new moon and
the other as the evening star. The Samarian section, finally, deviates from
the pattern inasmuch as Yaho/Adonai is without a partner in the songs. As
a matter of consequence, there is no sacred marriage. But the three Israelite
psalms do speak about the appearance of the new moon and a banquet
of choice meat and wine to celebrate Yaho’s kingship over the gods. Yaho
determines the destinies for the year to come. The cycle of three songs pro-
vides an insight into the New Year festival as it was celebrated in Israel.
Several elements of sections 1–3 return in a modified form in section 4.
The songs in the Palmyra section yield their full meaning only when read as
a sequence of ritual texts to mark the beginning of the New Year. A string of
references indicates that the ceremonies start in the evening and continue
throughout the night: cold descends upon the desert; it is evening; stars il-
luminate the city; and people keep a vigil until the sun rises. Two classic
elements of the New Year celebrations are the divine endorsement of the
human king and the marriage of the leading god and goddess. In section 4
Y7557-Toorn.indb 85 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of the Amherst papyrus, these elements take the form of a divine oracle by
Eshem-Bethel and Nabu promising the king a reign of everlasting peace
and a love lyric on Nanay’s marriage to Herem-Bethel. The composition
that opens this sequence of songs speaks about a chariot procession car-
rying a stele of Bel/Hadad and hints at the inauguration of the renovated
temple of Nanay. Throughout, there are references to the population get-
ting their fill from jars of wine and inebriating drink. Everything in these
texts points to celebrations of the New Year.
From the written records of Roman Palmyra we know that the inaugu-
ration of the temple of Bel was scheduled to coincide with the beginning of
the New Year. According to the Syrian section of the Amherst papyrus,
there was a similar connection between the New Year festival and the in-
auguration of the temple of Bethel. In light of these data, it is legitimate
to link the New Year festivities described in section 4 of the papyrus to the
inauguration of the renovated temple of Nanay and Nabu. We have no date
for the event. Given the context, the temple must have stood in the city of
sources. If the latter is indeed to be identified with Palmyra, the temple of
Nanay and Nabu must have been a predecessor of the Nabu temple dis-
covered in Roman Palmyra. Its inauguration took place sometime in the
seventh century BCE. It was this particular occasion, it would seem, that
provided the incentive to collect traditional songs of the constituent com-
munities of the city into one compilation.
If the reconstruction outlined here is correct, the texts in sections 1–4
of Papyrus Amherst 63 were compiled before (parts of ) the Babylonian,
Syrian, and Samarian communities migrated to Egypt. It was a literary
heritage they brought to Egypt. Attendant confirmation of this scenario
may be found in the fact that there is nothing in the Amherst papyrus that
betrays an exposure to Egyptian culture. It seems as though the people
whose traditions it preserves had never been to Egypt. There is not a single
Egyptian loanword nor any reference to an Egyptian god or to conditions
of life on Egyptian soil. In this respect, the use of Demotic to transliter-
ate the Aramaic is deceptive. It should not be taken as a sign of the Egyp-
tian setting of the traditions contained in the papyrus. There is nothing
Egyptian about those. As the analysis above has demonstrated, many of
the texts in the collection go back to the eighth century or earlier. Except
for the Tale of Two Brothers, added later as an appendix, scribes compiled
these traditions in the seventh century BCE.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 86 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Beginnings of the Aramaic-Speaking

Diaspora in Egypt
According to the evidence of several later sources, the earliest presence
in Egypt of military men from Syria, Phoenicia, and Israel dates to the
late seventh century BCE. This was the time when the Neo-Assyrian
Empire was disintegrating and Babylonia was emerging as the new super-
power. The Babylonians sacked Assur in 614 and took Nineveh in 612. Un-
der Nebuchadnezzar II (r. 605–562), the Babylonians forced the Egyptian
forces out of Syria and turned Syria, Samaria, and Judah into satellite states.
Under the impact of these events, a significant number of people from
Syria and Palestine migrated to Egypt, attracted by the prospect of houses,
land, and perhaps a salary, in exchange for military service. Mercenary colo-
nies sprang up at many places along the Nile, both in Lower and Upper
Egypt. The garrison of Syene, which included the military families living
at Elephantine, was just one of them. This is where many of the Aramaic-
speaking migrants from Palmyra ended up, most likely toward the end of
the seventh century BCE.
The migration from Palmyra to Egypt was part of a pattern. To many
inhabitants of Syria-Palestine at the time, Egypt seemed to be the prom-
ised land. The biblical record documents a migration to Egypt from Judah,
in the aftermath of the fall of Jerusalem, around 580 BCE ( Jeremiah 44).
It is very likely that there had been a comparable migration from Samaria.
When Samaria was an Assyrian province, it had become as composite as
Palmyra in terms of ethnic groups and religious practice. According to 2
Kings 17, the population consisted of Babylonians, Syrians from Hamath,
and people from other places, alongside the native Israelites. The migrants
from Hamath worshipped Ashima, and the Babylonians had an image of
Banit (2 Kgs 17:30). The parallels with the religious situation reflected in
the Amherst papyrus—and encountered later among the Aramaic-speaking
diaspora communities in Syene and Elephantine—are hard to ignore. They
should caution us not to posit a single origin for the migrant communities
in Egypt. They came from different places and arrived at slightly differ-
ent moments. Nevertheless, the correspondences between the traditions
reflected in the Amherst papyrus and the ethnic and religious situation
at Elephantine and Syene demonstrate that the Babylonian, Syrian, and
Samarian communities from Palmyra formed the nucleus of the Syenian
garrison.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 87 5/7/19 11:50 AM

For more than a century, the origins of the Elephantine Jews have
been a mystery. Owing to the decipherment of Papyrus Amherst 63, many
pieces of the puzzle now fall into place. Most of the men and women we
have come to think of as Jews were in fact Samarian Arameans. They had
a hyphenated identity, somewhat similar to the double identity of Jewish
Americans. By geographical origin, they were from Samaria. Having lived
for about a century in the Aramaic-speaking environment of Palmyra, they
had become Arameans. They had stayed loyal to their ancestral god Yaho
but equated him with the storm god Bethel. In addition to Aramaic as
their new language, they had also adopted several Aramean deities associ-
ated with Bethel: Anat-Bethel, Eshem-Bethel, and Herem-Bethel. Toward
600 BCE, they had migrated to Egypt, along with the Syrians and Baby-
lonians they had lived with in Palmyra. In the deep south of Egypt, they
settled in different neighborhoods: the Samarians at Elephantine, the Syr-
ians and the Babylonians at Syene. The settlement pattern probably corre-
sponded to the one they were used to in the place they had come from. The
three groups considered themselves Arameans but were also aware of their
distinct identities. As the final chapter will show, the particular identity of
the Samarian Arameans would go through a transformation. In the end,
the Elephantine experience would turn them into Jews.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 88 5/7/19 11:50 AM

5 A Military Colony
and Its Religion
Even if the greatest impact of Papyrus Amherst 63 on the study of the

Elephantine Jews concerns their origins and early history, its significance
does not stop there. The papyrus also throws new light on several aspects
of the life of the Elephantine colony in the fifth century BCE. So far, this
book has paid little attention to the Egyptian experience of the Elephan-
tine Jews. For many aspects of their daily life, there is no reason to rehearse
what other studies have already discussed in detail. But there are two areas
that merit a renewed inquiry because they are central to the Elephantine
experience. One is the role of Jews as soldiers in the service of the Persians;
the other concerns their religion. On both scores, the Amherst papyrus has
bearing—modest in one case, significant in the other. This chapter looks
first at the military side of the colony, then discusses various aspects of the
religious life of what was essentially a temple community, and finally seeks
to present the profile of the various gods that the Jews venerated.
The Elephantine Jews as a Military Colony

In 1911, the first full-fledged edition of the Elephantine papyri defined
the Jewish community of the island as a military colony. Half a century
later, Bezalel Porten could not think of a better term. The subtitle of his
1968 monograph speaks about “the Life of an Ancient Jewish Military
Colony.” More than a century after the discovery of the Elephantine Jews,
there continues to be a consensus about the fact that they served as fron-
tier soldiers. In light of the information from the Amherst papyrus, it is
now clear that the military activity in Egypt continued a tradition. The
89
Y7557-Toorn.indb 89 5/7/19 11:50 AM

90 A Military Colony and Its Religion
ancestors of the Elephantine Jews had already been in the armed forces.
The account of their arrival at Palmyra says they were part of a “troop.” Af-
ter their Judean commander had explained where they came from, the local
king told him that his men would be a “banner,” that is a military unit. It is
the equivalent of what, in the Elephantine documents, is known as a degel
(literally, “flag”), customarily translated as “battalion” or “detachment.” In
the seventh century BCE, the caravan route through the Syrian Desert was
dangerous. Given the importance of safe trade, several Assyrian kings sent
troops to secure unimpeded traffic. One such king was Assurbanipal. The
campaign against raiding Arab tribes brought his armed forces to Arak, a
satellite town twenty-seven kilometers northeast of Palmyra and part of
its territory. Palmyra needed trained men for its defense. The Samarians
had come as soldiers and would be employed as soldiers. The references
to “much booty” and “fines imposed upon the enemy,” also in the Palmyra
section of the Amherst papyrus, suggest that the military exploits they were
expected to perform were not merely defensive.
The Samarians migrated to southern Egypt toward the end of the sev-
enth century. They had a background as military professionals. In an at-
tempt to get away from political instability and oppression, they chose to
come to Egypt because they knew that their skills were in demand. They
were not the only ones. The fall of Jerusalem in 587 BCE led to a migra-
tion of Judeans too. It was an exodus in reverse, under the leadership of
the military. According to Jer 44:1, there were Judean colonies in the Nile
delta (Migdol, Tahpanhes), Memphis (Noph), and the southern province
(Pathros)—all places with garrisons. In light of Aramaic and Greek texts
from Egypt, the names of Edfu (midway between Thebes and Elephan-
tine) and Thebes may be added to the list. From all over the East Medi-
terranean and West Asia, foreign soldiers were arriving in Egypt. Besides
Samarians and Judeans, there were Arab, Carian, Greek, Phoenician, Asi-
atic, and Iranian mercenaries. Egypt had been employing non-Egyptian
soldiers for some time. At the beginning of the sixth century BCE, foreign
mercenaries left their graffiti in the Ramses temple at Abu Simbel. They
were part of the troops of Psammetichus the Younger on his expedition
against the Nubians. After 525, the Persians continued the Egyptian prac-
tice. From the Nile delta to the deep south, the garrisons employed soldiers
from a variety of backgrounds.
Studies of the foreign military colonies in Egypt often refer to them
as “mercenary communities.” The adjective implies that the men received
Y7557-Toorn.indb 90 5/7/19 11:50 AM

A Military Colony and Its Religion 91
a salary for their services. There is some written evidence in support of this
assumption. The so-called Padua letter is a message from a Jewish father
to his son, both active in the military. Amid several inquiries and words of
encouragement, the father mentions the wages to be paid to his son and
his colleagues. The letter refers to a practice at Migdol up in the north.
Another letter, written in the late sixth or early fifth century BCE, sug-
gests that at least some of the soldiers in the south were mercenaries too.
The letter is from Makki-Banit, an Aramean from Syene on a mission in
Memphis. Writing home, he informs his sister that “wages have been given
to them here,” “them” being the group of Syenian soldiers temporarily in
Memphis. The letter implies that wages were normally paid out in Syene.
From Elephantine Island, we have an ostracon listing four names of “the
Jews that received wages.” Another ostracon has a reference to the dis-
tribution of wages. And among the few papyri dating to the time of the
ostraca (first quarter of the fifth century BCE), there is a contract in which
a Jewish scribe promises to pay back a loan “month by month from my
wages, which they will pay me from the treasury.” His wages, then, were
monthly and paid out in cash.
In addition to the money paid out to various members of the Jew-
ish community, there are also references to remunerations in kind, consist-
ing mostly of grain. This payment in kind, disbursed from a place that
was known as “the royal treasury” or “the royal storehouse,” was called the
“ration.” On occasion, the texts mention a woman as recipient. Mibtahyah,
the sister of Yedanyah, the leader of the Jewish community during the fi-
nal decades of the fifth century BCE, donated her ration from the royal
storehouse to her sister, in return for the support she had received. The
civil status of Mibtahyah is unknown, as are the grounds on which she was
entitled to a ration. Do these data imply that all the Jews received wages in
silver and in kind? Such is the conclusion reached by Arthur Cowley, who
writes that all the Jews “received rations and pay, as a retaining fee.”
Cowley’s choice of words is intriguing. He speaks of a “retaining fee,”
implying that the wages were not remuneration for full-time employment.
The Jews had other sources of income. It might seem a technical matter, but
it is not. In later times, when Egypt was under the rule of the Ptolemies,
there was a difference between mercenaries and cleruchs. The mercenaries
were the misthophoroi, the ones who were employed as full-time soldiers
with a fixed salary (misthos). The cleruchs, on the other hand, did not receive
a salary but had an income through the parcel of land they had been given
Y7557-Toorn.indb 91 5/7/19 11:50 AM

(their kleros, “lot”). It is the difference between professional soldiers and

the men who could be called upon to do their military duty on the basis
of a land-for-service system. The cleruchs had a very different relation to
the country they defended because they were, in a way, defending their
own land. They resembled somewhat the medieval tenants in the European
feudal system. Cowley suggests that the situation of the Elephantine Jews
was mixed. They were both cleruchs and mercenaries. The matter deserves
closer attention because it affects the significance of the military identity
of the Elephantine Jews. Were they first and foremost a military colony,
employed as full-time soldiers in the Persian armed forces, or were they
landholders who could, on occasion, be called upon to defend the Persian
interests?
On the side of caution, it should be observed first that there is no in-
controvertible support for the theory that all of the Elephantine Jews re-
ceived wages. In fact, the distribution patterns in the texts suggest that only
selected community members received a ration. For the time being, we
should be careful not to extrapolate individual cases of wages into a general
rule. There is all the more reason for caution as the Elephantine papyri also
refer to the cultivation of fields by battalions. A judicial plea speaks about
a battalion possessing a “field” ploughed by one of its members. Atten-
tion must be paid to the choice of words. The battalion does not “own” the
field but “has it in possession.” The Aramaic verb occurs elsewhere with the
particular nuance of keeping or taking something into possession. Another
judicial record illustrates the distinction between ownership and posses-
sion. One man had deposited goods (garments of wool and cotton, vessels
of bronze and iron, implements of wood and ivory, corn, etc.) with another
party. Although he had explicitly declared, “They are on deposit,” the other
man “took possession of them and did not return them to him.” Here is
one man taking possession of what the other one owns. The soldiers of the
battalion did not own the land but had it in possession. The judicial plea
about the field actually specifies the period during which the battalion had
usufruct of the land: from year 24 until year 31 of King Artaxerxes I.
There are other written references to land in the possession of the fami-
lies of Jewish soldiers. After the death of their father, two sisters were as-
signed a “share” by the king’s judges and the garrison commander. They
exchanged half of it for a similar half elsewhere in the possession of two
other women. The deed of conveyance is from 495 BCE. Another docu-
ment from over fifty years later refers to the same piece of land and men-
Y7557-Toorn.indb 92 5/7/19 11:50 AM

tions that it was to be held in possession by a particular battalion. The

situation to which these documents are alluding is one in which a battalion
was assigned a particular area of land, which was subsequently parceled
out to the separate families that fell under the authority of the battalion.
Each family had a share. They were, in the Greek terminology, cleruchs.
Families might cultivate the land themselves, as evidenced by the refer-
ence to a member of the battalion “plowing” the land, or they might lease
it out to someone else. The Aramaic evidence attests to the continuation
of a practice that was already known from Egyptian sources from the New
Kingdom. Soldiers held land on condition of rendering military service.
According to Herodotus, the Egyptian soldiers paid no taxes on the yield
of their fields. Such was not the case for the foreign garrisons in Persian
Egypt. The troops had to pay a tax known as the “tribute of the garrison.”
Amélie Kuhrt notes the fact with some surprise. If the troops were en-
tirely dependent on the Persian authorities for their income, how could
they be asked to pay tribute? Only if they were not without possession
might such tribute be exacted. From other Aramaic sources on taxation it
is clear that “tribute” (mindah) usually refers to a collective rent on landed
domains. Since the soldiers received fields in reward for their services, a
tribute did make sense.
The system that prevailed in the relations between the Persian over-
lords and their Jewish soldiers is reminiscent of the land-for-service system
that the Persians adopted in Babylonia from the Babylonians. The essence
of this system is that land is allotted to new populations in return for cer-
tain services that the new tenants have to perform. In Babylonia, those ser-
vices were primarily military. That is the reason why the Babylonian word
hat ru, designating the fiscal district corresponding to the land, has been
˘ .
translated at times as “military colony,” the very term used for the Jewish
community at Elephantine. Over time, however, the Babylonian service
duty could be bought off by paying taxes. This is not exactly the system we
encounter in Egypt, where all members of the Jewish colony were divided
into battalions. Being the troops of a border garrison, the Jews had to be
available for military duties. But most of the time, the army was sleeping
rather than standing because all was quiet on the southern front. At those
times, the Jews were happily cultivating their fields and harvesting the yield.
For most of them, it was a profitable business. Some of them got rich in the
process. But for all of them, the fields they cultivated or the plantations they
took care of were essential sources of income.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 93 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The various house transactions documented in the Elephantine papyri

demonstrate that the Jews were free to buy and to sell. Yet the term that
refers to the possession of real estate on the island derives from the same
verb that was used in connection with land. The Jews did not really own
their houses any more than they owned their land; they had them in usu-
fruct. The Jews were, as the Aramaic expression has it, “holding property in
Elephantine the fortress.” The implied lack of ownership is connected to
the origins of the colony in Egypt. When the Jews came, they depended on
the goodwill of the Egyptian authorities to give them shelter. Service in the
armed forces was the condition on which the mercenaries received houses
and land. The unwritten contract that underlay the deal stipulated that the
Jews would forfeit the title to their houses the moment they stopped per-
forming the services they were expected to render. It was a hypothetical
possibility. In reality, no Elephantine Jews needed to fear that their houses
might be confiscated. Though technically a lease, in the course of time the
houses came to be regarded as individual property—to be bought, sold, or
donated without interference from the Persian authorities.
The Jews of Elephantine were frontier soldiers attached to a perma-
nent garrison. As the short texts of the ostraca show, though, their daily
activities were nonmilitary. The men lived at Elephantine Island, but they
worked on the mainland. They would usually be away for a week or longer.
In their messages home, they ask for bread, barley, and flour, as well as salt
to be added to the flour. As is clear from the supplies of cereals, as well
as the reference to grinding, some prepared their own bread. In terms of
clothing, the objects most frequently asked for are tunics and sandals. A
request for thread indicates they mended their own clothes when neces-
sary. Other food items and clothes have a minor place in the correspon-
dence. Sometimes they ask their families to send certain implements. This
is rare. But on occasion, the men did need a new pickaxe, axe, or saw.
Goods also went the other way, from the mainland to the island. The main
product the men shipped home to Elephantine was timber. In addition,
they sent vegetables, cucumbers, figs, and fish. Sundry other items occur
too sporadically for mention. Judging by the products they sent home, the
men were working on wood plantations, in the fields, and as fishermen.
Did they do their daily work in the line of duty? There is no evidence to
say they did, other than the fact that they stayed away for several days at a
time. They did not commute, even though the ferry ride to the island took
only a couple of minutes.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 94 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Aside from such duties as protecting commercial transports and pa-

trolling the border, the military activity of the colony was limited to times
of tension. The mere presence of the garrison would normally be enough
to deter invaders from the south and to prevent the population from rebel-
ling against the Persian occupation. But when conflict did break out, the
soldiers were called upon to defend the fortress. The papyri use a technical
term of Persian origin for the mobilization of the troops. It implies that the
men were to gather in the fortress and could only leave when the enemy
had been repelled. The fortress offered protection but was also a trap. For
water and bread the soldiers depended on the well within the fortress and
the royal granary to which they had access. But when the hostilities lasted,
food shortages could become acute. The fields that in times of peace pro-
vided the men with cereals, vegetables, and fruit were out of reach. Some
men had well-to-do relatives in the fortress who might help them out in
time of need. But nothing is free. The father of Mibtahyah—arguably the
wealthiest woman in the Jewish community—gave his daughter a house
in 446 BCE. The document that formalizes the grant explains that the gift
was in exchange for goods received: “When I was garrisoned in the for-
tress, I consumed them but did not find silver or gold to repay you. Then I
gave you this house in exchange for those goods of yours.” As the Ahiqar
proverb says, “The consumption of a loan is sweet . . . , but its return is the
contents of a house.” Or, as in this case, a house itself.
A Temple Community
Even though the ancestors of the Elephantine Jews had lived at close
quarters with the Arameans in Palmyra, in the deep south of Egypt, Jews
and Arameans lived in different neighborhoods. Whereas the Syrians and
the Babylonians lived in Syene, the Jews lived on Elephantine Island. Jews
and Arameans served in the same garrison (known in the texts as the “Sy-
enian garrison”), but each group had its domestic life in its own quarters.
These quarters were built around a temple. The temple of Yaho was at the
heart of the Jewish neighborhood, whereas the Babylonian Arameans had
their houses in proximity to the temples of Nabu and Banit, and the Syr-
ians lived around the temples of Bethel and the Queen of Heaven. The
settlement pattern shows that the boundaries between the three communi-
ties had not been erased through their stay in Palmyra. Though the texts
make it clear that the Jews had adopted much of the Aramean culture of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 95 5/7/19 11:50 AM

their neighbors (including several Aramean gods), they had not sacrificed
their distinct identity. Nor had the Babylonians or the Syrians. The three
communities shared a past in Palmyra but remained aware of their separate
origins.
Many, if not all, of the foreign communities in Egypt had temples for
their ancestral gods. Religion was important to them. Military life came
with dangers. And living abroad gave new significance to the gods of the
ancestors. The places of worship provided access to the gods and cemented
the cohesion of the community. They were an embodiment in timber and
stone of their identity as a people in the diaspora. In the eastern Nile delta,
the Arab soldiers had a shrine for their goddess Han-Ilat. In Memphis,
the Aramean community from Babylonia had a temple for Nabu. One text
speaks about the priests of the temples in the plural, implying there were
other Aramean temples in Memphis. A funerary stele for a certain Anan,
“the priest of Baal,” might be interpreted as evidence for a Baal temple
in Memphis. The presence of a temple for Yaho at Elephantine and of
temples for Nabu, Banit, Bethel, and the Queen of Heaven at Syene, then,
is part of a pattern.
Since temples for foreign gods were part of a pattern among the vari-
ous diaspora communities, there is reason to reconsider the traditional bias
against the Elephantine Jews. Many authors have implied that the Yaho
temple at Elephantine was unique to the Jewish community of the island,
that it was proof of their isolation. But the Elephantine temple was less
unusual than commonly granted. About one hundred kilometers north of
Aswan lies the town of Edfu (t. bh, in Aramaic). Like Syene and Elephan-
tine, it was a city with a fortress. From the Persian period onward, there
was a Jewish community living there. Aramaic documents from the third
century BCE indicate there were several priests in the community—the
term is khn, as in Elephantine and in the Bible. The most plausible explana-
tion is that the colony at Edfu, like that of Elephantine, had a temple. In
the Ptolemaic era, there was another Jewish temple at Leontopolis. Had it
been erected as a rival to the Jerusalem temple, as Josephus intimates? It
must have appeared so from the perspective of the normative Judaism of
later times. Given the presence of Jewish temples in Elephantine and Edfu,
however, the Leontopolis sanctuary may in fact have been just another Jew-
ish temple in Egypt. The presence of a Yaho temple at Elephantine, at any
rate, was hardly unique.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 96 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Both the Elephantine ostraca and the earliest papyri mention the tem-
ple. They refer to it as “the house of Yaho” or simply as “the temple.” The
phrase “house of Yaho” combines the common Semitic word for “habita-
tion” with the name of the deity. It characterizes the temple as the dwelling
place of the god of the Jews. The term commonly translated as “temple”
has a Babylonian pedigree. The Aramaic word ʾagûrāʾ is an adaptation of
the Babylonian term ekurru, which is based on Sumerian ekur, meaning
“mountain house.” It was the name of a famous temple in southern Meso-
potamia and conveys the idea that the gods inhabited a place elevated above
human dwellings. By the fifth century BCE, ʾagûrāʾ was mainly the current
term for a prestigious religious building. A description from the year 407
implies that it had been a monumental building (the temple was in ruins
at the time). This was not a roadside chapel but a palace with a courtyard
surrounded by a heavy wall.
The temple of Yaho did not merely symbolize the god’s presence at
Elephantine Island but served as its material guarantee. This is where Yaho
lived. The phrase “Yaho the god who dwells in Elephantine” echoes the bib-
lical phrase “Yahweh S.ebaoth who dwells on Mount Zion.” The Jews of
Elephantine practiced a local cult of Yahweh the way worshippers all over
the eastern Mediterranean honored local manifestations of their gods. At
Elephantine, the Jews were not cultivating memories of the temple at Zion,
as some have speculated. Nor did they long for Samaria as the true dwell-
ing place of Yaho. Yaho had a real presence down in Egypt, in his temple
on the island. The temple was not a forerunner of the synagogue, a meet-
ing place for religious Jews, but the true abode of the god. If they wanted
to meet him, to beseech his favors, or make him a witness to their solemn
declarations, this is where they went. Somehow, some way, this is where
their god was physically present.
Precisely because a god inhabits his temple, it is first of all a place of
worship. The term “worship” should not be confused with spiritual exercises
and meditations designed to cultivate feelings of devotion. Worship was
not concerned with worshippers but with the god. As the divine patron
of the community, the deity was entitled to what A. Leo Oppenheim has
called “the care and feeding of the gods.” The root metaphor of the temple
cult is the ceremony of the royal court. The temple is a god’s palace, and
the priests are his servants. Priests at Elephantine came from high-ranking
families. Temple stewards assisted them, performing most of the daily
Y7557-Toorn.indb 97 5/7/19 11:50 AM

chores. Through rites of feeding, fumigation, clothing, and obeisance, the

temple staff gave body to the belief that god dwelled in the sanctuary, lead-
ing the life of a sovereign. Most of the daily worship consisted of offerings
and sacrifices. In keeping with the prominence of the sacrificial cult, the
temple is on occasion referred to as the “altar house.” This was the place
where the Jews brought their vegetal offerings, burnt incense, and sweet
reeds, where they poured out their libations and presented the holocaust
offerings. On special occasions, the temple hosted a sacrificial banquet for
the community. At Elephantine, such a banquet was known as the marzeah.
The word was common in Palmyra, occurs two times in the Hebrew Bible,
and is found once in the Elephantine ostraca. Participants in the marzeah
banquet paid a fee to cover the costs of the festivities. The plentiful meal
with a liberal distribution of fermented drink united the worshippers with
their god in joint revelry.
Although the temple of Yaho was situated at the edge of the Jewish
quarter, it had a central place in the life of the community. The Jews were
a temple community. The Jew from the Nile delta who was writing to his
son on a mission to Elephantine, sent his greeting “to the temple of Yaho.”
In like manner, Arameans in Memphis, writing to their family in Aswan,
sent their greetings to the sanctuaries of Nabu and Banit and, in a differ-
ent letter, to the sanctuaries of Bethel and the Queen of Heaven. In all
instances, it is clear that the greetings were addressed to the communities
that patronized these temples. But it is striking that the greetings were
not to “the Jews,” “the Babylonians,” or “the Syrians” but to the temples of
their gods. It suggests that these communities took their ethnic identity
from their religious orientation. On occasion, the leader of the Jewish com-
munity presented himself as a “priest.” He used the Hebrew term khn
(pronounced kōhēn in Hebrew) rather than the more common noun kmr,
employed for the priests of Khnum and the priests of the Babylonian gods
in Syene and Memphis. The fact that the political leader was a priest fits
with the concept of a temple community. The same pattern prevails in con-
nection with the Egyptians of Elephantine Island. The temple of Khnum
was responsible for the collection of the harvest tax to be paid to the Per-
sians. The priests of Khnum were the leaders of the local community.
As several scholars have pointed out, religion today is not exactly the
same thing as religion in earlier times, so much so that one could make
the argument that religion is a misnomer when it comes to the beliefs and
ritual practices of the ancients. Although it will prove to be as good as
Y7557-Toorn.indb 98 5/7/19 11:50 AM

impossible to eradicate the notion of religion as a conceptual category, it is

important to be aware of the fact that religion has not always been some-
thing private; it used to permeate societies in all their fibers to the degree
that no one saw it as a separate field of human culture. The phenomenon
of temple communities illustrates the pervasive presence of religion. The
fact that the leadership of these communities consisted of priests is telling
of the porous boundary between the sacred and the secular. In our eyes, the
leader of the Jewish community at Elephantine was more an administrator
than a priest. In terms of his political role, this is true. But the ties between
the leading family in the Elephantine colony and the priests were strong.
And when the occasion demanded it, the leader would present himself as
a priest. The interpenetration of the sacred and the secular also meant
that the temple served a variety of functions, many of which were not (ex-
clusively) religious. Aside from being a place of offerings and prayer, the
temple also served as the public square of the community. It was a meeting
place and a kind of town hall. Some scribes may have worked out of the
temple. And the temple was the place to go when litigation led to the
imposition of an oath—a common outcome when there was no evidence
other than the contradictory statements of the two opponents.
The practice of the judicial oath illustrates the extent to which religion
put its stamp on public life at Elephantine—as it did elsewhere in the an-
cient world. The oath is at home in a time with a strong belief in divine ret-
ribution. In cases where the evidence did not allow judges to reach a verdict
of guilty or not guilty, the defendant was ordered to swear his innocence
“by” or “before” the gods. Perjury would have dire consequences. In order to
make the juror realize the seriousness of the situation, the oath ceremony
could be followed by an ordeal. The juror would be exposed to a danger he
could only survive by the grace of the gods: the consumption of a sacred
substance with potentially lethal effects, submersion in a river with stones
tied to his feet, or a variety of other tests. In most cases, the risks involved
would be enough to put the fear of god into anyone even marginally guilty.
They preferred to pay a penalty rather than to risk perjury. At Elephantine,
nobody took the oath unless there was a court order. Was this because the
oath involved a fee that people were reluctant to pay? Or did the oath in-
volve an ordeal of sorts? We don’t know. The fact is that records of an oath
obligation reckon with the possibility that the defendant might “turn away
from” the oath. Refusal to take the oath automatically entailed the obliga-
tion to fully indemnify the opponent.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 99 5/7/19 11:50 AM

While the judges imposed the “oath of litigation” at their court in

Syene, for the oath itself both accuser and accused would go to the temple.
The oath was “a declaration by gods” made by the one litigant to the other.
The god was not the recipient of the declaration but its witness. The oath
was made “by” or “upon” the god and was addressed “to” the accuser. One
text refers to the presence of four “attendants.” They were most likely acting
as witnesses, each party having the right to bring two witnesses. The de-
fendant would normally swear by his or her own god. For a Jew, that would
usually be Yaho “the god in Elephantine the fortress” or, more simply, “Yaho
the god.” Sworn in the temple, in the presence of Yaho, the oath settled
the matter. It was now in the hands of a god whose faculties of perception
and powers of retribution far exceeded the resources of human justice.
The Gods of the Elephantine Jews

The Elephantine Jews worshipped Yaho as their ancestral god. Their
temple was the “house of Yaho,” they took their oaths by Yaho, and they
gave extra force to their assertions with the phrase “by the life of Yaho.”
The three Israelite psalms of the Amherst papyrus are addressed to Yaho
and echo the religious orientation encountered in the ostraca and the pa-
pyri. In the religion of the Elephantine Jews, Yaho had a unique place,
but he was not the only god they venerated. A document from 400 BCE
shows that the temple at Elephantine accommodated two other gods be-
sides Yaho. This is a list of names of all those who contributed money, each
person two shekels, for Yaho the god (see the discussion in Chapter 2). Ac-
cording to a summary at the end, the money was allocated to Yaho, Eshem-
Bethel, and Anat-Bethel. The account does not specify the purpose of
the money, but the context suggests that it served religious ends and that
Eshem-Bethel and Anat-Bethel are gods. The Amherst papyrus contains
an oracle by, and a song to, Eshem-Bethel. There can be no doubt, then,
that it is indeed the name of a god. Anat-Bethel is a goddess. Her name
occurs in two Assyrian texts from the seventh century as the consort of the
Syrian god Bethel. Eshem-Bethel and Anat-Bethel were apparently theoi
sunnaoi, “gods in residence,” in the Yaho temple at Elephantine. Other
Elephantine papyri mention two other gods in addition to Yaho, Eshem-
Bethel, and Anat-Bethel. The documents in question are oath texts. A pa-
pyrus dated 401 BCE is a promissory note to make a judicial declaration
“upon Herem-Bethel the god.” The other text is undated, but on the basis
Y7557-Toorn.indb 100 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of the script and the people mentioned, it is most likely from the late fifth
century too. This time the oath is “by He[rem the go]d in the sanctuary
and by Anat-Yaho.” Anat-Yaho looks like a variant of Anat-Bethel and
must refer to a goddess. Herem or Herem-Bethel is qualified as “the god”
or “the god in the sanctuary.” The occurrence of Herem-Bethel as the lover
of Nanay in the Amherst papyrus proves that Herem-Bethel is really the
name of a god and not a reference to “the sacred property” of Bethel.
If the temple at Elephantine resembled temples elsewhere in the eastern
Mediterranean and West Asian world of the time, the presence of the gods
that lived there must have been embodied by symbols. The usual form of
such a symbol represents the god in the image of a human being, an animal,
or an object. Israelite religion has often been thought of as the exception to
this rule. The cult of Yahweh would have been aniconic, meaning without an
image. This school of thought turns the Israelites into the Protestants of the
past. There is room for suspicion, though. It is likely that the portable shrine
known as the ark contained an image that was later substituted with a copy
of the Torah. In the religious practice of Samaria (the Northern Kingdom),
Yahweh’s presence was symbolized by an image of a bull calf (the calves
of Bethel and Dan, satirized in the story of the golden calf ) or through a
bethel. Against this background, the presence of material symbols of the
gods in the Elephantine temple is a plausible scenario. In the one descrip-
tion that we have of the temple, in the 407 BCE petition to the Judean
governor, there is no reference to divine images, unless they were included in
“the furniture and other things that were there” or “the gold and silver basins
and other things that were in that temple.” Several scholars have argued
that the collection account of 400 BCE implies that there had been images.
They argue that that the money divided between Yaho, Eshem-Bethel, and
Anat-Bethel was in fact for the production of new images or symbols of
these gods. Ernst-Axel Knauf was the first to suggest this; other scholars
have followed him. It is, all things considered, a distinct possibility. With-
out material symbols of the divine presence, a temple cannot function. Jews
of Elephantine would normally take the oath by Yaho. The occasional oath
by other gods (Herem, Herem-Bethel, Anat-Yaho) was probably related to
the circumstance that there was no cult symbol of Yaho available at the time.
It is no coincidence that the texts that mention the oath by Yaho are all from
before the temple’s destruction in 410, whereas the cases of an oath by other
gods are from the final decade of the fifth century. Without the cultic pres-
ence of the god, the oath by Yaho would have been a hollow gesture.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 101 5/7/19 11:50 AM

If the presence of divine images or symbols is a plausible conjecture,

their actual form is unknown. Also, it makes little sense to speculate about
these symbols without first paying attention to the profile of the individual
gods. Studies of the religious life of the Elephantine Jews tend to contain
quite extensive discussions of the names of the different deities. For all
the pages written on the subject, however, some of the gods are still largely
unknown. To the Jews who venerated them, they must have been more
than mere names. They each had their own profile and iconography. When
it comes to the religion of the Elephantine Jews, the importance of Papyrus
Amherst 63 can hardly be overrated. The traditional texts of the compila-
tion allow a privileged access to the ideas that people entertained about
their gods. In the cases of Eshem-Bethel and Herem-Bethel, this evidence
is unparalleled. The rest of this chapter will use the Amherst papyrus to
sketch a portrait of the gods of the Jewish community.
Yaho
The Hebrew Bible writes the name of the Jewish god with the four
letters yhwh. Among contemporary scholars, the conventional pronuncia-
tion is “Yahweh,” but we are not absolutely sure this is correct. The earli-
est biblical manuscripts are consonantal, meaning that the scribes did not
add vowel signs. The later Bible manuscripts on which modern editions are
based have added the vowels for ʾădōnāy, “the Lord.” This has led to the
mispronunciation of the divine name as Jehovah—as in “Jehovah’s Wit-
nesses.” The cuneiform writing system does denote vowels. They indicate
that the forebears of the Jews pronounced the name of their god as “Yahu”
or “Yaho.” It is this abbreviated form that we find in the Elephantine ostraca
and papyri. Because of the variant spellings yhh (mostly in the ostraca) and
yhw (mostly in the papyri), the Elephantine Jews presumably pronounced
the name as “Yaho.” This is also the name we find in the three Israelite
psalms of the Amherst papyrus, where it alternates with Adonai (ʾdny).
Apparently, there was not a taboo on the utterance of the divine name.
It is tempting to think that the Yaho whom the Elephantine Jews wor-
shipped is the same god as “the Lord” (yhwh) of the Hebrew Bible. He is,
and he is not. The name is the same, but the god of the Bible is the edited
version. Modern Jews—or Christians, for that matter—would hesitate to
call their god “our Bull,” the way the forerunner of Psalm 20 in the Amherst
papyrus does. In fact, the Hebrew Bible criticizes the veneration of Yah-
Y7557-Toorn.indb 102 5/7/19 11:50 AM

weh in the form of a young bull calf: “I reject your calf, Samaria. . . . It is not
a god. No, the calf of Samaria shall be reduced to splinters.” In those places
in the Bible where Yahweh is referred to as a bull (ʾabbîr), the scribal editors
took care to read the word as “strong, mighty” (ʾābîr). The songs preserved
in the Amherst papyrus have not gone through this editorial process. They
do not shy away from the metaphor of the bull to extol the power of their
gods. Hadad is the “Bull-of-Babylon,” Eshem-Bethel has “the force of a di-
vine bull,” and Yaho is “our Bull.” Since the Elephantine Jews descended
from Samarians, it is possible they represented Yaho in their temple by the
image of a bullock. It would be entirely in keeping with the ritual practice
in what used to be the Northern Kingdom and in line with the iconography
of such West Semitic storm gods as Hadad and Baal.
The three songs to Yaho in the Samarian section of the Amherst papy-
rus celebrate Yaho as king of the gods. The third song does so by saying that
the host of heaven (literally, “the council of heaven”) proclaims Yaho’s rule.
The Aramaic expression “council of heaven” echoes the phrase “the council
of the heavens” from Ugaritic mythological texts. In a myth about Baal and
Anat, the council of the heavens occurs in parallel with “the assembly of the
stars.” From the context it is clear that these stars are the signs of the gods
(“the sons of El”). The parallel between stars and gods is familiar from the
Bible, too. There are several implications. First, the conceptual context of
these affirmations of Yaho’s position is polytheistic. Precisely because there
are many gods, it matters to be their leader. The polytheistic atmosphere
that pervades the Israelite psalms of the Amherst papyrus is tangible, too,
in the references to Baal-Shamayin and Baal-Zaphon congratulating Yaho
on the occasion of his rise to kingship. Second, if the multitude of the
stars stands for the council of the gods, the manifestation of their king is
either the moon or the sun—or both. This is a point we will have to address
when discussing the astral aspect of Yaho. The third implication is indirect;
it concerns the interpretation of the name “Yaho of hosts,” found twice in
the ostraca. It is the Elephantine variant of the biblical expression Yah-
weh S.ebaoth. Several scholars have suggested the Elephantine Jews had
a certain predilection for this divine name because they understood the
term s.ĕbāʾôt, “hosts,” in the sense of “armies.” Since they were a military
colony, the term seemed particularly appropriate. In view of the songs to
Yaho in the Amherst papyrus (as well as a lot of evidence from the Hebrew
Bible), the reference is most likely to the host of heaven. “Yaho of hosts” is
a reminder of the prominence of Yaho among the gods.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 103 5/7/19 11:50 AM

In the Samarian section of the Amherst papyrus, the first of the three
songs to Yaho—the forerunner to Psalm 20—contains another crucial
piece of information. At one point, the text equates Yaho and Bethel. The
identification of the two gods does not come as a complete surprise. Many
scholars had deduced as much from the occurrence of Anat-Bethel along-
side Anat-Yaho. If the gods differ only in name, it must be possible to
flesh out the profile of Yaho on the basis of descriptions of Bethel. For this
purpose, we must turn to the Syrian section of the Amherst papyrus. The
songs to Bethel portray him as a storm god in the image of Baal. In fact,
Bethel comes across as the successor to Baal since he has inherited much
of the mythological lore about Baal found in the texts from Ugarit. The
themes of Baal’s battle against the sea (Yamm), his accession to kingship,
and the building of a heavenly palace have been transferred to Bethel.
Like Baal, Bethel is both beneficent and terrifying: his rains bring fertility,
while his thunder sets the world ablaze. Scholars have long noted that the
Hebrew Bible uses many of these elements in its portrayal of Yahweh. In
that sense, the Elephantine conception of Yaho is not an innovation but a
continuation of a strand in Israelite tradition. The god of the Bible is not
the opposite of a storm god but a more perfect version. Some of the most
outspoken polemics against Baal in the Hebrew Bible make Yahweh suc-
ceed where Baal fails: He is the god who answers with fire and sends down
his rains. These views have strong roots in Samaria. They were part of the
religion that the Samarians brought to Palmyra and later to Elephantine.
Being a storm god, Bethel is typically a warrior. The songs collected in
the Amherst papyrus are full of references to Bethel doing battle. Bethel is
a god who “destroys enemies.” He “slays” them and “smashes them with a
righteous punishment.” Under the aspect of Eshem-Bethel, he is a war-
rior with the strength of a divine bull, shooting poisonous arrows at his
enemies and killing them off with a combat hammer. Yaho is not any
less martial. It must have been a reassurance for the Jewish soldiers at Ele-
phantine to know he was in their camp: “Some by the bow, some by the
spear—behold, as for us, my Lord, our God is Yaho!” The implication of
these words is not that the Jews should lay down their arms and become
pacifists. On the contrary, the belief that they had the divine warrior on
their side—“may our Bull be with us”—made them all the more valorous.
The prayer for new strength, found as a chorus in the third Israelite psalm
of the Amherst papyrus, is a soldier’s prayer. The god of these soldiers was
himself a powerful warrior.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 104 5/7/19 11:50 AM

If there is one aspect by which Bethel differs from Baal, it is his astral
appearance. In a sense, Bethel is more than a storm god. In the ritual songs
for the New Year celebration, Bethel is said to turn red like the sun and
to shine like the moon. From what follows it is clear that these are not
merely metaphors. The temporal setting of the ceremony is the evening. The
community celebrates the union of Bethel and his queen, the one rising as
the moon, the other as the evening star. At some point, clouds cover the
sky and obscurity sets in. It leads the worshippers to address Bethel as their
“Crescent”:
Our Crescent has been taken away,
The God of Rash.
The God of Rash is slumbering
On the day of [his] king[ship.]
And along with you, the Sons of El
Have put themselves to rest.
When the Crescent is slumbering,
All of them slumber.
And the chamber smells of slumber,
Which they built among your Mighty Ones. ( . . . )
Our Crescent,
You slumber in (lit., from) Rash!
You are dimmed because of love.
The light of his radiance has passed.
And his light is not high.
His light has turned dark.
Your <cl>oud is a seal, O Lord,
Send away your cloud for me!
Arise, wake up for me!
The song offers two explanations for the invisibility of the moon. The
one is natural, the other mythological. In the natural explanation, clouds
have covered the sky. In the mythological explanation, the moon is Bethel,
who has withdrawn to his heavenly chamber to sleep with his wife. In keep-
ing with the logic of the first explanation, Bethel is asked to send away the
clouds. Following the logic of the second interpretation, Bethel is to rouse
himself from sleep and come out of the bedchamber. Perhaps there is no
opposition: the clouds could be viewed as the curtains of the bedroom. The
mythological reading of the events draws a correspondence between the
rise of the crescent and the evening star, on the one hand, and the sacred
Y7557-Toorn.indb 105 5/7/19 11:50 AM

marriage of Bethel and his bride, on the other. By implication, the storm
god Bethel, here referred to as “our Crescent,” is also a lunar god.
The literary occurrence of the god Bethel in a lunar capacity is perhaps
unexpected yet is consonant with an increasing amount of iconographi-
cal data. Some of those data come from Roman Palmyra. Several entrance
tickets to religious festivals represent the god Agli-Bol as a bull carrying
a crescent on his back. The name “Agli-Bol” means “Calf-(of-)Bol.” He
is normally defined as a moon god, but it would perhaps be more precise
to say that he is the storm god in his manifestation as the moon. Earlier
iconographic evidence linking the storm god and the moon comes from
Tayma. A pedestal, originally located in a corner of the local sanctuary, has
two sides with decorations. One side portrays the head of a bull, hold-
ing a moon disk between his horns, with a winged sun disk to the left and
a crescent moon and Venus star to the right. The other side of the block
pictures a walking bull, with a full moon between his horns and a winged
sun disk above him, flanked by the eight-pointed star (Venus) and the cres-
cent moon. The gods of Tayma form a triad: S.ulmu, Shegal (šnglʾ), and
Ashima. As several scholars have argued, these gods have Syrian origins and
may be linked more specifically with Hamath. Significantly older is the
so-called Bethsaida stele (eighth century BCE). It depicts a bull-headed
figure with horns in the shape of crescents. The stele was presumably
erected at the gate of an ancient city belonging to the Aramean kingdom
of Geshur in the Golan Heights. There has been discussion of whether the
deity represented is the moon god or the storm god. In light of the literary
evidence of the traditions preserved in the Amherst papyrus, we may now
conclude that this image represents the storm god in his lunar capacity.
The notion of Bethel appearing as the moon is a clue to the understand-
ing of an otherwise enigmatic phrase in the first Israelite psalm: “Be a bow
in heaven, Crescent! Send your messengers from all of Rash!” The transla-
tion is tentative. However, all interpreters agree that there is a reference to
the moon (“crescent,” shr), and most of them think the song here actually
addresses the moon. The central issue, then, concerns the relationship
between Yaho and the crescent. On the strength of the references to Bethel
discussed above, the most plausible reading of the text takes the crescent
as a manifestation of Yaho and not as a separate deity. It implies that Yaho,
like Bethel, is associated with the moon. Under the impact of the Arame-
ans, it would seem, the Elephantine Jews came to understand the crescent
(and perhaps the moon in general) as a manifestation of Yaho. This is not
Y7557-Toorn.indb 106 5/7/19 11:50 AM

something that one would have guessed on the basis of the Hebrew Bible,
where the veneration of the moon counts among pagan practices. But at
Elephantine, the Jewish community did not have such scruples. At night,
their god was visible as the moon.
At Elephantine, finally, Yaho was believed to be a deity with a Diony-
sian side. He drank wine in large quantities and liked to hear music. The
sacrifice of fine lambs pleased him. In the three Yahwistic psalms of the
Amherst papyrus, Yaho is depicted as a bachelor. At Elephantine, however,
he had a partner called Anat (Anat-Bethel or Anat-Yaho, see the discus-
sion below), also known as the Queen of Heaven. In view of the love lyrics
between Nanay and Herem-Bethel in the Amherst papyrus, the relation-
ship between Yaho and his consort was hardly platonic. The presence of
such ideas in a Jewish community might come as a surprise to those who
believe that the Jews were the Puritans of antiquity. The latter, however, is a
questionable assumption.
Eshem-Bethel
One of the gods in residence in the Jewish temple at Elephantine was
Eshem-Bethel. The name of this deity occurs twice in the Amherst papy-
rus, both times in the Palmyra section. The first reference to Eshem-Bethel
occurs in an oracle where Eshem-Bethel is said to have chosen a young
man to be king and promises him a reign of everlasting peace. The text
contains very little that might help us in determining the profile of the de-
ity, except that Eshem-Bethel must have been a leading deity and perhaps
the god of the royal dynasty. One attendant detail of the oracle is its tem-
poral setting. Like the rest of the texts in the Palmyra section, the oracle to
the king is spoken in the evening. It is possible, then, that Eshem-Bethel
has a particular connection with the evening or the night.
The second text that mentions Eshem-Bethel is considerably more
forthcoming with descriptions of the deity. The ritual song casts Eshem-
Bethel in the role of protector of the city. At night, the god watches over its
safety and keeps its enemies at bay:
The force of a divine bull is your force.
Indeed, Eshem-Bethel,
Your venom is like asps.
Your bow in heaven,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 107 5/7/19 11:50 AM

You, O Lord, you draw,

Biting, Eshem-Bethel,
Your enemies.
You see that it is good,
Your hammer.
With force against Elam
You raise it.
—You see that it is good,

My protection.
My protection to your fortress
Shall be near.
Should they raise their head,
Your enemies;
Should they be heated against you,
The adversaries;
Should they stretch out their hand
Against the Lord—
It is powerless against the sealed gates.
I myself am coming forth
From Darga-and-Rash
In a fire you have never seen.
The song depicts Eshem-Bethel as a warrior god as strong as “a divine

bull” (literally, “a bull of El”). He is armed with bow and combat ham-
mer. The reference to his venom, likened to that of asps, does not imply
a switch of metaphors. Venom was applied to the tips of arrows to make
them deadlier: “For the arrows of Shadday are in me, my spirit absorbs their
poison” ( Job 6:4). Bow, combat hammer, and arrows—alluded to through
the reference to venom—belong to the battle gear of a storm god: rainbow,
thunder, and lightning bolts. The comparison with the bull also hints at the
fact that Eshem-Bethel is a manifestation of the storm god.
In the second part of the song, the god Eshem-Bethel speaks in the
first person. Here the text reads as a “frozen oracle,” comparable to certain
oracles that have been incorporated into the biblical psalms. The god as-
sures the citizens of his “protection.” The Aramaic word is kdn, based on the
Babylonian kidinnu. The kidinnu that Eshem-Bethel provides will deter
human enemies from attacking. Should adversaries lay siege to the city,
the god himself will come forth “from Darga-and-Rash in a fire (ʾš ) you
Y7557-Toorn.indb 108 5/7/19 11:50 AM

have never seen.” The divine epiphany will be from the traditional land of
Bethel, also referred to in the oracle in the Syrian section of the Amherst
papyrus. Fire, too, is typical of Bethel. Several songs in the Amherst pa-
pyrus picture him as the god who answers with fire. Eshem-Bethel does so
too. Clearly, the relation of Eshem-Bethel to Bethel is close. In fact, it is
difficult to really distinguish between the profiles of the two deities, except
for the fact that Eshem-Bethel seems to be connected more specially with
the evening and the night.
The name “Eshem” occurs in two variants. In the Aramaic texts from
Egypt and in the Amherst papyrus, the name is spelled ʾš(m). Usually,
the form is transcribed in modern languages as “Eshem.” The alternative
pronunciation is “Ashim,” based on the assumption that Eshem is identi-
cal with Ashima, the god of the people of Hamath (2 Kgs 17:30). In fact,
“Ashima” (ʾšymʾ) is the other spelling of the god’s name. For many years,
scholars believed that the biblical rendering of the god’s name was a garbled
version. Since the discovery of references to Ashima in Aramaic inscrip-
tions from Tayma, it is clear that the biblical spelling is correct. The Tayma
texts write the god’s name in exactly the same way. “Ashima” (ʾšymʾ),
then, was a well-established variant of “Eshem” (ʾšm). The form ʾšm is Bab-
ylonian in origin. Pronounced as “Ishum,” it is the name of a warrior god
to whom humans turn for protection, especially at night. Ishum is, as the
Song of Erra says, the “torch” that makes the night as light as the day. The
god was known in Syria, as demonstrated by a sacrificial list from Ugarit.
The alphabetic version of the list writes the name as itm, whereas the paral-
¯
lel list has his name in the traditional syllabic writing. At Ugarit, the god
Ishum is associated with the moon god Shaggar. Ishum’s association with
the moon seems to fit the evidence from Tayma, where the iconographic
evidence points to a link between Ashima and the moon.
The Aramaic-speaking communities of Palmyra that later moved
to Syene and Elephantine abandoned the dialectal variant “Ashima” and
adopted the Babylonian spelling “Eshem.” We don’t know how they actually
pronounced the name. A perfectly Babylonian name such as Ishum-kudurri
(written ʾšmkdry), encountered at Syene, demonstrates that ʾšm is really the
Babylonian variant of the name. The reference to Eshem-Bethel’s coming
forth “in a fire” (bʾš) suggests that the Aramaic-speaking worshippers of the
god associated his name with the word for fire (ʾš). Several scholars have
argued that this is the correct explanation for Ishum’s name. Perhaps it
Y7557-Toorn.indb 109 5/7/19 11:50 AM

is merely a folk etymology, however. At any rate, Eshem’s connection with

Ishum and the association with fire lay to rest the speculative interpretation
of the name “Eshem-Bethel” as “Name-of-Bethel.” Eshem/Ishum is
originally an independent god, as is also evident from the occurrences of
“Eshem” in personal names. “Eshem-Bethel” is a secondary construct. The
compound name is best understood as an apposition, to be paraphrased
as “Bethel-in-his-appearance-as-Eshem.” The name interprets Ishum,
the warrior god who illuminates the night, as a manifestation of Bethel.
There is no connection, it would seem, with the god Eshmun.
Herem-Bethel
The most enigmatic god of the Elephantine papyri is Herem. The name
occurs mostly separate and once in the construct “Herem-Bethel.” The
compound name has been interpreted as a reference to the “sacred precinct,
sanctuary” or the “sacred substance, taboo” of Bethel. The occurrence of
Herem as an independent deity, especially in personal names, has always
been a challenge to this interpretation. Papyrus Amherst 63 now sheds new
light on the god. The compilation contains a song in which a lover and a
group of bridesmaids alternately turn to Nanay and invite her to abandon
her coyness. The name of the lover turns out to be “Herem-Bethel.”
Nanay, you be my wife!
A bed of fennel they have brought,

Sweet fragrances for your nostrils.
—Our goddess, a bedspread
Has been carried to your darling,
Twigs of cedar to the darling.
In your bridal chamber a priest is singing:

“Nanay, put your lips close to me.
Please enter our bed, Nanay.
In the evening I have sung a serenade for you.”
Indeed! The chosen lad has come.

His voice will sing you a serenade
In our sanctuary:
“My favorite, where are you?
Let my harp bring you a serenade
Y7557-Toorn.indb 110 5/7/19 11:50 AM

In the bedroom of my beauty.

Let the sound of my lyre
Bring you a serenade,
In the bedroom of my girl.”
Please enter the door of our inner room!

With his mouth, Consort of Our Lord,
He will kiss you.
“And as I come and enter,

She is pleasant to my nostrils.
Come and let us enter
The perfumed hideaway!”
Herem-Bethel will make you lie down

On the bedspread,
My God on embroidered sheets
In his heavens.
The song does not go into detail about the profile of Herem-Bethel, but
it is clear that the traditional interpretation “sanctuary of Bethel” or “sacred
substance of Bethel” does not fit. Herem-Bethel is a lover. He is the “chosen
lad” who brings the goddess a serenade to the sound of the harp and the
lyre. In view of the evidence of the personal names that refer to Herem as
an independent deity, we must seek to interpret his name without reference
to Bethel. The god is a protagonist in what is traditionally referred to as the
sacred marriage (after the Greek hieros gamos). In fact, the opening line of
this love lyric—“Nanay, you be my wife!”—is a traditional phrase in the
formal celebration of marriage in Babylonia. In Mesopotamia, the sacred
marriage ritual had a variety of local traditions involving different deities.
But the most famous pair of lovers was Ishtar and Dumuzi. In the context
of the ritual, Dumuzi bore the title harmu, “lover,” the masculine form of
˘
harimtu, “lady lover, courtesan.” Ishtar is the patroness of harimtus and
˘ ˘
refers to herself as a “loving harimtu.” Since Nanay is an alter ego of
˘
Ishtar, it is quite fitting that she is referred to as a courtesan in the Amherst
papyrus as well. Her male partner is Herem, whose name must go back
to Dumuzi’s title harmu. Herem is “the lover.” His name is etymologically
˘
related to the root h.rm, “sacred, taboo,” but it developed a very specific
meaning. Since the name is a title, “Herem” could refer to various deities.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 111 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Tammuz and Hadad are the most obvious candidates. In the Amherst
papyrus, it is Bethel who plays the role of divine lover. “Herem-Bethel” may
be paraphrased as “Bethel-in-his-capacity-as-divine-lover.”
Since the title “Herem” is specific to a god in his role as youthful lover,
the coupling of Herem and Anat-Yaho in an oath text from the late fifth
century BCE may carry a meaning that goes beyond an occasional asso-
ciation. For the full reference, I follow the reading proposed by Bezalel
Porten and Ada Yardeni. One Jew will swear to the other “by He[rem] the
[god] in the sanctuary and by Anat-Yaho.” The word for “sanctuary” is
literally a “place of prostration, place of worship.” Technically it might
be a reference to the Yaho temple at Elephantine. Normally, however, the
Elephantine temple is called “the house of Yaho” or “the temple,” so it is
quite possible that the word refers here to a separate chapel, either within or
outside of the Yaho temple. The oath by Herem (or Herem-Bethel) was ex-
ceptional; a Jew would normally swear by Yaho. The choice of Herem may
have been due to the fact that there was no Yaho image or symbol available
at the time. The alternative was to take an oath by Herem and Anat-Yaho,
gods whose images had been left unharmed during the outburst of violence
in 410 BCE. They were a couple with their own chapel. If Herem was the
god in his role as a lover, Anat-Yaho must have been the mistress. At Ele-
phantine, the sacred marriage was not some exotic ritual only practiced by
others. The Jews of the island honored the tradition too.
The Queen of Heaven

According to the book of Jeremiah, the Jews of southern Egypt (Path-
ros) venerated the Queen of Heaven. They made offerings to her, poured
libations, and made cakes in her likeness ( Jer 44:15–28). The Elephantine
papyri do not mention the Queen of Heaven. The goddesses they refer to
are Anat-Bethel (present in the temple of Yaho) and Anat-Yaho (appar-
ently the consort of Herem/Herem-Bethel). Perhaps the two names refer
to the same goddess. On the mainland just across from Elephantine Island,
the Syrian Arameans had temples for Bethel and the Queen of Heaven.
Because the usual consort of Bethel is Anat-Bethel, many commentators
surmise that “Queen of Heaven” was a title of Anat-Bethel, just as “Banit”
was a title of Nanay. Reasoning along these lines, the discrepancy between
the book of Jeremiah and the Elephantine papyri might be explained by
assuming that Jeremiah uses the title and the papyri use the name of the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 112 5/7/19 11:50 AM

goddess. According to later tradition, the goddess owed her title to her as-
sociation with the Venus star. An early Jewish translation of the book of
Jeremiah into Aramaic renders the Hebrew “Queen of Heaven” as “the Star
of Heaven,” meaning the Venus star. Pursuant to this identification, it is
often assumed that the cakes made “in her likeness” (literally, “to represent
her”) were in the shape of the eight-pointed star well known as the symbol
of Venus.
The ritual songs collected in Papyrus Amherst 63 favor the interpreta-
tion of the Queen of Heaven as the Venus star. There is only one direct
reference to Anat in the papyrus. The goddess is mentioned in a context
that reveals nothing of her profile. The Syrian section of the papyrus cel-
ebrates the marriage of Bethel and his partner, but the name “Anat” does
not occur. The goddess is called “the Beautiful One” (šapirāʾ), “the Bride”
(kallāʾ), “the Perfect One” (šalmāʾ), “the Spouse” (h.êrtāʾ), and “the Queen”
(malkāʾ). The focus is entirely on the rise of the goddess and the god, she
as the evening star, he as the lunar crescent. Their marriage is figured in the
evening sky. The title Queen of Heaven is implicit at best. The goddess is
“the Queen,” and she is to rise in heaven, but she does not go by the name
“Queen of Heaven.” In fact, the only time the Amherst papyrus uses the ti-
tle “Queen of Heaven” is in connection with Nanay. The Babylonian section
describes her elevation to sovereignty as the result of her marriage to Nabu.
All the gods of heaven rise from their thrones as she makes her entry in
the evening skies. She is the Queen of Heaven. In the Amherst papyrus,
there is no clear difference between the profiles of Nanay and Anat. Nanay
is “the maiden” (rh.mʾ) and the royal wet-nurse, in much the same way as
Anat is “the maiden” (rh.m) and the royal wet-nurse in Ugaritic texts. The
compilation emphasizes their celestial manifestation and pays little atten-
tion to the warrior traits both goddesses have. Their roles in the ritual
songs are so similar that the sacred marriage between Herem-Bethel and
Nanay is hardly unnatural. Normally, Bethel’s sexual mate would be Anat.
His union with Nanay could be taken to symbolize the close collaboration
between Arameans from Syria and Arameans from Babylonia. It should
be noted that the sacred marriage of Herem-Bethel and Nanay is also a
heavenly union. The god makes her lie down “on embroidered sheets in his
heavens.” What actually happened down below is a matter of specula-
tion. But the real event took place above.
Given the general likeness between Nanay and Anat in the Amherst
papyrus, it is to be expected that the goddess Anat who was venerated in
Y7557-Toorn.indb 113 5/7/19 11:50 AM

the Jewish quarter of Elephantine would be viewed as Yaho’s consort. In

the nocturnal sky, god and goddess showed themselves as the moon and the
Venus star. Yaho was king of the host of heaven, and Anat was the Queen
of Heaven. Were “Anat-Bethel” and “Anat-Yaho” two names for the same
goddess? It would seem so in view of the equation of Yaho and Bethel.
However, it may be necessary to make a distinction between the typologi-
cal identity of the two goddesses and their different representations. There
is only one Holy Virgin Mary, but she has different statues and pictorial
forms. Those devoted to her cult will often feel emotionally attached to
one of her representations more than to others. While “Anat-Bethel” and
“Anat-Yaho” ultimately refer to the same goddess, the two names may stand
for two statues. In the interpretation of the texts here followed, the statue
of Anat-Bethel had been stolen or destroyed in 410 BCE. During the final
decade of the fifth century, Jews could still take their oath by the statue or
symbol of Anat-Yaho.
Conclusion
Among the Judeans who ended up in Babylonia during the first quarter
of the sixth century BCE, there were some who cultivated memories of
Jerusalem in its glory days. No more songs of Zion for them. “If I forget
you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand whither” (Ps 137:5). The nostalgia for
their homeland led them to call one of the towns where they settled Al-
Yahudu, “Judah-town,” after a name used in Babylonian sources for Jeru-
salem. There is no evidence, in either the ostraca or the papyri, to sug-
gest that the Jews of Elephantine thought along similar lines. To them, the
Elephantine temple was not a substitute for the temple in Jerusalem. They
were Jews abroad who simply practiced their religion, itself a mix of Jewish
and Aramean elements. Were they Jews in the diaspora? That’s how they
have come to be defined, but it is doubtful whether they themselves would
initially have shared the view. Their diaspora was one without nostalgia. The
temple they had built for their god was in timber and stone, surrounded by
an imposing wall, as though it would stand forever. It was not a temporary
shelter. They were there to stay. The Babylonian Jews may have dreamt of a
return to Zion, but the ones at Elephantine did not.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 114 5/7/19 11:50 AM

6 Becoming Diaspora Jews
How did the Samarians of Palmyra become the Jews of Elephantine? The
final chapter of this book will seek to solve the mysterious transformation
of Samarian Arameans into Jews. In the light of Papyrus Amherst 63, it is
clear that the core of the Elephantine community consisted of people of
Samarian extraction. This new information confirms the earlier intuition of
several scholars that many of the Elephantine Jews came in fact from Sa-
maria. These Samarians may have thought of themselves as Arameans due
to their integration into the Aramaic-speaking society of Palmyra, where
they had lived for several generations. When they migrated to Egypt, they
were presumably aware of their double heritage. They were both Aramean
and Samarian. But it is unlikely that they thought of themselves as Jews.
So what happened that eventually made them embrace a Jewish identity as
their defining one?
The earliest written record of the Elephantine Jews is from the very
beginning of the fifth century BCE. From that point on, the stream of
short messages and other more extended texts begins to flow, with a con-
centration of papyri from the final decades of the fifth century. There is
nothing from the sixth century. Yet the Jews must have been there already.
By their own witness, the temple of Yaho had been built before 525, the
year that Cambyses II conquered Egypt and turned it into a Persian ter-
ritory. The absence of written evidence of their presence should not be
taken as evidence of their absence. They were there, but due to the fortuities
of the archaeological record, the sixth century is a century of silence. This
should be cause for caution in writing the story of the Elephantine Jews.
When a century lies more than two millennia behind us, it may seem like
115
Y7557-Toorn.indb 115 5/7/19 11:50 AM

a short stretch of time. Close to the horizon, everything becomes small.

But a century then was just as long as a century now. A lot may have hap-
pened. When the community at Elephantine emerged from its century of
silence, it called itself Aramean or Jewish. Samarians had vanished from the
picture. Yet given what we know, a major part of the Elephantine Jews had
their historical roots in Samaria. Why did they make themselves invisible?
This chapter looks at the phenomenon of an emerging Jewish identity
under the dual impact of the diaspora experience and the Persian policy of
ethnic diversity. It distinguishes three phases in the process of becoming
Jews. In the first phase, the term yĕhûdāyēʾ was used collectively to qualify
the community as a whole. The ostraca, written between 500 and 475 BCE,
are the earliest witness to this development. The term is ethnic, embraces
both Judeans and Samarians, and is probably best translated as “Jews.” The
second phase in the development began when the Persian authorities rec-
ognized the yĕhûdāyēʾ as a separate ethnic group entitled to live by its own
laws and customs. This happened around 420 BCE. It consolidated the
Jewish identity of the community. The third phase was reached when the
leadership of the community at Elephantine deliberately deployed their
Jewish identity to win the support of the leaders in Judah and Samaria.
This happened in 407. The cause for the petition was the destruction of the
Elephantine temple in 410. The temple demolition might seem like an act
of religious violence, but a detailed investigation shows that the antagonism
between Jews and Egyptians had very little to do with religion. However,
in their letter to Jerusalem and Samaria, the leadership of the community
presented it as a religious conflict, thereby casting themselves in the role of
victims of religious intolerance. They turned the event into a Jewish story.
How a Mixed Diaspora Community

Embraced a Jewish Identity
Studies on the ethnicity of the Elephantine Jews have normally fo-
cused on the meaning of the term “Aramean.” People have been puzzled
by the seemingly random identification of individual members of the com-
munity sometimes as Jews and other times as Arameans. The scribes of the
contracts used these ethnic qualifications as though they were synonyms.
Based on their names and the god they worshipped, the Elephantine Jews
were Jews. How could they be Arameans? In their attempts to solve this
problem, scholars have twisted the meaning of the term “Aramean” in order
Y7557-Toorn.indb 116 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Becoming Diaspora Jews 117
to get rid of its reference to ethnicity. In light of the new evidence provided
by Papyrus Amherst 63, it is clear that we have been asking the wrong ques-
tion. The fact that Samarians thought of themselves as Arameans was only
natural given their century-long participation in an Aramean society. The
real question is why they should identify themselves as Jews.
The decision to translate yĕhûdāyēʾ as “Jews” rather than “Judeans” was
the subject of a few observations in the Preface and a longer discussion in
Chapter 1. There is no need to reiterate the argument. It is important to
bear in mind, though, that for the diaspora Jews in Egypt there was no dif-
ference between Judeans and Jews. The words go back to the same Aramaic
term. That term is, in origin, a reference to a territory: the kingdom, and
later the province, of Judah. From the way it is used in the Elephantine doc-
uments, it is clear that the Aramaic term has extended its meaning beyond
that of “those born or living in Judah.” The Samarians are included in the
term. This inclusive use of the term—inclusive of people from Samaria—is
an instance of the more general phenomenon wherein a specific territorial
name is given an extended meaning. All citizens of the Roman Empire are
Romans, even if they are not from the city of Rome. Persians derive their
name from Fars, which is actually just a province in the country. The Turk-
ish name for a Moroccan is Faslı, literally someone from Fès.
The earliest references to a Jewish identity of the Elephantine commu-
nity are collective. They occur in the ostraca and date from the first quarter
of the fifth century BCE. The short messages mention “the Jews” four times.
Two of the occurrences are not very illuminating. One potsherd gives the
names of a handful of men, presented as “the Jews who received wages.”
In view of their names and the fact that regular members of the colony did
not receive wages, the reference may be to the community’s leadership. The
second fragment seems to belong to a list with a similar scope. The third
ostracon mentions a Caspian who is uttering words against “the Jews” (the
term occurs twice). This is an example of Jewish ethnic identity used to
delineate one group from the other. It can hardly be a coincidence that the
ostraca contain only references to Jews in the plural.
A perusal of the Elephantine papyri shows that their earliest refer-
ence to Jewish ethnicity is from 464 BCE. The text in question registers
the formal ownership of a piece of land. It is the outcome of a process
involving a Jew and a Horesmian, arbitrated by the judges in Syene. As
Chapter 2 has argued, the reference to Jewish ethnicity may have been trig-
gered by the desire to claim membership in a group that differed from the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 117 5/7/19 11:50 AM

other ethnic communities in Elephantine and Syene. For individuals, the

Aramean identity was their identity by default. Jewish identity emphasized
difference. In this sense, individual Jewish identity echoed the collective
identity of the Elephantine community. If there is a pattern in the ref-
erences to Jewish ethnicity in documents from the first half of the fifth
century, the claim of Jewish identity is primarily collective and occurs more
particularly with reference to the leadership of the community. The latter
usage also occurs once or twice in the late fifth century. It may be related
to either the specifically Judean background of the community leaders or
their role as the community’s representatives.
Three factors contributed to the shift from a Samarian to a Jewish
identity. First, the influx of Judean migrants into Egypt led to an increas-
ingly mixed composition of the community. Second, its presence in the net-
work of Jewish diaspora communities in Egypt produced a sense of shared
identity. Third, the Persian encounter with the mixed community of Jewish
exiles in Babylonia promoted the term yĕhûdāyēʾ as the designation for the
diaspora communities elsewhere in the Achaemenid Empire. Each factor
merits close consideration.
The narrative of the arrival of Samarian soldiers in Palmyra has impli-
cations for the ethnic composition of the Jewish community at Elephan-
tine. On the basis of a detailed analysis of Papyrus Amherst 63, Chapter 4
has shown that the Samarians came to Palmyra around 700 BCE. Their
descendants migrated to southern Egypt a century later. Around 600, then,
the principal component of the Jewish community of Elephantine was Sa-
marian. The colony was not exclusively Samarian, though, because the nar-
rative in the Amherst papyrus—the charter story of the Samarian commu-
nity at Palmyra—mentions a Judean who acted as spokesman of the group.
Since the group consisted of soldiers, the particular constellation suggests
that the Samarians had been mercenaries in the service of the Judeans. The
Judean minority was apparently in a position of command. It is unclear
whether this became a pattern that persisted after their integration into
the society of Palmyra. In the sixth century, migrants to Egypt came from
other places in Syria and Palestine as well. The Hebrew Bible documents
the arrival in Egypt of a substantial number of Judeans around 580. Some
of them settled in the southern province, the area that ran from Thebes to
Elephantine. The “tower houses” in the Jewish quarter, built in the first half
of the sixth century, demonstrate the growth of the colony’s population.
Multiple floors were designed to accommodate an influx of people within
Y7557-Toorn.indb 118 5/7/19 11:50 AM

an area that could not expand. While Samarians were perhaps still the
majority, the community came to include a Judean component. Much of
its culture continued to be Aramean, but in terms of geographical origins,
the community was increasingly diverse. Some migrants had their roots in
Samaria, others in Judah. The sources contain no trace of tension between
the two groups, unless one interprets the references to the leaders as “Jews”
in this sense. In the search for a common identity, they settled on the terms
“Aramean” and “Jewish.”
Another factor that contributed to the emergence of a Jewish iden-
tity for the Elephantine community as a whole was relations between the
various Jewish diaspora communities in Egypt. Elephantine was part of a
network. There were Jews at Elephantine, but also at Migdol, Tahpanhes,
Memphis, Abydos, Thebes, and Edfu. Between the various nodes of the
Jewish diaspora in Egypt, communication and movement of persons was
frequent, more so than with Judah or Samaria. The Jewish communities in
Egypt felt connected most of all to one another. Their encounters favored
the emergence of a sense of community that looked at a common identity
beyond the differences of geographical background. This phenomenon has
analogies in modern diasporas. Gandhi was from Gujarat and grew up as a
Gujarati. He developed his sense of Indian identity outside his homeland
in the Indian diaspora in London and South Africa. By good fortune, the
ruin hill on the south side of Elephantine has yielded a text documenting
an instance of the contacts between Jews from the delta and those in the
deep south. It is a letter sent by a Jewish man from Migdol to his son on a
mission to Elephantine: “[Greetings] to the [H]ouse of Yaho in Elephan-
tine. To my son Shelomam, [fr]om your brother Osea. [I send you greet-
ings] of welfare and strength. [Now then,] from the day you went on that
journey, I have not been happy. The same goes for your mother. Now then,
may you be blessed [by Yaho the God, that he may sh]ow me your face in
peace. ( . . . ) Now then, how is the family? And how was your trip? Yaho
[the God willing you are] well and there is no injury. Be a man! ( . . . ). To
my brother Shelomam son of Osea, your brother Osea ( . . . ).”
Many observations could be made about this letter. In the present con-
nection, however, its significance resides in the fact that it documents the
contacts between the different diaspora communities in Egypt. The son had
traveled all the way from Migdol to Elephantine, a journey of more than
one thousand kilometers, the two towns being at opposite ends of Egypt.
Following in the footsteps of his father, he served as a soldier and was now
Y7557-Toorn.indb 119 5/7/19 11:50 AM

on a mission. Possibly he was married to a girl from the Jewish commu-

nity of the island. The father sent his greetings to the house of Yaho in
Elephantine. These temple greetings were actually addressed to the com-
munity that patronized the temple. Even if the other references to Yaho are
merely rhetorical, they convey a sense of shared identity between the Jews
at Migdol and those in Elephantine. Was that identity Judean or Jewish? It
was a mix of religion and ethnicity. The letter is from the second quarter of
the fifth century. Let us call this sense of identity “Jewish,” since the term
embraced people of both Judean and Samarian descent.
The third factor that may have played a role in the gradual transfor-
mation of the geographical term “Judean” into a broader term of ethnicity
was the Persian perception of the Judean diaspora. This is a moot point. In
the absence of direct evidence from the Persian side it is based on deduc-
tion. In the course of the fifth century BCE, the Persian authorities gave
official recognition to the Jewish people. Since the Persians used religion
as a significant parameter of ethnicity, this was arguably the consecration
of the Jewish community as an ethnic group defined by roots and religion.
The Persian decree that legitimized Hananyah’s mission (see below) pre-
supposes an awareness that there was a diaspora community in the Persian
Empire that referred to itself as “Judean.” The Persians’ first encounter with
these Judeans was with the community of Judean exiles in Babylonia. The
fact that these exiles called one of the places where they lived “Al-Yahudu”
(“Judah-town”) defined them as Judeans. With the recent publication of
some hundred cuneiform documents from the Judean diaspora in Baby-
lonia, it has become clear that the community of exiles included people of
Samarian descent. Their personal names often contain a reference to the
god Bethel (Bīt-il). Whether Bethel was identified with Yaho or not, his
veneration was typical of Samarians. These Samarians may have been the
descendants of families that had moved to Judah after the fall of Samaria in
721. They were included in the group of “Judeans” (Yāhūdāya). Through-
˘
out the Persian Empire the Judean diaspora was not purely Judean but
included Samarian elements. But the Judeans gave the diaspora its name.
Persian Policies and the Jewish People

The second phase in the transformation of Samarians into Jews may
be said to have begun with the mission of Hananyah, who was sent to
Egypt by order of the Persian king. It is unclear whether he ever visited
Elephantine. His activity, however, had quite an impact on the Elephantine
Y7557-Toorn.indb 120 5/7/19 11:50 AM

community. Hananyah sent instructions about the Jewish festival calendar

to the colony at Elephantine. The remains of his letter turned up during the
German excavations on the island and were first published in 1911. De-
spite the damage to the text, it stirred a great interest among scholars. The
message seemed to give directions about Pesach (Passover), one of the great
festivals of the Jewish calendar and an annual reminder of the exodus from
Egypt. The text came to be known as the Passover Papyrus. As it turns
out, the title is misleading, since the Passover Papyrus is actually not about
Pesach but about the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Matzoth). The body of
the letter contains detailed instructions about its date and proper obser-
vance. Matzoth and Pesach were originally distinct agrarian rites that were
later combined into a liturgical sequence with the exodus story as its cultic
tale. It is possible that the link between them had already been established
at Elephantine. In view of the references to Pesach in the ostraca, we know
that the community was familiar with the festival by the beginning of the
fifth century BCE, two generations before Hananyah came to Egypt. The
significance of the Passover Papyrus, therefore, does not consist in the in-
troduction of a new festival. The purpose of Hananyah’s intervention in
the ritual practices of the Elephantine colony was to make it observe the
proper rites and dates as they had been established for the Jewish commu-
nity throughout the Persian Empire.
Aside from his name, there is very little we know about Hananyah. The
Passover Papyrus is the only direct evidence of his mission. Elsewhere in the
documents from Elephantine, his name occurs one other time. In 411 BCE,
the Persian commander of the garrison at Syene arrested the secretary of the
Jewish community. The event took place in Abydos, a city located some 330
kilometers downstream from Syene, beyond Thebes. Shortly after his re-
lease, the secretary wrote home to solicit the cooperation of the community
in the investigation that two Egyptian officials were coming to conduct. The
historical background of the incident—a precious stone was reported stolen
by the Egyptians, then found in the possession of Jewish traders—deserves
a longer treatment in its own right. In the present connection, the point of
interest is the reference to Hananyah. The secretary reminds his superiors
of the fact that “Khnum has been against us from the time Hananyah came
to Egypt until now.” “Khnum” stands for the Egyptian community of Ele-
phantine. Hananyah’s mission of 419, then, had led to a deterioration in
relations between Egyptians and Jews on the island. What had antagonized
the Egyptians? A close reading of Hananyah’s letter gives a clue.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 121 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The real significance of Hananyah’s letter does not reside in his in-
structions about the festival calendar but in the lines that introduce them.
Hananyah has a peculiar way of addressing his readers. They are his “broth-
ers”—not brothers in arms, as in Osea’s letter, but brothers because they be-
long to one people: “To my brothers Yedanyah and his colleagues the Jew-
ish garrison, your brother Hananyah.” This is the first occurrence of the
expression “the Jewish garrison.” In an important study from 2002, Ingo
Kottsieper argues that the use of this expression reflects the official recogni-
tion on the part of the Persian authorities of the Jews as a nation. Since
the Jews were in fact serving in the Syenian garrison—for which reason the
leadership of the community referred to itself in 407 BCE as “Syenians”—it
is questionable whether the term h.aylāʾ, literally “the force,” is to be taken
in the narrow, technical sense of “garrison.” The more likely interpretation
assigns to the term the wider meaning of “community.” Irrespective of
the precise translation of the term h.aylāʾ, however, the highlighting of the
Elephantine community’s Jewish identity is unmistakable. They are broth-
ers—members of one ethnoreligious community living throughout the
Persian Empire, from Babylonia to Egypt. Hananyah’s salutation reflects a
self-conscious Jewish identity.
The second element of significance is the reference to a Persian decree:
“And now, this very year, year 5 of King Darius, it has been sent to Arsames
[as follows: . . . ].” Before Hananyah gives instructions about Matzoth,
then, he quotes the text of an official decree of Darius II. Its contents can
only be guessed at. There is room in the gap for five to seven words. Because
the decree is quoted to legitimize and lend authority to the instructions
about Matzoth, it must have been about the Jews and their right to prac-
tice their religion—something along the lines of “Let the Jews observe the
rites of their religion.” Hananyah’s letter is evidence about a change in the
Persian policy toward the Jews. The decree that he quotes implies official
recognition of the Jews as an ethnic group with its own religious practice.
In the scholarly discussion of the Passover Papyrus, the Darius decree
is frequently called a firman, a word that commentators also use in connec-
tion with the Artaxerxes decree that legitimized the mission of Ezra (Ezra
7:12–26). The term firman suggests a parallel between the Persian policy
toward the various ethnic groups in their empire and the millet system
practiced in the Ottoman Empire. Firman is a Persian term and refers to a
written order issued by the sovereign. Applied to the decrees of the ancient
Persian kings, however, the word is an anachronism, since it makes its first
Y7557-Toorn.indb 122 5/7/19 11:50 AM

appearance only in the seventeenth century. The practice of the firman is

best known through the fermans of the Ottoman sultans ( ferman being the
Turkish term). There is indeed a remarkable parallel between the manage-
ment of diversity in the Ottoman Empire and the policy of the Persians—
more specifically the Achaemenids. Although the Ottoman sultans were
Muslims, the empire over which they ruled was not Islamic. The majority of
their subjects may have been Muslims, but there were large groups of non-
Muslims as well—most notably Christian communities from various back-
grounds, persuasions, and traditions, as well as significant groups of Jews.
These were not expected to adopt the religion of the sultan. The Ottomans
followed a policy that promoted loyalty to the sultan as a core virtue among
all their subjects, while allowing each “nation” (the Turkish word is millet)
to live in accordance with its own tradition. The millets were largely defined
on the basis of religion; also, their leaders were usually religious dignitaries.
As long as a millet paid its dues to the sultan, in terms of taxes and services,
it would enjoy a great deal of autonomy. The millet system eventually col-
lapsed under the impact of Ottoman, and later Turkish, nationalism in the
nineteenth century.
About two thousand years earlier, Persian rulers had followed a simi-
lar policy. They practiced a millet system without the benefit of the term.
Loyalty to the king—and, through the chain of command, to the satrap,
governor, and garrison commander—was the first commandment. But the
second commandment recognized that the different communities in the
empire had a right to live by the rules of their own religious codes. Once
an ethnic community was recognized as such, the Persian administration
focused on two tasks. One was the creation and maintenance of a properly
functioning infrastructure, in terms of administrative centers and leader-
ship. Second was the written codification of the rules and laws practiced
within the community. It was the Persian way to deal with diversity. Un-
der these circumstances, the claim to nationhood was almost as politically
significant as it is today, when nationhood implies the right to an indepen-
dent state. Nationhood and religion were intimately linked. The Persians
took the latter as an important parameter of the former.
At some point during the fifth century BCE, the Persian authorities
decided to grant the Jews the status of a nation—a millet, in the Ottoman
terminology. It is unlikely that their decision was the outcome of lobby-
ing by the Jews in Egypt. As we have seen, the Elephantine Jews thought
of themselves as Arameans first and as Jews second. The campaign for the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 123 5/7/19 11:50 AM

recognition of the Jewish nation probably originated in the heartland of the

Persian Empire. In Babylonia, the Judean diaspora had sparked a move-
ment, among men and women of the third generation, propagating a reli-
gious nationalism. We don’t know the names of its leaders. The Bible has
turned Ezra and Nehemiah into the focal figures of the nascent Judaism,
but the historical reliability of the stories about them is doubtful. History
writers have a tendency to telescope complex and long-term developments
into the doings of unique historical figures. Yet there can be no doubt about
the presence of a movement of religious nationalism among the descendants
of the Judean deportees. They must have pleaded with the Persian authori-
ties to recognize their people as a distinct nation, defined by descent and
religion. And in that religion, Jerusalem—a place most of them only knew
from stories—became the holy city that could not be left in ruins. We have
no idea how many of the Babylonian Jews supported this view. It may have
been just a fraction, but it was a group that carried the day in the end. In the
course of the fifth century, the Persians were persuaded to acknowledge the
Jews as a distinct nation. They recognized the Jews’ right to live by their own
laws—a mix of religious and family law—and imposed a uniform religious
calendar on the various diaspora communities in the empire.
The Passover Papyrus is an echo of the new Persian policy vis-à-vis
the Jewish diaspora in Egypt. Its real significance was the official defini-
tion of the Elephantine Jews as “the Jewish community.” Many of them
may have come to Egypt as Samarians—or Samarian Arameans—but they
now belonged to the Jewish nation abroad. Jewish ethnicity, loosely based
on origin but more narrowly defined by worship of Yahweh (or Yaho, ac-
cording to the name they employed in Elephantine), had taken the place
of the more particular geographic references to Judah and Samaria. It was
a change of identity that hardly affected religious practice. Until the very
end of the fifth century BCE, the Elephantine Jews continued to honor
Aramean gods besides Yaho. But the new status of the Jewish community
did cause tensions between Jews and Egyptians. The two groups still inter-
married, but something had changed. The increasingly uneasy relation be-
tween the two communities came to a crisis in the summer of 410.
Claiming Jewish Identity

In the classic version of its story, the Jewish community of Elephan-
tine went through the most momentous episode of its existence in July
Y7557-Toorn.indb 124 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of 410 BCE. As the summer heat was at its peak, the Egyptians of the
island attacked the temple of Yaho. They entered by force, took everything
of value, destroyed the rest, and burned the building to the ground. The
Jews were left with the smoldering ruins of what had once been the heart
of their community. To them, it was an act of wanton violence inspired
by anti-Jewish sentiments. In the public perception, this “anti-Jewish out-
burst” has come to determine the meaning of the Elephantine experience.
In the end, this is what it means to be Jewish: no matter how hard you try
to be on good terms with your neighbors, no matter how faithful you are
in your duties, for some reason you will always end up on the wrong side
of history. The demolition of the Jewish temple has thus become a symbol
for and a premonition of what was in store for later generations of diaspora
communities. It is the story of the Jews in a nutshell.
This perception of the temple destruction as an act of religious violence
is not based on a critical analysis of the event and its historical context but
is a consequence of the way in which the leadership of the Jewish com-
munity framed the story. Three years after the event, they wrote to the
governor of Judah. Their purpose in writing was to solicit his support in
obtaining a building permit for a new temple. In order to present their case
in the most favorable light, they chose to highlight the religious aspects
of the conflict. At the time, the leader of the Elephantine community was
Yedanyah. He came from a family that had been in power for more than a
century. Writing to the Judean leadership, he calls himself a priest (khn).
Speaking on behalf of his “colleagues the priests and the Jews,” he gives a
strongly biased report of the events of 410 BCE:
In the month of Tammuz, year 14 of King Darius (II), when Arsames had
departed and gone to the king—at that time the priests of Khnub, the god
who is in Elephantine the fortress, gave silver and valuables to Vidranga,
the governor over here, saying, “Let them remove from there the temple of
Yaho, the god who is in Elephantine the fortress.” Then this Vidranga, the
wicked, sent a message to Naphaina his son, who was the garrison com-
mander of Syene the fortress, saying, “Let them demolish the temple of
Yaho, the god who is in Elephantine the fortress.” Then this Naphaina led
the Egyptians and the other troops. They came to the fortress of Elephan-
tine with their weapons, broke into that temple, razed it to the ground, and
smashed the stone pillars that were there. In addition, they destroyed five
great gateways, built of hewn stone, which were in that temple. And their
standing doors, plus the bronze fittings of those doors, and the roof of the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 125 5/7/19 11:50 AM

temple, all of it cedarwood, along with the rest of the furniture and the other
things that were there—all of it they burned with fire. But the gold and sil-
ver basins and other things that were in that temple—all of these they took
and made their own.
Now, during the days of the kings of Egypt, our fathers had built that
temple in Elephantine the fortress. And when Cambyses (II) entered Egypt
he found that temple built. And while they overthrew the temples of the
gods of the Egyptians, all of them, they did no damage to anything in that
temple.
And as this had happened, we with our wives and children were wear-
ing sackcloth, fasting and praying to Yaho, the Lord of Heaven, who let us
gloat over this Vidranga. The dogs removed his fetters from his feet, and all
the goods he had acquired were lost. And everyone who sought evil for that
temple, all of them were killed, and we gazed upon them.
The long quotation is from the second draft of the letter. Two scribes
were involved in the composition of the text. Two scribes, two drafts—
clearly the Jews were keen to use the right words and strike the proper
chord. Yedanyah presents the temple demolition as the outcome of a con-
flict that opposed one group of priests against another. The instigators of
the violence were the priests of Khnum (“Khnub” is a variant of the Egyp-
tian god’s name). They bribed the provincial governor. The Persian offi-
cial collaborated and ordered the commander of the Syenian garrison to
demolish the Jewish temple. A good deal of the message is a description
of the rage of the Egyptians against what must have been a monumental
building. In the second half of the letter, Yedanyah emphasizes the impact
of the catastrophe. The Jews are still in a state of shock:
Also, since the month of Tammuz, year 14 of King Darius, and until this day,
we have been wearing sackcloth and have been fasting. Our wives have be-
come like widows. We do not anoint ourselves with oil and we do not drink
wine. Also, from that time until today, year 17 of King Darius, they have not
made vegetal offering, incense, or holocaust in that temple.
All the grief is about the temple. No fine clothes, no fancy food, no sex,
no ointments, no alcohol. The fast that the Jews claim to be keeping is not
total, or else they would not be alive. They keep a vegetarian diet, since
meat consumption became taboo after the cessation of holocaust offerings
in the temple. The message that the Jews of Elephantine want to get across
is that their life is in tatters. Without the temple the community is com-
Y7557-Toorn.indb 126 5/7/19 11:50 AM

ing apart. They have given up on the things that make life enjoyable—as
though the traditional counsel of “carpe diem,” which rings from the Gil-
gamesh Epic up till the book of Ecclesiastes, has become an abomination.
Mourning after a calamity is normal, but three years of communal mourn-
ing seems unusual.
Yedanyah was playing the Jewish card. Another petition with the same
message was being sent to Samaria. In response to these petitions, the
authorities of Judah and Samaria jointly endorsed the new temple project.
Yedanyah, then, was not playing the Judean but the Jewish card. The com-
munity he represented consisted of pious Jews whose devotion to Yaho was
evident from the selfless fast they were keeping. Their life was all about the
temple of Yaho. This thoroughly religious community had become victim to
the hatred of the priests of a different god. Whereas the Jewish community
had always enjoyed the protection of the Persians, its Egyptian opponents
had turned to bribery in order to get the local Persian administrators to
condone their plan. Normally, the Persians would have been above such
despicable practices, but these were not normal times because the Persian
satrap had left Egypt. The Jews were unprotected. But they had God on
their side. Their fasting and praying had not been in vain. In the end they
had witnessed the terrible fate of the corrupt Persian governor and all those
who had plotted evil against the temple. It did not mean the end of their
grief. For the Jews, the matter would not be over until their god had a
new temple.
By presenting the Jews as the victims of a religious conflict, Yedanyah
and his colleagues were asserting their Jewish identity. In the early fifth
century BCE, the mixed community of Elephantine had come to define
itself collectively as Jewish. Shortly after 420, the Persian authorities had
confirmed this Jewish ethnicity by the imposition of a uniform ritual cal-
endar. In 407, the leadership of the community claimed Jewish identity as a
means to win sympathy for their cause. The petitions to Judah and Samaria
marked what for the Elephantine community would be the end of an evo-
lution. Henceforth, they would be remembered as the Elephantine Jews.
The way they described the events of 410 suggests that their religion was
the cause of all the trouble, as though the enmity of the Egyptians proved
how thoroughly Jewish they were. In fact, Jewish identity was a choice. It
was part of a strategy to come to terms with the recent past. But as Ernest
Renan has said, becoming a nation takes a lot of forgetting. The same
is true of Jewish identity at Elephantine; becoming Jewish took a lot of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 127 5/7/19 11:50 AM

forgetting. The Jews chose to forget not only their Samarian background
but also some of the more uncomfortable aspects of their more recent his-
tory. Like most of us, they had a very selective memory. It is the duty of the
historian to show the other side of the story. As a closer look at the previous
episodes shows, the outburst of violence of 410 had been in the making for
some time. The conflict had little to do with religion.
Previously at Elephantine
Less than a year before the temple demolition, another conflict had
pitted Egyptians against Jews. The cause of their clash was a precious stone.
Jewish traders were trafficking the piece, expecting to make a good profit
from its sale. As it turned out, the stone had been stolen from the Egyptian
community. After the boat with the traders’ cargo had left Elephantine
harbor, the Egyptians of the island discovered the theft and notified the au-
thorities. They suspected the Jews of robbery or receiving stolen goods. The
conflict was initially dealt with by the garrison commander at Syene. He
went after the shipment and made sure the cargo did not reach its destina-
tion. But the matter was too big to remain local. The Persian authorities in
Memphis were informed and started an investigation. From that moment
on, matters went from bad to worse.
The conflict over the precious stone involved three parties: the Ele-
phantine Jews as suspects, the local Egyptians as accusers, and the Persian
authorities as arbitrators. Although the entire community was under suspi-
cion, three Jewish parties played a more prominent role in the matter. One
was a business consortium operating out of Elephantine Island, consisting
of women from influential families, many of whom were related to men in
positions of leadership or responsibility for the temple. The Jewish second
party was a man called Hosea son of Natan. During the years 411–410, Ho-
sea was stationed in Memphis as representative and commercial agent of
the Jewish business consortium. He was from Elephantine and would later
return to the island. As a consequence of the alleged theft, Hosea found
himself caught up in a very unpleasant situation and eventually ended up
in jail for failure to pay a fine. The leadership of the Jewish community was
the third party to play a role. Some of them were closely connected with
the business consortium. In fact, it is not perfectly clear where to draw the
line between private and public here. It is possible that the consortium was
actually working for the temple. That would explain why the secretary of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 128 5/7/19 11:50 AM

the presidium came with the traders on their journey to Memphis. When
matters escalated, the leadership of the community—including its presi-
dent, Yedanyah—felt it necessary to go to the Persian authorities in person
in order to plead the cause of the Jews.
The nature of the object that triggered the conflict is not entirely clear.
The secretary of the Jewish community refers to it as “one ʾbns.rp.” In their
discussion of the term, Jacob Hoftijzer and Karel Jongeling conclude that
it probably indicates some kind of precious stone. Most specialists agree.
The word ʾeben means “stone,” and it is clear the item was precious. The
exact meaning of .srp, however, has not been established. It might be con-
nected to the Assyrian word .sarpu, “silver,” itself a derivative of the verb
.sarāpu, “to refine.” Could the word refer to a precious stone set in silver?
Irrespective of the actual shape and composition of the object, it must have
been an expensive piece of jewelry. A letter by Hosea son of Natan to one
of his employers in Elephantine implies that he had received orders to sell
the precious object for gold. In the fall of 411, a commercial transport was
carrying the stone to Memphis when the Persian authorities stopped the
traders halfway, in Abydos. The secretary of the Jewish community—a man
named Mauzyah—reported the event in a letter to the leadership.
To my lords Yedanyah, Uriyah and the priests of Yaho the god, Mattan
son of Yashobyah, Berekyah son of [PN]. (From) your servant Mauzyah.
[May the God of Heaven seek after] the welfare of my lords [very much at
all times; and] may you be in favor before the God of Heaven. Now then,
when Vidranga, the garrison commander, arrived in Abydos he arrested me
on account of a precious stone, one, which they found stolen in the hands
of the traders. Afterwards, Zeha and Hor, the servants of Anani, pleaded
with Vidranga and Hornufi, with the help of the God of Heaven, until
they set me free. And now, behold, they are coming there to you. You must
look after them. Anything or any action that Zeha and Hor might ask from
you—you must be at their disposition, so that they will not find anything
reprehensible about you. You know that Khnum has been against us from
the time Hananyah came to Egypt until now. Now whatever you will do for
Hor, you will be doing for the ch[ancell]or (lb[ʿl t.]ʿm). Hor is an assistant of
Hananyah (error for Anani?). You must bring out from our houses our pos-
sessions. Give him whatever your hand finds. This shall not be a loss for you.
That is why I am sending you (this message). He said to me, “Send a written
order ahead of me (saying:) ‘[Bri]ng out! For a serious loss there is back-up
in the house of Anani.’” The way you will deal with him will not be hidden
Y7557-Toorn.indb 129 5/7/19 11:50 AM

from Anani. [Address:] To my lords Yedanyah, Uriyah and the priests, and
the Jews. (From) your servant Mauzyah son of Natan.
The secretary’s letter leaves out some elements of the story because
the people he reported to had no need to be told what they already knew.
Nevertheless, the contours of the affair are clear enough. The Egyptians of
Elephantine had gone to the Persian authorities to report a case of theft.
Apparently they had reason to suspect that Jewish traders had smuggled the
wares out of the island because Vidranga—then still garrison commander
but promoted to provincial governor the following year—came after the
commercial convoy. He stopped it at Abydos, did a search, and found one
precious stone “in the hands of the traders.” It proved that the Egyptians
had been right. But the case was not yet closed. The secretary specifically
mentions “a precious stone, one,” thereby suggesting that there were more
of them. The rest of the letter shows that other objects were still miss-
ing. To put pressure on the Jews, the garrison commander imprisoned the
community’s secretary. In the meantime, news of the accusation against the
Jews had reached Memphis. The central authorities decided that the matter
was too important to be left to the discretion of the local garrison com-
mander. Anani sent two officials to conduct an investigation. This Anani
was the Jewish chancellor of the Persian satrap in Memphis. He was an
influential man. His officials persuaded Vidranga to release the secretary.
Since they were on their way to Elephantine to do a house search in the
Jewish quarter, the secretary sent a letter of recommendation that urged the
community’s leadership to fully cooperate.
The affair of the stolen stone developed in an atmosphere that had
been going awry for some time: “Khnum has been against us from the
time Hananyah came to Egypt until now.” Looking back, the mission of
Hananyah in 419 BCE had been the beginning of soured relations with
the Egyptians. Because the instructions of Hananyah were about the ritual
calendar, it is possible to argue that the Egyptians took offense at the new
religious practices of their Jewish neighbors. “Hananiah’s mission probably
served to antagonize the Khnum priests . . . simply because it emphasized
strict observance of a seven day festival which commemorated the Exodus
from Egypt and the victory of the Israelites over the Egyptians,” Bezalel
Porten writes in Archives from Elephantine. This interpretation turns the
conflict again into a religious one. According to the ostraca, however, the
Jews of Elephantine had been celebrating Pesach all through the fifth cen-
Y7557-Toorn.indb 130 5/7/19 11:50 AM

tury BCE—so why should it now all of a sudden upset the Egyptians? It
is hardly more convincing to suggest that the sacrifice of a Pesach lamb
offended the worshippers of Khnum. Jews and Egyptians had been living
side by side for more than a century. Each group had celebrated its own rit-
uals without offending the religious sensibilities of the other. The real sig-
nificance of Hananyah’s mission resided in the Persian decree that served
as its legitimation. The Persian authorities had established that the Jews
of their empire constituted a separate people entitled to live by their own
religious code. It was this new status of the Jews that made the Egyptians
uneasy. The Jews seemed to receive preferential treatment. They enjoyed
state protection. In one report about the events of the summer of 410, the
Jews imply that the Egyptian violence was triggered by the growth of the
Jewish community: “[When] ( . . . ) we grew, the battalions of the Egyptians
rebelled.” It may just have been a matter of perception, but the Egyptians
had a sense that they were being pushed aside on their own island. Re-
ligion had very little to do with this. These were two communities at odds
because one felt threatened by the other.
In this climate of tension, the affair of the stolen stone could assume
proportions well-beyond anything warranted by the material value of the
object—or, more likely, the objects in the plural. The matter got out of
hand. Two letters to the agent of the Elephantine business consortium at
Memphis give a sense of increasing nervousness on the Jewish side. Hosea
wrote the first letter in response to letters that he had received from the
Jewish leadership in January 410 BCE. His answer must have been prompt:
To my lords Yedanyah, Mauzyah, Uriyah, and the garrison. (From) your
servan[t Hosea son of Natan. May all the gods] seek after [the well-being of
my lords] at all times. All is well for us here. And now, every day that [they
are investigating, PN] has been complaining to our investigator, a certain
Zivaka. And he complained to an[other] investigator. [So far all blame in
the matter] lies with us because the Egyptians are giving them bribes. And
since [the investigation began, the agents] of the Egyptians [have been ac-
cusing us] before Arsames, but they are acting like thieves. Also [there is a
new administrator] of the province of Thebes. And they are saying, “A Maz-
dean is the provincial administrator. [He is responsible for the rest of the
investigation.”] We are afraid because we are (now) smaller (in number) by
two. And now, behold, they are favoring [the Egyptians ever since Arsames
left Egypt.] If only we had shown ourselves to Arsames before, then it
would not have been like this [for us. Now no one, neither we nor anyone
Y7557-Toorn.indb 131 5/7/19 11:50 AM

else,] will plead our cause before Arsames. Pisina is reassuring us [saying a
few gifts might change our situation. Now, whatever] you can find—honey,
castor oil, strings, ropes, tanned skins, boards—[do send it as gifts to us here
because] they are full of anger against you. ( . . . ) Tiri[. .] gave orders [to
arrest Zeha and Hori] by order of the King. And they are detaining them.
And the indemnification for Arsames and the ransom for Zeha [and Hori, I
shall pay it—both the indemnification and the ransom for Zeha] and Hori
whom they put in detention. The sixth of the month Paopi (ca. January 20)
the letters arrived [here. Do not worry about anything.] We will take care of
the matter. [Address:] To my lords Yedanyah, Mauzyah. (From) your [ser-
vant Hosea son of Natan.]
“All is well for us here.” In light of what follows, this rings hollow.
Nothing was well. In fact, the Egyptians had the ear of the authorities, and
the Jews had lost sympathy. Hosea blamed it on the Egyptians, who were
shamelessly distributing bribes. He urged the leaders of the Elephantine
community to send counterbribes. Would this bring about a reversal of the
situation? It was questionable. The letter hints at a deeper cause for worry.
Due to the damaged state of the papyrus we literally have to read between
the lines, but the message seems clear. The Persian satrap Arsames had left
the country. Arsames was not in Egypt when the Yaho temple was attacked
in the summer of 410. His absence from Egypt put the Jews at a disadvan-
tage, since he had traditionally been sympathetic to the Jewish cause. Such
is also the meaning of Hosea’s complaint, “If only we had shown ourselves to
Arsames before”—meaning, before he left the country—“then it would not
have been like this.” Arsames must have left Egypt in early 410. His depar-
ture brought about a reshuffling of the local Persian administration. One
significant change was the promotion of Vidranga to the post of governor
of the southern province. He was the “Mazdean” recently appointed chief
of the “province of Thebes,” another name for the province of Tshetres.
The absence of Arsames and the changes in the Persian administration were
a major setback for the Jews. The fact that Zeha and Hori, back in Memphis
from their mission in Elephantine, have been put in fetters was an omen.
Anani, the Jewish chancellor of Arsames, had apparently lost his influence.
In mid-May 410, Hosea wrote another letter, this one addressed to
someone whose name does not occur elsewhere in the papyri, Haggus son
of Hodo:
[To my brother Hagg]us. (From) your brother H[os]ea. I send you many
(wishes of ) well-being and strength. [And now, . . . . We went to Pi]sina the
Y7557-Toorn.indb 132 5/7/19 11:50 AM

judge and we paid him cash (lit. “in his hand”) ten karsh of silver, plus one
karsh [in addition. But he requested another five karsh. The money was not]
in my hand [so] that I find myself de[tained fo]r five karsh of silver. And
now, [take this letter] with you, that you might be given five karsh of silver.
And write them a debt acknowledgement for it. And if [they] don’t [lend]
all the silver against interest, and if they don’t give it to you, saying “Give a
security,” sell the house of Zakkur and the house of Ashan. And if they don’t
buy them, look for a man who will buy the big house of Hodo and sell it to
him for the price that it will go for. And when this letter reaches you, do not
delay, come down to Memphis at once. If you find the money come down at
once, and if you don’t find any, come down at once. ( . . . ) Now if you come
down to Memphis alone, do not leave Ashan [without suppl]ies. Give him
grain so that you [do] not [sin.] When the Jews bring them in before [ . . . ]
. . . I have been abandoned [ . . . ] their words. Do not delay. Come down at
once, and bring down with you at once for me one tunic for [ . . . ] to bring to
me. Written on the 27th of Tybi (ca. May 10). [(Address:) To my] bro[ther]
Haggus son of Hodo. (From) your brother H[osea son of Natan].
About three months separate Hosea’s letter to the Jewish leadership at

Elephantine and this letter to Haggus son of Hodo. Judging by the tone
of concern and urgency, matters in Memphis had come to a crisis. Hosea
and his unnamed companion had gone to Judge Pisina again. They paid the
judge one hundred shekels and maybe an additional ten shekels, but the
judge wanted more. Hosea was in urgent need of a sum of five karsh, that
is, fifty shekels. The urgency derived from the fact that the judge had put
Hosea in prison as a way to make him pay. Confinement for debt was not
unusual. The main thrust of the letter is that Haggus was to do everything
in his power to raise fifty shekels. A simple loan against interest would be
best. But if necessary, he was to give two houses as security. And if worse
came to worst, he was to sell the big house of his own father for any ac-
ceptable offer. Hosea feared for the future: “I have been abandoned.” Be-
cause Hosea would subsequently act as witness to a house bequest in 404,
we know that he eventually survived his trials. But at the time he was
writing to Haggus, he was desperate. In his other letters, Hosea had been
keeping up appearances. This letter is more candid. The name of the man
whose help he was soliciting does not occur in the rest of the papyri. It is
clear from Hosea’s various requests that there was a special bond between
them. Otherwise, how would he have dared to ask Haggus to sell the house
of his own father? Since the assistance Hosea was asking for went beyond
anything that might be expected from a mere colleague, Haggus and Hosea
Y7557-Toorn.indb 133 5/7/19 11:50 AM

were presumably family. If so, they must have been in-laws, the one having
married the sister of the other.
Toward the end of the letter, Hosea mentions “the Jews.” It is an in-
triguing phrase in view of the fact that both he and his correspondent were
Jews too. The reference is most likely to the leadership of the Elephantine
community. From the use of the verb “to bring up,” it would appear that
the Jews were on their way to Memphis. The purpose of the leadership was
most likely a personal intervention with the Persian authorities to put an
end to a conflict that had been dragging on for far too long. The leaders of
the Elephantine community never reached Memphis, however. According
to an undated report by Yislah son of Natan, the delegation was appre-
hended in Thebes. They were now in prison:
[To my brother Yislah son of Gaddul, your brother Yislah son of Natan. It
is well with me here.] May the gods seek after your well-being at all times.
And now, [. . . . . . . . . P]N son of P[N] went to Syene. And he did [ . . . ] to
the Jew[s][ . . . . . . . . And these are the names of the men th]at have been
taken prisoner in Elephantine:
Berekyah,
Hosea,
[PN son of PN]
[PN son of PN]
[PN son of ] Pa-Khnum.
And these are the names of the women who were appre[hended in the gate
in Thebes, and who were taken p]risoner:
Rami wife of Hodo
Isireshwet wife of Hosea
Pallul wife of Yislah
Raiya [wife of PN]
Tabla daughter of Meshullam,
Qaw(i)la her sister.
Here are the names of the men who were apprehended in the gate in Thebes
and who were taken [prisoner:]
Yedanyah son of Gemaryah
Hosea son of Yatom
Hosea son of Nattum (error for Nattun)
Haggai his brother
Ahyo the son of Mikayah.
[The investigators have left] the houses that they had entered in Elephan-
tine. And the possessions that they confiscated, they shall certainly return to
Y7557-Toorn.indb 134 5/7/19 11:50 AM

their owners. However, they fined their owners (an amount of ) 120 karsh of
silver. Hopefully there will not be another decree for them here. Greetings
to your house(hold) and to your children until the gods show me [your face
in peace.] [Address:] To my brother Yislah son] of Gaddul, your brother
Yislah son of Natan.
The report lists the names of the Jews who had been arrested. These
arrests occurred in connection with what is best described as a second in-
vestigation into the matter of the stolen stone. This time, the Persians did
not leave the matter to Egyptian officials. The name of the man who went
to Syene is in the lacuna of the text. Several reconstructions are possible,
but none of them is certain. The Persian investigators entered the houses of
the Jews and confiscated their possessions. The inhabitants were temporar-
ily evicted. By the time Yislah wrote his report, the investigators had left
the houses, and the confiscated goods would be returned to their owners.
But in the course of the proceedings, several men and women had been ar-
rested. Yislah distinguishes three groups: men who were taken prisoner in
Elephantine; women who were apprehended “in the gate in Thebes”; and
men who were apprehended “in the gate in Thebes.” The reference to the
gate in Thebes—point of entry, point of exit—suggests that Yislah wrote
from Thebes, seat of the governor of the southern province.
Most of the names of the men arrested in Elephantine are lost due to
gaps in the papyrus. The names of the women and the men apprehended
in Thebes, on the other hand, are nearly completely preserved. Among the
men there are some familiar figures. Yedanyah son of Gemaryah was the
leader of the Elephantine community. Two of the other men were signa-
tories, along with Yedanyah, of a letter offering a huge sum of money in
return for a building permit. They belonged to the leading families of the
community. The women are harder to identity. Since they were not married
to the men that have been captured, the most plausible explanation for their
presence is to assume they represented the business consortium. Yislah
simply reports their arrests. Even though he does not mention any motive,
it seems obvious. Detention of influential members of the Jewish com-
munity was a way to coerce it into collaborating with the authorities and,
here more specifically, to pay the fine that had been imposed. The Persians
had condemned the community to a payment of 120 karsh, the equivalent
of 1,200 shekels. It is a substantial sum. The special tax for all families of the
Jewish community in 400 BCE netted a total of 318 shekels. When Hosea
son of Natan was in urgent need of 50 shekels, he thought that two regular
Y7557-Toorn.indb 135 5/7/19 11:50 AM

houses would do as security. So 1,200 shekels was a serious fine indeed.

“Hopefully there will not be another decree for them here.” Did it mean
that the matter had been settled to the satisfaction of all concerned? Yis-
lah’s report is the last piece in the file on the missing stone. There were some
loose ends—goods to be returned to their owners, a fine to be paid—but
otherwise the case seemed closed. And since Hosea son of Natan appears
some years later as witness to an Elephantine marriage, all seems to have
ended well for him, too. Hosea wrote his letter for help in May of 410.
Yislah’s report must have been written around the same time, perhaps June.
Yislah was expecting that now everything would return to normal. Many
others would have entertained similar hopes. They were on the eve of a
summer that would prove them terribly wrong.
The Egyptian Revolt and the Role of Vidranga

Less than two months after the verdict in the case of the stolen stone,
the Jewish community of Elephantine witnessed the demolition of its tem-
ple. In their description of the event in the petition to Jerusalem, the com-
munity leaders framed it as an outburst of anti-Jewish violence inspired by
religious motives. Although the troops had attacked the Jewish temple at
the orders of the provincial governor, the Egyptians were the actual instiga-
tors of the violence. Once again, they had bribed the Persians. There is room
for suspicion about this version of the events. The Jewish bias is evident.
There is no hint of the affair of the stolen stone in which the Jews had been
found guilty. The Egyptians’ anger had been justified. It is unlikely that the
penalty imposed by the Persians had completely pacified the Egyptians.
Who knows? They may have had other motives for their acts of aggression.
Another element of the story that deserves closer examination is the role
of Vidranga, the provincial governor. It is hard to believe that he allowed
bribes to dictate his behavior toward the Jews. They had been serving the
Persian cause with diligence. If he turned against a group of loyal soldiers,
he must have been motivated by more than mere greed. The principal docu-
ment that allows us to look at the summer of 410 BCE from a different
angle is the draft of a petition to Arsames. The authors of this letter are the
same as those who wrote to Jerusalem. The time of composition is the same
too. Several phrases occur almost verbatim in the one and the other peti-
tion. But the petition to the Persian satrap presents a version of the events
that puts them in a very different light.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 136 5/7/19 11:50 AM

One element that both petitions have in common is the reference to

Arsames’s absence at the time the horrors happened:
In the month of Tammuz, year 14 of King Darius, when Arsames had de-
parted and gone to the king—at that time the priests of Khnub, the god who
is in Elephantine the fortress, in league with Vidranga, the governor over
here . . . (First draft of the petition to Bagohi)
In the month of Tammuz, year 14 of King Darius, when Arsames had de-
parted and gone to the king—at that time the priests of Khnub, the god
who is in Elephantine the fortress, gave silver and valuables to Vidranga, the
governor over here . . . (Second draft of the petition to Bagohi)
In the year 14 of King Darius, when our lord Arsames had gone to the king,
this is the crime which the priests of Khnub the god [di]d in Elephantine
the fortress, in league with Vidranga the governor over here. They gave him
silver and valuables. (Draft of the petition to Arsames)
On the basis of the letter of Hosea to the Elephantine leadership, Arsames’s

departure from Egypt can be dated to the beginning of 410. From the cor-
respondence of Arsames with his subordinates in Memphis, we know that
he was away for several years. In 406 BCE, Arsames was back. He had
probably returned to Egypt in 407. The Jewish leadership mentions Ars-
ames’s stay abroad to imply that he might have prevented the destruction
of the temple: “Also, Arsames did not know about all that was done to us.”
Hosea had suggested something similar in connection with the matter of
the stolen stone: “If only we had shown ourselves to Arsames before (he
left), then it would not have been like this [for us].” Arsames, apparently,
had protected the Jews. He had been satrap at the time of Hananyah’s mis-
sion and had to make sure that the new status of the Jews was respected.
The appointment of a Jewish chancellor, Anani, was his doing. His absence
created a fateful vacuum.
The papyrus with the draft of the petition to Arsames is in a bad state
of preservation. The opening lines are missing, so the name of the intended
recipient of the letter has to be inferred from the contents of the message.
The man being addressed is consistently referred to as “our lord.” He must
have been someone from the Persian administration in view of the plethora
of rather technical Persian terms employed in the text. Since Arsames is
referred to as “our lord” in the second preserved line of the letter, it makes
sense to identify him as the intended recipient. By implication, this letter
must have been composed at the time when Arsames was back. It can be
Y7557-Toorn.indb 137 5/7/19 11:50 AM

dated to the same year as the petition to Jerusalem, that is, 407. The simi-
larities of phraseology lead to the same conclusion. These were the same
scribes, searching for the best formulation of petitions dispatched around
the same time to Memphis, to Judah, and to Samaria. The petition to
Bagohi mentions earlier letters sent to him, to the Jerusalem priests, and to
the Judean nobles. We have no record of those letters and no knowledge
of their dates. But it is no coincidence that the two petitions whose drafts
have been preserved are both from 407. The reason the community waited
for more than three years to start a campaign for the reconstruction of its
temple was related to the absence of Arsames. It made no sense to try to
obtain a building permit as long as Arsames was away. In his absence, oth-
ers were in power. The new rulers—temporary, as it would turn out—had
proven to be unsympathetic to the Jewish cause.
The draft of the petition to Arsames has suffered serious damage. Some
lines have gone missing, other lines are only partially preserved. The scribe
used the strip of papyrus as a piece of scrap paper to write down a rough
draft, writing in different directions, and sometimes repeating a line or
two. The significance of the text is such, however, that it warrants a full
quotation:
[ . . . ] . . . we grew in number, the battalions of the Egyptians revolted. We
did not abandon our posts and nothing bad was found in us.
In the year 14 of King Darius, when our lord Arsames had gone to the
king, this is the crime which the priests of Khnub the god [di]d in Elephan-
tine the fortress, in league with Vidranga the governor over here. They gave
him silver and valuables. There is a part of the royal grain-house which is in
Elephantine the fortress—they demolished it and built a wall in the middle
of the fortress of Elephantine. [ . . . ] And now, that wall is built right in
the middle of the fortress. There is a well that is built within the fortress. It
was not lacking in water to satiate the garrison. Whenever they would be
garrisoned here, they would drink the water from that well. Those priests
of Khnub stopped up that well. If inquiry is made of the judges, police, and
informers that have been appointed in the Southern Province, it shall be
known to our lord that it is exactly like this, as we are saying. Indeed, we are
separated [from . . . ]
[ . . . .] We grew in number [. . . . Nothing ba]d was found in [us. . . . .]
. . . to bring offering [. . . .] to do there for Yaho the g[od . . . ] . . . [ . . . ] but
one brazier [ . . . .] The furniture they took and [made] their own. [ . . . ] If
it please our lord . . . [ . . . ] we from the [ Jewish] community [ . . . ] If it
please our lord, may [an order] be issued [ . . . ] we. If [it please our lo]rd
Y7557-Toorn.indb 138 5/7/19 11:50 AM

[ . . . that they] protect the things that . . . [ . . . ] to [rebuild] our [tem]ple

which they demolished . . .
The report mentions the destruction of the temple only on the reverse side
of the papyrus. Owing to the fact that the scribe rotated the papyrus sheet
by ninety degrees, the damage to the top and bottom of the recto affects
the right and left sides of the verso. It leaves us with a very truncated mes-
sage. But we can make out references to offerings and a brazier, as well as a
phrase about “the furniture they took and made their own.” Also the occur-
rence of the verb “to demolish” in the last line suggests that the description
is about the ruined temple. The petition presumably ended with a request
for permission to rebuild.
The significance of the petition to Arsames is the light it throws on
the historical context of the temple demolition. In fact, the message to the
satrap is relatively succinct when it comes to the damage to the temple, in
comparison with the description of three other “crimes” of the priests of
Khnum: they demolished the part of the royal granary that stood in the for-
tress of Elephantine, built a wall in the middle of the fortress, and occluded
the well that had provided the soldiers with water when garrisoned. Such
interventions in the infrastructure of the fortress seem unrelated to the
demolition of the temple. The common explanation interprets the destruc-
tion of the granary, the building of the wall, and the occlusion of the well
as collateral damage or merely provocations. Such qualifications assume
that the principal aim of the Egyptians was the demolition of the Jewish
temple, the rest being side effects. This might be argued with respect to
the granary and the well, but the construction of a wall of separation does
not fall into the category of collateral damage. No one builds a wall over-
night. It requires planning and time. These actions convey the impression of
premeditation. Apparently the Egyptians intended to create a situation in
which the Jewish garrison would be unable to perform its duties. Without
access to water and food, the soldiers would be helpless if anyone attacked
the fortress; it would turn into a death trap. The function of the wall was
to isolate the Jewish quarter, turning it into the ghetto it had never been
before. It also cut the Jewish soldiers off from the part of the royal granary
the Egyptians did not destroy. This is what you would do if you wanted to
neutralize a military opponent.
The acts of aggression listed in the first part of the petition to Arsames
were directed against the Jews—not, however, because the Jews honored
the wrong god or practiced ritual abominations but because they were
Y7557-Toorn.indb 139 5/7/19 11:50 AM

military opponents. The Egyptians attacked the Jews in their capacity as

soldiers. These acts make sense in the context of a revolt. That is exactly
what the petition is saying: “The Egyptian battalions revolted.” To mark the
contrast with the Egyptian insurrection, the Jews stress their loyalty: “We
did not abandon our posts, and nothing bad was found in us.” The usual
reading of this phrase takes it as a reference to the demonstrated loyalty
of the Jews during an Egyptian insurrection in the past. Yet nothing in
the text implies that the Jews were reminding the Persian authorities of
their loyalty during a crisis that had long ago been resolved. Their reference
would far more likely be to some recent event. In fact, there are several ref-
erences to an Egyptian rebellion in the letters that Arsames sent to Egypt
between 410 and 407 BCE. Around 410, the Egyptian insurrection had
reached Memphis. “When Egypt revolted and the garrison was summoned
to the fortress,” Arsames writes, thirteen of his slaves had failed to make it
to the fortress in time. They fell into the hands of “the wicked Inaros(?),”
the leader of the insurrection. This was a time of “turmoil” in Egypt.
Locally Egyptians profited from the absence of Arsames to take matters
into their own hands. The events in Lower Egypt had repercussions in
the deep south. Here, too, the Egyptian troops had rebelled in an attempt
to regain their independence.
While the motives of the Egyptians are not a mystery, the attitude of
Vidranga is puzzling. All the accounts agree. The Egyptians had acted “in
league with” Vidranga, the provincial governor at the time. It would be too
simple to say that Vidranga had allowed himself to be bribed. There is no
reason to assume he did not take bribes, but it is hard to believe he would
be willing to act against his own interests. In search of an explanation for
Vidranga’s behavior, it is important to look at the total picture. Not only did
he order the demolition of the Jewish temple, he also consented to acts that
amounted to the practical dismantlement of the fortress of Elephantine. It
has been suggested that Vidranga ordered the removal of the Yaho temple
because the Jews had no formal permit for the building. They didn’t, but
that is no reason why the Persians should suddenly revoke their implicit
acceptance of the Jewish temple. Also, the program of the Egyptian rebels
was far more ambitious than just the destruction of a temple. In fact, in the
petition to Arsames, the temple demolition comes across as the finishing
touch in the elimination of an adversary.
The most likely scenario is that Vidranga profited from the troubled
circumstances of the time to strengthen his own hold over southern Egypt.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 140 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Just after the departure of Arsames, Vidranga had been promoted to the
position of governor of the southern province. His son Naphaina had be-
come garrison commander at Syene in his stead. The absence of Arsames
created a power vacuum. The Egyptians seized the opportunity to try to
throw off the yoke of Persian domination. Vidranga had been appointed
to serve the Persian central authorities. Instead he chose to follow a policy
that allowed him to navigate between Egyptian interests and personal gain.
These were years of turmoil and political fragmentation. Vidranga turned
the southern province into his personal domain. In our book, he would
be guilty of treason. It is unlikely that Vidranga’s contemporaries took a
more benign view of the matter. In the formal statement of support from
Bagohi and Delayah, the Egyptians go unmentioned. All the blame falls
on Vidranga, “the wicked one.” It is the exact same qualification—lh.yʾ, “the
wicked one”—that Arsames had employed for the leader of the Egyptian
revolt at Memphis. In the end, Vidranga proved to be a traitor to the Per-
sian cause. He sacrificed a group of loyal soldiers to his personal ambition.
In 407, the temple was still in ruins, but the Jewish community had wit-
nessed the defeat of their opponents. All those who had done harm to the
temple had been killed. The letter does not specify the circumstances of their
deaths. They probably died when the Persian forces brought the southern
province under the control of the Egyptian satrapy again. Vidranga did not
survive either. He died an ignominious death: “The dogs removed his shack-
les from his feet, and all the goods he had acquired were lost.” The translation
of the phrase is unproblematic, but its meaning is obscure. Let us assume
that the dogs are real dogs and the shackles real shackles. This suggests a
scenario in which Vidranga had been captured, fettered by the feet, and left
to die somewhere. The dogs had come to feed on his body. It is a classic im-
age of a disgraceful death. “Let dogs tear his unburied body to pieces,” says
an Assyrian curse upon a possible grave robber. Torn to pieces, Vidranga
had been “released” of his shackles. It is, indeed, a cynical way of celebrating
the end of an enemy. By 407, Vidranga was very much dead. Later references
to a man by the same name apply to a different person.
The petition the Elephantine community sent to Judah and Samaria
presented the demolition of the temple as an act of religiously inspired
anti-Judaism. To the authors of the petition, the dramatic events of the
summer of 410 served as a certificate of Jewish identity. Many modern
scholars have accepted this reading of the events: “The trouble which
brought down the Temple of Yahu was perhaps unavoidable. It specialized,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 141 5/7/19 11:50 AM

after all, in sacrificing animals, most of which were undoubtedly sheep,

exactly the creatures venerated by their next-door neighbors at the Temple
of Khnum.” The quote is from Simon Schama’s The Story of the Jews.
It echoes Bezalel Porten’s take on the matter. The conflict did not merely
oppose Egyptians to Jews; it had been “between the devotees of the god
Khnum and the followers of the God YHW.” This interpretation fits the
presentation of Elephantine as a typical Jewish diaspora story: Jews run
into trouble because they are Jewish. The Jews of the island had experi-
enced an “anti-Jewish outburst” that amounted to a “proto-pogrom.” The
facts of the matter tell a different story. A careful analysis of the available
evidence shows that the summer of 410 had a prelude, as well as a specific
context. Leading up to the violent summer of 410, there had been the af-
fair of the stolen stone, with all its unpleasant repercussions. The Jews had
been found guilty in the matter. In this respect, the story of the temple
demolition is about unappeased anger. The context of the violence against
the Jews was the Egyptian revolt. Once the satrap had left the country,
insurrections erupted in the north and the south. The Jews chose the side of
the Persians, as loyal soldiers should. They ended up being the victims of a
political choice that was all about personal gain and had nothing to do with
anti-Jewish sentiments.
Conclusion
Over a period of a hundred years, perhaps longer, the Samarians of Pal-
myra became the Jews of Elephantine. Up to a point, the new identity hap-
pened to them through the force of circumstance. The diaspora experience
in Egypt led others to perceive them as Jews. The community became part
of the network of Jewish diaspora nodes. Around 420 BCE, the Persian
authorities included them in the Jewish nation. Commissioned by the Per-
sians, a Jewish ambassador for religious affairs ordered them to bring their
religious calendar into conformity with the calendar observed by Jews all
over the empire. During the final decade of the fifth century, the leadership
of the Elephantine Jews deliberately claimed their new identity to present
their situation in the most favorable light. At first the Jewish identity had
happened to them. In the end, they claimed it. They would henceforth be
remembered as the Elephantine Jews.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 142 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Epilogue
In the more than one hundred years that have passed since the discovery of
the Elephantine Jews, several versions of their story have sought to define
who they really were. Some scholars have pictured them as an insulated
community far from the homeland that preserved pre-Deuteronomic prac-
tices. Others have presented them as Jews abroad who had deviated from
the Mosaic religion under the powerful influence of other religions. Some
have proposed that they were actually quite ordinary diaspora Jews, who
were devoted to their ancestral god and observed Pesach and Shabbat but
paid occasional tribute to other gods as a way of cultivating good relations
with their non-Jewish neighbors. Most scholars have argued that the di-
aspora community came into being sometime between 650 and 550 BCE.
Where the Elephantine Jews came from has been a matter of controversy.
While many have considered it likely that they migrated from Judah, the
hypothesis of Samarian origins has been vigorously defended as well. Who
were the Elephantine Jews? This epilogue seeks to answer that question by
summing up the results of a review of all the evidence, including the texts
from the Aramaic papyrus in Demotic script.
If it had not been for Papyrus Amherst 63, it is doubtful whether a
review of the evidence, however rigorous, would have been able to come up
with a compelling narrative to take the place of earlier versions of the story.
Recent monographs have challenged conventional interpretations and illu-
minated many aspects of the Elephantine experience. Yet it has proven very
difficult, if not impossible, to offer a comprehensive counternarrative on the
basis of more or less the same evidence that was used to write the classic
version of the story. All the Aramaic texts from Elephantine are from the
143
Y7557-Toorn.indb 143 5/7/19 11:50 AM

144 Epilogue
fifth century BCE. This fact alone renders speculation about the origins
and development of the Elephantine Jewish community a hazardous affair.
The Amherst papyrus sheds new light on the origins of the community.
Owing to the historical data it contains, it is now possible to follow the
trajectory of the Elephantine community and its antecedents over a period
spanning three hundred years. Except for the references in the book of
Jeremiah, we still have nothing from the sixth century. But the information
in the Amherst papyrus allows us to answer some of the most tantalizing
questions about the origins and the history of the community.
One of the things the papyrus shows is that the ancestors of the Ele-
phantine Jews were Samarians. As a result of the Assyrian victory over Sa-
maria in 721, they had left their homeland and moved to Judah, where they
found employment as mercenaries. These men came from a religious tradi-
tion in which Yaho had all the traits of a storm god. In their temples, they
worshipped him in the form of a bull calf. He was “our Bull,” as one of their
traditional songs stated. Yaho was a warrior god. To men from the military
profession, this must have felt reassuring: “Some by the bow, some by the
spear—behold, as for us, my Lord, our God is Yaho!” When the descen-
dants of these Samarians ended up in the deep south of Egypt, they held on
to the god of their fathers. In a way, they followed in their fathers’ footsteps
professionally as well, since they kept serving in the armed forces. Some
served as mercenaries, but most of them served in a land-for-service ar-
rangement that entitled them to houses and fields in return for their readi-
ness to take up arms to defend the interests of their new masters.
Originally, these Samarians spoke Hebrew, like the rest of the popu-
lation of Samaria. The religious songs that they took with them were in
Hebrew, as is clear from the various Hebraisms that appear in the Ara-
maic version of three of their psalms in the Amherst papyrus. Although the
northern dialect of Hebrew differed from the Judean variant, Samarians
and Judeans were perfectly able to communicate. So when the Samarian
soldiers went to Judah—along with many others after the fall of Samaria
in 721—they continued speaking Hebrew. The reason that, at some point,
they completely abandoned Hebrew had to do with their longtime stay
in Palmyra. The Amherst papyrus does not mention Palmyra—or rather
Tadmor, as it used to be called. But the references to a “fortress of palms”
situated near a spring on the fringe of the desert along a trade route make
the identification with Palmyra compelling. The Samarians ended up in
Palmyra because they had been looking for shelter. We can only guess at
Y7557-Toorn.indb 144 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Epilogue 145
the reason they left Judah. The most plausible scenario assumes that Sen-
nacherib’s campaign in 701 was so devastating that it resulted in mass mi-
gration from Judah. The Samarian mercenaries were among these migrants.
Along with their Judean commander, they found shelter at Palmyra. The
Amherst papyrus has a historical narrative of their arrival. The reference
to “the people of your dialect,” unintelligible to the people who welcomed
them, demonstrates that they did not speak Aramaic when they came. At
Palmyra, the dominant language was Aramaic. The switch to Aramaic was
inevitable. If the Samarians wanted to be part of the ethnically mixed com-
munity of Palmyra, they had to speak its language. When they left Palmyra
for Egypt, toward the end of the seventh century, they spoke Aramaic.
Though originally from Samaria, they had become Arameans in language.
Language and ethnicity are two different things. The ethnicity of the
Elephantine Jews is complex. The Amherst papyrus shows that the fore-
bears of the Elephantine Jews had accumulated ethnic identities. They had
come to Palmyra as a troop of Samarian soldiers under the leadership of
a Judean commander. Their stay at Palmyra of about a century had turned
them into Arameans. This was their new identity, though their Samarian
roots did not cease to matter. As Israelites, they worshipped the god of their
ancestors—the three Israelite psalms celebrate Yaho as the supreme deity—
but they identified him with the Aramean god Bethel. In addition, they
made room in their devotion for such gods as Anat-Yaho, Eshem-Bethel,
and Herem-Bethel. While religion is not a direct echo of ethnicity, it sug-
gests that these Samarians had come to see themselves as a subgroup of
the Aramean community. The fifth-century texts from Elephantine waver
between an Aramean and a Jewish identity. The fact that the Elephantine
Jews should look at themselves as Arameans is no cause for wonder, given
their history in Palmyra. But their self-reference as Jews is arresting. Sa-
marians have disappeared from the picture.
The Jewish identity of the Jews of the island was the outcome of the
Elephantine experience rather than the identity they carried with them
when they came. When they arrived they were Arameans with a Samarian
background. By the time they were forced to leave the island, they were
Jews. This was the result of their time in Egypt. The diaspora experience
had brought them into contact with various other Jewish communities.
The Jewish community of Migdol, for instance, had little affinity with the
Samarian roots of the Elephantine Jews. But if the Elephantine community
had a temple for Yaho, it meant it was Jewish. In Egypt, Jewish identity
Y7557-Toorn.indb 145 5/7/19 11:50 AM

146 Epilogue
prevailed over previous commitments to a more particular ethnic identity.

The Persian decree to recognize the Jews as a separate nation clinched the
matter. From that point on, the Elephantine Jews would be Jews. The mis-
sion of Hananyah gave an inkling of what this would mean. With the full
backing of the Persian central authorities, Hananyah told the Elephantine
Jews to bring their ritual calendar into conformity with that of the other
Jews in the Persian Empire. Hananyah’s intervention did not put an end to
mixed marriages, nor did it turn the Elephantine Jews into monotheists.
Yet it is doubtful that the descendants of the Elephantine Jews would have
continued to honor Aramean gods. In Egypt, the Elephantine community
got caught up in a process of change that made Jewish ethnicity their pri-
mary identity. Over time they would have forgotten their Aramean heri-
tage. It would be too simple to say that the entire Jewish diaspora in Ptol-
emaic Egypt ended up embracing the Torah as their sacred law. But the
particular religious situation that had obtained in Elephantine during the
fifth century BCE got lost among the succeeding generations.
The story of the Elephantine Jews is a typical diaspora story and a use-
ful reminder of the fact that the diaspora experience is as much about the
production of identity as it is about the preservation of identity. When the
community settled at Elephantine in the late seventh or early sixth century,
they were not yet Jewish. They developed a Jewish identity in Egypt under
the impact of the diaspora experience and the Persian diversity politics. The
long-term effect of their acquired Jewish identity was the creation of a new
cultural memory. The process is visible in the transformation of Ahiqar and
the rewriting of one of the Samarian songs preserved in the Amherst papy-
rus. In the book of Tobit, the Aramean protagonist of the Life and Sayings
of Ahiqar is transformed into a Jew from Samaria. It amounts to a cultural
amnesia of his Aramean origins. Psalm 20 is a revision of the first of the
three Samarian songs known through Papyrus Amherst 63. In the bibli-
cal version, all Samarian and Aramean references have been suppressed,
and the name of Zion has been inserted. What once was a Samarian text
has become a Jewish psalm. Does it mean that others were censoring the
cultural memory of the Elephantine community? That argument supposes
that the Elephantine Jews were keen to preserve the memory of their Sa-
marian and Aramean past. It is not certain that they were. Creating a na-
tion takes a lot of forgetting, as Ernest Renan has said. For the Elephantine
Jews, becoming a Jew took a lot of forgetting too.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 146 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Epilogue 147
But forgetting is not the purpose of scholarly inquiry. This book has
attempted to look at the other side of a familiar diaspora story. It reveals
a reality that perhaps does not fit the classic diaspora narrative. The Ele-
phantine Jews were originally much less Jewish than many authors like to
think. Their story illustrates the formative role of the diaspora experience in
the creation of Judaism. Elephantine is an early chapter in the story of the
Jews. It is, in some respects, an unusual chapter. At Elephantine, it was pos-
sible to be a Jew and a polytheist. It was possible to be a Jew and have your
own temple far away from Jerusalem. It was possible to be a Jew, marry an
Egyptian wife, and still have Jewish children. It was possible to be a Jew and
never read the Torah because there was, as yet, no Torah. To anyone who
hears it, the story of the Elephantine community is a reminder of the fact
that the story of the Jews has many chapters. To believe that every chapter
tells the same story in a slightly different way would be a big mistake.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 147 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Appendix: Translation of
Papyrus Amherst 63,
Adapted from AOAT 448
Section 1: The Babylonians (columns i–v)

Magnificat for the Lady of the Sanctuary (i 1–17)
The herald of Gaddi-El [comes out (?).]
[He appears before Nabu (?)]
[. . . .] and he announces:
“Your [reign], O Lord, is enduring!
And your heroism is [great]
[Among Gods and m]en.
Lighten up, [O Lord!]
[Show (?)] your manhood to the Lady!
Crown the Lady of the Sanctuary!
[Send out] your heralds and your messengers!
Be shin[ing like] Resheph!
Gi[ve sp]lendor to the sta[rs]
[Like gold (?)] that shi[nes.]
In your light we will tr[ust.]
[In heaven your] light is exalted.”
In the gate [of the p]alace

[ . . . .]
[. . . . .]
Present yourself (?) [ . . . !]
[. . . .]
“Magnify the Lady, my [Queen,]
[. . . . ,] O King!”
The Lord answered [and said:]

[“Take the har]p (and) the lyre,
And let [them sing to the Lady]
On the harp and the lyre.
149
Y7557-Toorn.indb 149 5/7/19 11:50 AM

150 Appendix
[. . . .] your gatekeeper (?)

All your [ . . . ] in [ . . . ]
[. . . .] your [. . . .].
Rash, [sing] to the Lady!”
[All the king]s (and) all the Gods
[Will see the Lady] of the Sanctuary
[And will b]le[ss her:]
“Exalted is the Lady, [our Lady!]
[Exalted is] the Lady, my [Queen.”]
May the Lady Rear Her Child (i 17–21 // ii 12–18; iii 3–6; iii 14–17; iv 3–6)
Your deer [we] have sacri[ficed, O La]dy.
And may [your] ey[es]
[Take pleasure] in our sacrifice.
I will sing the praises of the Radiant One,

[So li]sten [to me:]
[“I am exalted,]
I have reared [you,]
I [have suckled my darling.”]
[Elevate, my Lady, your baby!]
[You will make (him) glorious,]
[You will ma]ke [him] stro[ng. End.]
He Smells as Pleasant as You (ii 1–12)
“Install and place for me
A cou[ch in the sanctuary.”]
“We will set up your couch
[In the midst] of your sanctuary.”
She is crouching in the san[ctu]ary.

Your people are how[li]ng:
“Come out to the [day]light!
[The mi]dwife will carry you.
She will carry, and she will suckle.”
And we shall establish you, Radiant One,

On the throne.
[W]ash (him), and swaddle (him)!
And we shall watch the little darling
Whom [you su]ckle.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 150 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Translation of Papyrus Amherst 63 151
Sprinkle your loved one!

Your darling whom you [will sati]ate!
And he will get drowsy
And lay himself to rest
On a bed of fir.
“Inspect the baby!

Protect the baby,
My God, my Lord!”
“He smells as pleasant as you,
Que[en] of Heaven.
Kiss the one
[Who dw]ells in the sanctuary, O La[dy.”]
May the Lady Rear Her Child (ii 12–18 // i 17–21; iii 3–6;
iii 14–17; iv 3–6)
Your deer we have [sa]crificed, Lady.
And may [your] eyes
Take pleasure [in] our sacrifice.
I will sing the praises of the Radiant One,

[So list]en to me:
“I am exalted,
I have reared [you],
I have suckled my darling.”
Elevate, my Lady, your baby!
[You will make (him) glor]ious,
You will make him strong.
End.
I Am the Cow (ii 18–22)
To a[ll . . . ]
You call:
“Listen [to me! . . . . .]
I am the Cow.
[I am] glorio[us.”]
Deliver the Radiant One
The Radiant One [. . . .]
Call [ . . . ]
[Ins]pect [your] bab[y . . . . . .]
[. . . .]
Y7557-Toorn.indb 151 5/7/19 11:50 AM

152 Appendix
Nabu Chooses His Bride (iii 1–6 // iii 12–17; iv 1–6)

Nabu co[mes out.]
He sings to [the Lady of the Sanctuary.]
“I will choose you.
I have purified (you) and pour[ed the oil],
I have made my pride rule
Over all the G⌈ods.”⌉
[I] will sing the praises of the Radiant One,

So listen to me:
“I am exalted,
I have reared you,
You will make (him) glorious,
End.
The Judge at the Gate (iii 6–12)
The Judge was taken
To the gate and halted,
My Lord, sevenfold blessed.
All my mouth is saying
As it cries out:
“Please enter, O King,
Bless the Radiant One.
Stand on your place!
Wash his hands, Kothar!
My Lord, bless the Lady!”
Nabu Chooses His Bride (iii 12–17 // iii 1–6; iv 1–6)
Nabu comes out.
[He sings to] the Lady of the Sanctuary:
“I will choose you.
[I] have purified (you) [and poured the oil,]
I [have made] my pride [rule]
Over all the Gods.”
[I will sing the praises] of the [Radiant One,]

[So] listen to me:
Y7557-Toorn.indb 152 5/7/19 11:50 AM

“[I am exa]lted,
[I have reared you,]
[Elevate, my Lady, your baby!]
[You will make (him) glorious,]
[You will make] him strong.
A Blessing (iii 17–19)
. . . [. . . . . . . . . . . . .]
[. . . . . .] you will ble[ss . . . ]
[. . . . . . . . .] . . . [. . . . . . . .]
Nabu Chooses His Bride (iv 1–6 // iii 1–6; iii 12–17)
[Nabu comes out.]
He sin[gs to the Lady] of the Sanctuary:
[“I will choose you.]
I [have purified (you)] and poured the oil,
[I have made my pri]de [rule]
Over all the Gods.”
I will sing the praises [of the Radiant One],

So listen to me:
“I am exalted,
I have reared you,
You will make (him) glorious,
Kings Saw You and Were Fearful (iv 6–24)
Kings saw you,
And they were fearful.
They were in a[we,]
Saying before their magnates:
“At the sta[rt] of the day she is elevated.
And we have seen
The [ri]se of the Queen of Rash,
The entrance of the Lady
Among the Gods.”
And all of them rose
<From> their thrones.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 153 5/7/19 11:50 AM

154 Appendix
“Let the Lady be seated

Among the Gods.
Let her throne be precious in [Rash!]
In Rash a footstool
Has been se[t up] for you!”
They were intoxicated
By the goodness of the Lady,
The Gods by [her] love.
Kings made the Lady go up,
“Please ent[er and] be seate[d]
[Upon your throne.”]
They burned incense for her throne,
And they crowned her, and they said:
“Let the sunrise bless the Lady!”
“I am Nanay, [the Queen of Heaven (?)].”
What is my Lady saying?
“[Bless (?)] my appearance!”
Let the m[oon] bless you,
Who brightens up the Gods of the N[ight].
Let the sun [say a bl]essing,
The light [that ill]uminates [the earth (?).]
[Let] the King bless [his] Bride.
Let the constellations speak a bles[sing].
Just so the lights [of the night,]
The planets and the constellations:
“Elevate between us [your light (?)]!”
They bless the Lady:
“[You are] the Lady of the Sanctuary, Lady.”
My Gift Is for You on New Year’s Day (v 1–17)
[The King comes out.]
He bles[ses the L]ady.
[. . . .]
[. . . .]
[He] sings to the Lady of the Sanc[tuary.]
[He praises] the Lady [in song.]
[And he says] to the Lady:
“Lady, illuminate the heavens.
[Lady,] illuminate the earth.”
The [maiden]s have come.
They have come before my Bride:
Y7557-Toorn.indb 154 5/7/19 11:50 AM

“She is absolutely glorious

Always as my Lady.
Forever, over those declared unclean.”
Al[l the mi]ghty ones approached,
The people approached.
“[You] shine in the assembly of the stars (!),
You are bright at the sta[rt of the day.]
You are my Fortuna.
[To] the Creator she is the Beautiful One.”
And kin[gs] were struck with awe.
They set up your throne,
[And they cr]owned her.
The people of your maidens exult:
“My gift is for you
On New Year’s Day.”
Dress Nanay with a [cro]wn.
Master of the lyre, si[ng]
[To] Nanay on the harp.
[The priests (?)] come and take a stand.
They speak [and they sa]y:
“Arise, my Lord,
With a [sp]lendid rise for your servants!
[Shine (?) in] splendor!”
Let all the Gods
Bless Gaddi-El:
“Nanay, [you (?) are] beautiful.
At harvest ti[me (?) you illu]minate
The high [heavens.”]
And your [ . . . ] calls out:
“Amen, [you ligh]t up your heavens,
[You b]righten up [your he]avens,
All the [ea]rth as you rise.
You are my [queen (?)], Nanay!”
[ ...]
[Musicia]ns (?) prai[se . . . ]
[ ...]
[They offer up (?)] incense [ . . . ]
[. . . .]
[. . . .]
Y7557-Toorn.indb 155 5/7/19 11:50 AM

156 Appendix
Section 2: The Syrians (columns vi–xi)

They Put Their Hands in Shackles (vi 1–11)
[The ter]rors, Lord,
The t[errors,] we are howling,
The terrors [we have] se[en.]
They [ru]ined for you
All your cities.
Trembling dwells in the land.
The [dis]tressed ones turn to you,
The entire community
Of your consecrated ones.
The people of your sons
And your servant girls—
They put their hands in shackles,
All of them they carried and drove away.
They are scattered, they are howling:

Your cook(s) who used to offer bread
And prepare all the barley of your offerings.
Your butcher(s)
Who used to offer a ram—
He/They would slaughter a lamb,
He/They would slaughter a mountain goat.
He/They prepared all the food
Of your offerings.
Your priests who used to offer
Soothing incense—
They would bring you
Fragrances and reeds.
Your musicians
Who used to offer merriment—
They would carry the harp,
They would carry the lyre.
The cupbearers are ho[wling.]
They would make him drink
The mixed drink of his belly. End.
What the God of Rash Said (vi 12–22)
He [appears], he comes up (?),
The Resident of [Hama]th from Rash.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 156 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Those who disturb you, O Rash,

[ . . . ] he will strike.
His mouth that [ . . . ]
[He strike]s and he shatters.
[ ...]
[ . . . ] and ⌈he⌉ will find.
[. . . . the Lord answered],
[And] the God of Rash sa[id to me:]
[“I have come before you]
[I have heard] your call for help.
[ ...]
[. . . .]
[Don’t you fear, my servant,]
[Ra]⌈kib⌉-Bol (?)!
[ ...]
[ . . . ] . . . you . . .
[ ...]
[ . . . ] . . . me . . .
[ ...]
[ . . . ] you have lamented.
[ ...]
[And you will praise (?)] Bethel.”
My Servant, Do Not Fear (vii 1–18)
His mercies that we shall [ex]alt
[Forever (?)] in the valleys of [ . . . .]
Lord, our good God,

Our God, my Creator!
I know my murderers, our God.
Our God, there is no evil on my hands,
Our God, there is no duplicity in my mouth.
Yet you have made me a sheep in their flock
And a ram in their fold.
All the time they keep an eye on me:
“Let us kill him, become fat and opulent!
Let us eat his flesh and become fat!
Let us drink his blood and be satiated!”
Great God of Rash, Lord!

They have packed lies in their mouth,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 157 5/7/19 11:50 AM

158 Appendix
Bitter things underneath their tongue.

Lord, our good God,
Our God, my Creator!
I know my murderers, our God.
There is no evil on my hands, our God,
There is no duplicity in my mouth.
Yet you have made me a date in their mouth
And sweets under their tongue.
Great God of Rash, Lord!
They have packed venom in their mouth,
Bitter things underneath their tongue.
The Lord answered and said to me:

“[R]⌈akib⌉-[B]ol, my servant,
Do not fear!
I will save you!
I bless you by the Lady,
By the Lord from Darga-and-Rash
[I bless you.]
[In] your days
[Your] e[nemies shall be] de[stroyed.]
During your years
[Your] fo[es] shall be slain.
[Your opponents] I
Will destroy before you,
Your foot on their necks
[You will plant . . . ].
[I] will be like your right hand
In all your land.
[You shall rule (?)] your house in peace.”
[Lord, for] you we [sacri]fice your offerings.

Your cup [shall be filled] with goodness,
And you will pou[r (it) out.] End.
A Dwelling for Bethel (viii 1–23)
When [you speak] your blessings,
All the Gods will bless you.
The Lord will bless you from Rash,

The Lady will bless you from Syria.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 158 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Baal will bless you from Zaphon,

Pidray will bless you from the Orontes (?).
Bel will bless you from Babylon,
Belet will bless you from Esaggil.
Nabu will bless you from Barsippa,
Nanay will bless you from the sanctuary.
Throne-of-Yaho and Asherah
Will bless you from the south.
Give offerings, and make them go up in fire.

Multiply, Rash, the sheep.
Multiply, Rash, multiply
The incense for the Lord,
And he will multiply your blessings.
Bow to Anat,
Swear by Nabu,
Kiss his courtesan.
Let sixty musicians sprinkle

The stele of the Lord,
Let them lift their voice and bless the Lord.
Let sixty temple stewards sprinkle
The stele of the Lord,
Their palms full of frankincense
For Bethel’s nostrils.
Let sixty young men (?) sprinkle
The stele of the Lord.
The land of your love, Lord,

The land of your love, and Rash,
The land of your love, Rash,
That celebrates in song
The Destroyer of the Sea—
May the Gods order for it old age.
Take away your yoke, Lord of Heaven,
Bring the wheat and barley close to you.
Raise them high on the soil of Aram.
Our Master, we will set up your dwelling.

Please do come out, O Lord,
And please enter the abode.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 159 5/7/19 11:50 AM

160 Appendix
A strong wall has been erected.

Through the rift (?), call (?) [upon] Kothar,
Your windows [in the house, let him build.]
The opening (?) in your palace, Lord.
[. . . .]
[. . . .]
[. . . .]
Bethel’s Beauty Contest (ix 1–x 8)
[L]ady, may you be blessed,
Forever and ever.
[She] comes [before our G]od
And before our Lord,
[Our G]oddess, the Lady.
Your sons and the people of your daughters
Have adorned the Beautiful One.
The Lady is clad in bracelets.
And the God of Rash is strong.

He takes precedence over all the Gods.
Open your shrine, my God,
And let your mouth order your food.
Your table will be provided
With bulls and with deer.
Butchers wait upon him,
All of them with swift hands.
Every ox is becoming weak.
Your drinking bowl shall be poured out,
Resident of Hamath.
It will be poured out, and they will fill it.
And cupbearers wait upon him,
All of them standing in attendance
And saying:
“You are at a banquet!
Lift your eyes,
Behold and drink it!”
Lord, through your snorts

You turn every reed marsh red,
Like the smoke of incense,
Through your breaths.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 160 5/7/19 11:50 AM

You fly over the places you drenched.

You lift your wings like an eagle,
Also they spring back again.
The beams of your temple,

Bethel, are from the Lebanon.
From the Lebanon,
Yes, your garden, are they.
Now, Resident of Hamath,
Strike them down toward you.
Select the girl!

Who is the girl?
All your appearances
We closely watch.
End.
The Lord turns red like the sun,

And he shines like the moon,
Like the moon along the length of his heavens.
Yes, let them build
Your house in the heavens,
An abode with the stars.
Let your couch be installed in the sanctuary.
Let them build in your palace
A thousand altars for Bethel.
Examine them, and select the beauty queen,

That she may bring the sacrifices of the city,
In Rash plenty of bulls.
This is the beauty queen!
Adorn her face with embroidered scarfs.
Select the girl!

Who is the girl?
All your appearances
We closely watch.
End.
And the daughters of Rash

Light up and shout out:
Y7557-Toorn.indb 161 5/7/19 11:50 AM

162 Appendix
“This is the one!”

And the Lord has crowned the Perfect One.
The God of Rash has crowned her
In his house,
And he established her
In his palace.
He elevates her like the day in his house.
When [he comes] out, his rays,
My Goddess, are illuminating you.
Our Crescent has been taken away,

The God of Rash.
The God of Rash is slumbering
On the day of [his] king[ship.]
And along with you, the Sons of El
Have put themselves to rest.
When the Crescent is slumbering,
All of them slumber.
And the chamber smells of slumber,
Which they built among your Mighty Ones.
And the Lord is wailing:

“Protector of Rash, wake up!
Where is the Beautiful One, the Bride?
Lord, God of Rash,
[In] your pal[ace], crown the Perfect One,
⌈The Glorio⌉us One among the princes of he[aven!”]
Howl and [mo]an to Bol:

“Bol, have mercy, have compassion!
[Shake off ] the sleep that is upon you!
[Illu]mi[nate the heavens],
Illumin[ate the earth.]
Shine brightly, our Perennial One!
And shine brightly, our Goddess!
Shine brightly, like the sun [ . . . ]
[. . . .]
Let him sprinkle your a[bode (?)],
Perennial One!
When you have intercourse (?), love [. . . .]
Y7557-Toorn.indb 162 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Your throne [ . . . ]
[ ...]
Please [enter!”]
[ ...]
Our Crescent,
You slumber in (lit., from) Rash!
You are dimmed because of love.
The light of his radiance has passed.
And his light is not high.
His light has turned dark.
Your <cl>oud is a seal, O Lord,
Send away your cloud for me!
Arise, wake up for me!
Wake up, Lady, his Spouse!
The guard looks
At the inner room of the Lady.
The Gods are watching out for the Queen,
Also the princes, for the Spouse.
The young woman, once examined,
Is established in his palace.
Now come, Bride of his,
Shake off slumber!
Let me see her rays.
And you will be called upon:
“Bring the God, the Lord!”
Let me see their rise.
End.
Praying for Rain (x 9–13)
Bethel, God Most High,
Who sweeps up the sea,
Who dwells on the mountains—
All the rainclouds,
It is you who builds them!
We celebrate you in our song!
Do let it rain, Lord,
In vessel, pond, and cistern.
For you, our silver and our gold.
For you is the fullness of our possessions.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 163 5/7/19 11:50 AM

164 Appendix
For you are our bulls,

Amen, our firstborn.
Hope for the Fugitives (x 13–17 // x 21–24; xi 6–8; xi 13–16)
Bring me close, listen!
He will help us,

Let the crowd say, “Amen, amen.”
End.
Father of the Orphan, Champion of the Widow (x 17–20)
Lord, God, Father of the orphan,
Judge of the widow!
When to you she lifts up her hands,
In the wink of an eye
She breaks into praise and rejoices.
She lifts up her hands,
In the wink of an eye
She breaks into praise and rejoices.
God protects those who are brought down.
The Lord will [. . . .] their distress
In [the wink of an eye.]
Hope for the Fugitives (x 21–24 // x 13–17; xi 6–8; xi 13–16)
To you I call out in battle,
Among the wounded whom you struck.
[He will] help me,

May the Gu[ardian of Siyan] keep watch,
I [keep groaning and moaning.]
Y7557-Toorn.indb 164 5/7/19 11:50 AM


Shall m[agnify] the Lord.
May the trou[bles of the fu]giti[ves]
[Let the crowd say, “Amen, amen.”]
[End.]
The Lord of Thunderstorms (xi 1–6)
From the Lebanon,
Lord, from Rash,
You strike the entire earth.
You lift up the skies, O Lord.
You attack the stars and make (them) dark.
In all of Rash, the land of our God,
He howls, he throws his thunders;
He throws, he howls with his thunders,
Illuminating with fire
The places drenched by the sea.
He shines, and he speaks,
Until he burns them, the Lord,
He burns them, the God of Rash,
Like columns of fire.
Hope for the Fugitives (xi 6–8 // x 15–17; x 22–24; xi 15–16)
Let the crowd say, “Amen, amen.”
End.
Dreaming of the City in Rash (xi 8–13)
In my dream I was young again,
I was transported to Rash.
I spotted a city in Rash,
I went and heard its name:
“Near-the-borders-of-Rash-she-is-founded.”
Our Master protects “Near-the-borders.”
He will slay her enemies on her fields,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 165 5/7/19 11:50 AM

166 Appendix
He will smash with a righteous punishment.

His words will sustain me
Against his anger,
So I shall be lifted
To the broad place of the Lord.
Hope for the Fugitives (xi 13–16 // x 13–17; x 21–24; xi 6–8)
He will help me,
I shall rise again in peace.
May he help me, the God of Rash.
Let the crowd say, “Amen, amen.” End.
Prayer against Enemies (xi 16–20)
The Lord is coming forth from Rash.
Who is like you?
Who more compassionate than you?
Take away and destroy the enemy!
Arise, my Lord,
Take away and destroy our enemy!
Do make the enemy powerless,
That Cush and Elam
Not annihilate us.
That we not wander about restless,
Lord, we who are close to you.
That we not be sacrificed,
That they not feast on us.
Before our enemy we call out:
“De[liver (?)] your wandering ones!”
Y7557-Toorn.indb 166 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Section 3: The Samarians (columns xii–xiii)

A Desolate City under Tall Cedars (xii 1–11)
[She] lam[ents] the cal[amity:]
“Establish me again [and] raise (me) up!
[Esta]blish me in [my place] again,
Make me stand!”
Under tall cedars,

There [I saw y]ou.
For you had firmly established yourself,
You whose people feasted on plenty.
—Your father is old and unfit,

Your brothers are small.
—“My father is not old and unfit,
My brothers are not small!
For my father is like a solid house,
And my brothers are like vultures and eagles!”
—My brothers have mixed your bowl

On account of (your) filthy insolence.
A bowl plenty of filth,
And destruction and fury.
They will thoroughly pollute the source,
And its water shall perish in the canal.
Our anger has smitten you,

City full of people
And profanity and wickedness!
A wild ass is at its windows {its windows}.
Those that move about its walls (are)
The wild ass, the wild cat, and the snake.
End.
May Yaho Answer Us in Our Troubles (xii 11–19)
May Yaho answer us
In our troubles.
May Adonai answer us
In our troubles.
Be a bow
In heaven, Crescent!
Y7557-Toorn.indb 167 5/7/19 11:50 AM

168 Appendix
Send your messengers

From all of Rash!
And from Zaphon
May Yaho help us.
May Yaho give to us
Our heart’s desire.
May the Lord give to us
Our heart’s desire.
Every wish,
May Yaho fulfill.
May Yaho fulfill,
May Adonai not diminish
Any request of our heart.
Some by the bow,

Some by the spear—
Behold, as for us,
My Lord, our God is Yaho!
May our Bull be with us.
May Bethel answer us tomorrow.
Baal-Shamayin
Shall bless the Lord:
“By your loyal ones
I bless you!”
End.
Our Banquet Is for You (xiii 1–10)
Hear me, our God!
Fine lambs (and) sh[ee]p
We will sacrifice for you among the Gods.
Our banquet is for you
Among the Mighty Ones of the people,
Adonai, for you,
Among the Mighty Ones of the people.
Adonai, the people will bless you.
Your annual offerings we will perform.
From the pitcher, saturate yourself, my God!
Let it be announced forever:

“The Merciful One exalts the great,
Yaho humiliates the lowly one.”
Y7557-Toorn.indb 168 5/7/19 11:50 AM

They have mixed the wine in our jar,

In our jar, at our New Moon festival!
Drink, Yaho,
From the bounty of a thousand bowls!
Be satiated, Adonai,
From the bounty of the people!
Singers wait upon the Lord,

The player of the harp, the player of the lyre:
“We will play for you
The song of the Sidonian lyre,
And our flutes resoundingly,
At the banquets of humankind.”
End.
The Host of Heaven Proclaims Your Rule (xiii 11–17)
Who among the Gods,
Among humankind, Yaho—
Who among the Gods,
Among king and nonking,
Who is like you, Yaho, among the Gods?
From the very beginning, Adonai, avenge
Your worshippers, the longstanding people.
Take note of our pursuer,

And restore my strength.
Beneath you, Yaho,

Beneath you, Adonai,
The host of heaven is (as plentiful) as sand.
Yaho, the host of heaven
Proclaims to us your rule.
Take note of our pursuer,

And restore my strength.
Let Baal from Zaphon

Bless Yaho.
Arise, Yaho, to our rescue.
Let his ears turn
To the prayer, Lord.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 169 5/7/19 11:50 AM

170 Appendix
Arise Yaho!
Do protect,
As you have been protecting
Your people since olden times.
End.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 170 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Section 4: In Palmyra (columns xiv–xvii)

Lady, Restore Your Sanctuary! (xiv 1–xv 9)
Be you blessed, Lady,
Over all the blessed ones.
Come (and) order cold for the desert!
You are my Queen.
Yes, come (and) shine from Rash, Lady!
You are the Queen over all of Aram.
Observe the ruins of the chapel!

You must take pity on the trampled (and)
The pulverized parts of your house.
Maiden, your pedestal
Who will rebuild it?
Who will rebuild, O Maiden,
The stand by its side?
Cow Nanay,
Rebuild the stand of your image.
Fully restore, my Goddess,
The socle of your witness.
A sun of blinding light

Shines through your windows,
Your windows, divine Cow,
Into the gate of your image,
The image of the Dove.
I will watch over you,

A watch that will not grow weak.
And I will satiate myself with your presence.
I will get my fill, my Sister,
Of your features.
The day they came up against the Lord,

They stretched their hand
Against the wings of Nanay.
They came in and raised their hand
Against the Maiden.
Get up, watchman,

Herald of tidings for us,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 171 5/7/19 11:50 AM

172 Appendix
That I may learn about

The demolition of the Delicate One.
From the tidings I heard,
I learn about the calamity.
The herald of the Delicate One,

The herald of the Dove,
The herald of my Voluptuous One,
No longer sets up the harp.
Baalat, his tongue has been plucked out.
We entered—
He had been very much dismembered.
The very spot where you were lying down,
We quickly entered, and we wailed.
“Come, Nanay, get up!
Move! That we may exalt you!
Our Companion has fallen,

Our Holy One has fallen.
Between the (sculpted) panthers,
Haddu has become undone.
I will cry to you until he gets up.
Get up, Gatekeeper of the Perennial Source!
Arise! That he may cause to murmur (again)
The stream for the Maiden.
Of the image of the husband
We have been deprived.
His feet have been smashed,
His hands have been smashed.
Come and have mercy!
His feet have been smashed—
Our statue, the Guardian.”
Who are you?

You are my strong Goddess!
From our raiders
Please grant us rest!
End of section.
On the chariot
Of the King of Rash, the Bull,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 172 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Put a stele!
On the throne, on the throne
Of the Bull-of-Babylon, our guard.
Who are you?

You are our Goddess:
The Great One, the Exalted One!
Exalt my people!
My people,
Establish them like Gods!
Nanay, let them get their fill
(From) jars of wine,
(From) his inebriating drink,
That used to intoxicate me.
Who are you?

You are my Goddess, the Strong One!
From our raiders
Please grant us rest.
End of section.
“Upon my back
The horses have marched.
I am a viper
At their heels.
The horses have marched
Upon my belly.
They turned gray from my saliva,
And from my venom they fell ill.”
Our community by your mercy,

Save (and) exalt!
Those who fainted from thirst,
Heal, O Lady!
Make Mar-Bol
The Guardian!
Elevate, Nanay,
The one who loves your house!
A divine stand establish!
Appoint, Nanay, Nabu
The Herald-of-Heaven.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 173 5/7/19 11:50 AM

174 Appendix
A Reign of Everlasting Peace (xvi 1–3)

Prai⌈se me, my ser⌉vant!
Eshem-Bethel will choose you.
Nab[u] will proclaim
[Your] kingship.
Be seated, young man,
On ⌈your⌉ [thro]⌈ne.⌉
I presented myself at your call,
Son of man.
For you will establish peace
Forever and ever!
In the month of [ . . . ]
Nabu will remember you.
He will put you among the esteemed ones
On earth and on high.
Haddu, Bless Gaddi-El! (xvi 3–4; cf. xvii 17–18)
Blessed are you, Hadad!
Haddu, bless Gaddi-El:
“Blessed are you!
Baal-Shamayin controls your fortress.
Patroller Nabu is your guard.
Pidray is your closing-beam.”
Evening in the City of Palms (xvi 4–12)
At sunset Haddu is strong,
The Overseer of Rash.
And the people have put themselves at ease
In the temple of the Lord;
The caravan of wanderers
Lies down in your guardroom;
The cattle have been sated,
Within you, at your source.
How should you ever be abandoned

Or be laid waste?
Nabu has made you illustrious.
He has adorned <you>
With stars of gold.
And he has placed you
Y7557-Toorn.indb 174 5/7/19 11:50 AM

In a fortress of palms,
That shall not be captured
And that hides no breach.
To me, you have indeed

Conducted much booty.
To you silver shall be added,
To you gold has been brought.
And the One who makes

The perennial fountain murmur
Says to me:
“Exalt the Lord,
The God who gives
And does not deceive!
Exalt Me!
For whom would you put next me?”
Within me, you, who makes
The perennial fountain murmur,
You whisper:
“Come up to me!”
Present to your citizens

A fountain of wine.
Present to your citizens
A vessel, Nanay.
A beautiful vessel,
A vessel from Anshan bring!
Put it upon the table, Queen.
Divide, divide
The fines imposed on the enemy.
Divide the booty!
Through drunkenness of much wine
You make them revel.
Song to the Rising Sun (xvi 12–13 // 17–19)
You wake up completely
As the day comes out.
You shine like a diadem
Of gold!
Y7557-Toorn.indb 175 5/7/19 11:50 AM

176 Appendix
Wake up, let go of sleep,

Bright-Eye!
We drink from the source
That shines
As you come out with a golden sunrise,
Swift-Hands.
The God Who Answers with Fire (xvi 13–17)
Indeed, Eshem-Bethel,
Your venom is like asps.
Your bow in heaven,
You, O Lord, you draw,
Biting, Eshem-Bethel,
Your enemies.
You see that it is good,
Your hammer.
With force against Elam
You raise it.
—You see that it is good,

My protection.
My protection to your fortress
Shall be near.
Should they raise their head,
Your enemies;
Should they be heated against you,
The adversaries;
Should they stretch out their hand
Against the Lord—
It is powerless against the sealed gates.
I myself am coming forth
from Darga-and-Rash
In a fire you have never seen.
Song to the Rising Sun (xvi 17–19 // 12–13)
You wake up completely
As the day comes out.
You shine like a diadem
Of gold!
Y7557-Toorn.indb 176 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Wake up, let go of sleep,

Bright-Eye!
We drink from the source
That shines
As you come out with a golden sunrise,
Swift-Hands.
Shelter for the Samarians (xvii 1–6)
They [came (?)] toward the evening watch.
Broken men during [the mor]ning watch.
[With] my own eyes I saw
A troop of men co[mi]ng up.
The Samarians made their way
To my lord, the king.
—From where are you, young man?
From where are the [pe]ople of your dialect?
—I come from [ J]udah,
My brothers have been brou[ght]
From Samaria.
And now a man is bringing
My sister from Jerusalem.
—Come in, you, young man,
We will give you shelter.
Take a qab-measure of wheat
On your shoulder, boy.
We will know your people as a banner.
On your table
There will be put bowls.
And from every pitcher
Wine will be gulped down.
And from every vessel
There will be a plentiful measure.
Nanay and Her Lover (xvii 7–14)
“Nanay, you be my wife!”
A bed of fennel they have brought,

Sweet fragrances for your nostrils.
Our Goddess, a bedspread
Has been carried to your darling,
Twigs of cedar to the darling.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 177 5/7/19 11:50 AM

178 Appendix
In your bridal chamber a priest is singing:

“Nanay, put your lips close to me.
Please enter our bed, Nanay.
In the evening I have sung a serenade for you.”
Indeed! The chosen lad has come.

His voice will sing you a serenade
In our sanctuary:
“My favorite, where are you?
Let my harp bring you a serenade
In the bedroom of my beauty.
Let the sound of my lyre
Bring you a serenade,
In the bedroom of my girl.”
Please enter the door of our inner room!

With his mouth, Consort of Our Lord,
He will kiss you.
“And as I come and enter,

She is pleasant to my nostrils.
Come and let us enter
The perfumed hideaway!”
Herem-Bethel will make you lie down

On the bedspread,
My God on embroidered sheets
In his heavens.
A Blessing before Bethel (xvii 15–16)
May the Lord bless from Rash.
Lord, speak a blessing before Bethel
Who is forever and ever.
“My Sister, Lady,
May you be blessed.
Cow, our Lady,
May you be blessed.”
Haddu, Bless Gaddi-El (xvii 17–19)
Haddu, bless Gaddi-El:
“Blessed are you!
Y7557-Toorn.indb 178 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Baal-Shamayin, build her!

Build the land near the source(s)!
Build the city of ruins,
Next to the sun, build her!
Extend her territory!
Sustain the poor one,
The son of the lowly man!”
End.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 179 5/7/19 11:50 AM

180 Appendix
Section 5: Appendix (columns xviii–xxiii)

A Complaint among the Cedars (xviii 1–4)
May the King observe my lament,
And may he take pity at this sound.
What worry makes her moan

Continually in my garden?
You (fem.) offer sweet scents
Among the cedars,
You (fem.) sing to the lyre
Sweet sounds.
Baal-Shamayin, come out!

Wake up, my God, and observe!
I shall utter my lament and prolong it,
My lament, the lament of the marshlands.
A Tale of Two Brothers (xviii 4–xxiii 9)
In Nineveh—which made the population
Wander away from your city—
The year our lord was born,
The king, Sarbanabal,
The earth was prospering,
Likewise the accumulated rain of the clouds.
A man would find its gatekeepers.
“You live in peace, my brother!
Please, enter this gate!
In our house we will still your hunger
(With) a morsel (of food)
And a roast piece of goat.
Enter! Get up!
We will sustain you.”
Days went by,
And years passed.
The year our lord was born,
Our brother Sarmugi,
The earth was of copper,
The skies of iron.
The earth was tainted by evil,
The skies by profanity.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 180 5/7/19 11:50 AM

A man would find its gatekeepers.

They were dejected, every one of them.
“This gate is closed (lit., guarded).”
They watched him suspiciously.
They cursed him.
Days went by,
And years passed.
The king answered and said,
And he spoke to Sarmugi:
“Come and go
To the land of Babylon.
Eat its bread (as sweet) as (honey)dew,
Drink its wine (as good) as premium wine.
Discontinue the goodwill gift to me,
The tribute to the land of Ashur.”
Sarmugi went
To the land of Babylon.
He ate its bread (as sweet) as (honey)dew,
He drank its wine (as good)
As premium wine.
He discontinued his goodwill gift,
The tribute to the land of A[shur].
Days went by,

And years passed.
The messengers came out of Babylon
Until they were escorted into Nineveh.
“I have been appointed and sworn in
At the head of these young men.
(Message) from Sarmugi to Sarbanabal:
‘I am king in Babylon,
And you are governor in Nineveh.
Render the tribute owed to me,
Lest I destroy your honor.’”
The king got angry with the messengers.
They were brought to the prison
And rationed bread and water.
The sun began to glow and shine.
The Tartan (commander in chief ) dispatched
Watchmen to the palace.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 181 5/7/19 11:50 AM

182 Appendix
“Message of our lord to the king:

Listen, lord of kings!
Since the days of your father,
Since the days of your father’s fathers,
Messengers have not been locked up
And given rations of bread and water.
Lead the messengers out of the prison.
Bring them to the bathhouse.
Dress them in embroidered clothes.
Go to the hospitality officer
And assign him
To the right hand of the scoundrels.”
The advice pleased the king.
The king answered and said:
“Lead the messengers out of the prison,
And let them be brought to the bathhouse.
Dress them in embroidered clothes.
Go to the hospitality officer
And give him instructions:
‘Release the messengers from the prison,
Bring them to the bathhouse,
And dress them in embroidered clothes.’”
They went to [the majordomo]
[And] instructed him.
The king [answered and said]:
“Let them call [Sa]ritra, the [king’s] sister.”
Saritra came to the guard
At the ga[te of the pa]lace.
The king [answered and sa]id,
And he spoke to [his s]ister, to Saritra:
“Haven’t you [se]en the arrogant one?
For he acted badly against me.
I appointed him governor in Babylon.
He offended me, the king in Nineveh.
Mighty horses from Media—
They were brought to Sarmugi.
Wonderful linen from Egypt—
It was brought to our brother.
Dogs from Suhu—
They were brought to Sarmugi;
Mighty bows from Elam—
Y7557-Toorn.indb 182 5/7/19 11:50 AM

They were brought to our brother.

Come and go to the arrogant one.
Talk and speak to him.
Let him know and listen to what you say,
And let him pay attention to your words.”
Saritra went out of the palace.
They seated her in her chariot.
She set her face toward Babylon.
The watchmen climbed
The wall of Babylon.
The watchmen answered and said:
“The force that is coming
Is too great for messengers,
Too small for warriors.”
Saritra was made to descend
From the chariot.
“From where is someone like this?”
“I am Saritra,
The sister of the twins.”
Sarmugi answered and said:
“We will keep you in custody.
Now it is between us and between you.”
Saritra’s face
He actually slapped, and he humiliated her.
Saritra answered and said:
“Who turned me
Into his footstool?
Sarmugi, my brother!
When you treat your maidservant well,
It will be good for your own life.
When you listen to my speech,
You pay attention to my words.
Behave yourself as a governor.
Take your feet away from here.
Go to the king, your brother.
For he is [len]ient
And will not avenge your bravado.”

“Why did you (pl.) multiply the men
Beside your (pl.) horses?
Y7557-Toorn.indb 183 5/7/19 11:50 AM

184 Appendix
Why did you reduce your riders?”

“Listen to me, my lord, listen!
Truly, truly,
Two kings are being overthrown
On account of one of them.
The one brother and the other are fighting
If my king will listen to me,
Disregard the tribute
That they did not bring you.
Take your feet away from here!
Go to the king, your brother.”
Sarmugi did not listen to her
And did not pay he<ed> to her words.
“If you do not listen to my words
And pay no heed to my message,
Go up to the house of Bel,
Indeed, to the house of Marduk.
Let them build you
A house of the summit,
Your house of fire and conflagration.
Heap up frankincense/tar and incense/pitch
And Arabian spices.
Make your sons enter and your daughters
And your doctors who made you haughty.
When you see a flash above you,
The fire will burn you,
Along with your sons and your daughters
And your doctors who made you haughty.”
Saritra left Babylon.
She set her face to Nineveh.
She stamped her foot.
Saritra was leaving Babylon
Until she was escorted into Nineveh.
The king answered and said
And spoke to Saritra:
“What did the arrogant one say to you,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 184 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The one to whom I sent you?”

“He was hot tempered
Like a blazing furnace.
He has slighted and insulted me.”
And spoke to the Tartan:
“Call the assistance of my standing army.”
The king summoned the administrator:
“Appoint your scribe
As scribe for battle.”
And the king said to the army:
“Summon your standing forces.
Then you will slay Babylon,
With the Tartan at the head of the troo[p].”
“Eventually, let them strike Babylon,
But spare my brother.” [ . . . ]
The Tartan left the palace.
They seated him in his ch[ar]iot,
And he [set] his face [to Ba]bylon.
The watchmen went up

To the wall of Babylon.
The wat[chmen ans]wered and said:
“The force [that is] coming
Is too great for messengers,
Too small for the royal army.”
The Tartan answered and said
And spoke to Sarmugi:
“Listen to me, my lord, listen to me!
Truly, two kings are being overthrown
If my king will listen to me,
Disregard the tribute
That they did not bring to you.
Take your feet away from here,
And go to the king, your brother,
For he is lenient,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 185 5/7/19 11:50 AM

186 Appendix
And he will not avenge your bravado.”

“Thus it has been decided
Over the governor, your servant—
Thus it has been decided.”
“If that’s how it is,
Listen to your own words,
And pay heed to your own advice.
Go up! For the wall of Babylon
We shall take in three days.
For my brothers destroy
The wall in a single day.
Let Sarmugi go
To the house of Bel,
Indeed, to the house of Marduk.
Let him build for himself a house on high,
Their house of fire and burning.
Heap up frankincense/tar and incense/pitch,
[As well as] Arabian spices.
Make his sons and his daughters enter,
[As well as his doctors]
Who made him haughty.
When [he sees the flash] above him,
[The fire will burn h]im,
Along with his son[s and his daughters]
And his doctors who made him haughty.”
The Ta[rt]an set fi[re to the wa]lls.
The k[ing] made [Saritra] mount,
He seated her in her chariot.
She set [her] face [to Ba]bylon.
Sarmugi answered [and said]:
“Truly, [the Tart]an is fu[ri]ous.
A devastating [fi]re [he set to the walls (?).]
While I relented in [our meeting (?),]
He burned my doctors
When the pyre was [kind]led.
While I was seeking ag[reement,]
He was pi[ling up] the skulls.”
Thereupon Sari<tra>
[went to find the Tar]tan.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 186 5/7/19 11:50 AM

She hastened to him.

[ ...]
“Wh[y . . . ?”]
“The walls [. . . .]
Their daughters [ . . . ]
And we will sla[y . . . (?).”]
“Let [my l]or[d] listen [to me:]
[. . . .]
[. . . . That] he has heaped up.”
The Tartan s[poke to Saritra and said:]
“My [ha]nds [are innocent] of the bloodshed.
[The battle] was not [like that!]
On whom did he heap [insults (?)?]
Indeed, the battle was not like that!”
The [Tar]tan sent a message and said:
“I just responded to his attacks.
He raised his hand against me.
His army started to do battle.”
[Sari]tra sent urgently to the king,
She quickly sent a message to the king.
Her account reached [the king:]
“Make the Tartan desist
From warfare, you!”
“I will break that enemy, our lord.
I will destroy Sarmugi
On his throne.
—The enemy is very much terminated.
Remember, you (pl.), his end:
For his own army burned him.
They set fire to the house
Of the one who controls heaven and earth.”
The king an[swered] and said
“Let the [army] come (back) to me.
And if you [still have] some compassion,
Turn your face to me.
Come to me, to the pa[lace.]
I said [to you:]
‘Let them slay Babylon,
But spare my brother!’”
Y7557-Toorn.indb 187 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Abbreviations
ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel

Freedman. 6 vols. New York, 1992.
AHw Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. W. von Soden. 3 vols.
Wiesbaden, 1965–1981.
AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament
AS Assyriological Studies
BiOr Bibliotheca Orientalis
BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft
CAD The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of
the University of Chicago. Edited by I. J. Gelb et al.
21 vols. Chicago, 1956–2010.
CBR Currents in Biblical Research
CHANE Culture and History of the Ancient Near East
Cl.-G. Ostraca from the Clermont-Ganneau collec-
tion, published by H. Lozachmeur. La collection
Clermont-Ganneau. Paris, 2006.
COS The Context of Scripture. Edited by W. W. Hallo
and K. Lawson Younger Jr. 3 vols. Leiden,
1997–2002.
CUSAS Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and
Sumerology
DDD Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible.
Edited by K. van der Toorn, B. Becking, and
P. W. van der Horst. Rev. ed. Leiden, 1999.
DJBA A Dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic of
the Talmudic and Geonic Periods. M. Sokoloff.
Ramat-Gan and Baltimore, 2002.
189
Y7557-Toorn.indb 189 5/7/19 11:50 AM

190 Abbreviations
DN Divine name
DNWSI Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions.
J. Hoftijzer and K. Jongeling. 2 vols. Leiden, 1995.
DQA Dictionary of Qumran Aramaic. E. M. Cook. Winona
Lake, Ind., 2015.
DUL A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic
Tradition. G. del Olmo Lete and J. Sanmartín. Transl.
W. G. E. Watson. 3rd rev. ed. 2 vols. Leiden, 2015.
EncJud Encyclopaedia Judaica. Edited by F. Skolnik and
M. Berenbaum. 2nd ed. 22 vols. Detroit, Ill., 2007.
HALAT Hebräisches und Aramäisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament.
L. Koehler, W. Baumgartner, and J. J. Stamm. 5 vols.
Leiden, 1967–1995.
Jastrow A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and
Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. M. Jastrow.
2nd ed. New York, 1903.
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
JEOL Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschap Ex
Oriente Lux
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
Joüon Joüon, P. Grammaire de l’hébreu biblique. Rome, 1923
JQR Jewish Quarterly Review
JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic,
and Roman Periods
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement
Series
JSSSup Journal of Semitic Studies Supplement
KAI Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften. H. Donner and
W. Röllig. 2nd ed. Wiesbaden. 1966–1969.
KTU The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn
Hani and Other Places. M. Dietrich, O. Loretz, and
J. Sanmartín. Münster, 1995.
LÄ Lexikon der Ägyptologie. Edited by W. Helck, E. Otto, and
W. Westendof. 7 vols. Wiesbaden, 1972–1992.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 190 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Abbreviations 191
LAOS Leipziger Altorientalische Studien

LAPO Littératures anciennes du Proche-Orient
MDAIK Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in
Kairo
NJPS NJPS Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures: The New JPS Transla-
tion According to the Traditional Hebrew Text
OBO Orbis biblicus et orientalis
OLA Orientalia Lovaniensa Analecta
PAT Palmyrene Aramaic Texts. D. R. Hillers and E. Cussini.
Baltimore, 1996.
PN Personal name
RAr Revue Archéologique
RIMA The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia, Assyrian
Periods
RlA Reallexikon der Assyriologie. Edited by E. Ebeling et al.
Berlin, 1928– .
SAA State Archives of Assyria
SBL Society of Biblical Literature
SDAIK Sonderschriften des Deutschen Archeologischen Insti-
tuts, Kairo
SHANE Studies in the History of the Ancient Near East
Sokoloff A Syriac Lexicon: A Translation from the Latin, Correction,
Expansion, and Update of C. Brockelmann’s Lexicon Syri-
acum. M. Sokoloff. Winona Lake, Ind., 2009.
TAD Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt.
B. Porten and A. Yardeni. 4 vols. Jerusalem, 1986–1999.
(Note: In the interest of clarity, the four volumes are
represented by letters [A–D] rather than numbers in the
references.)
ThWAT Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testaments. Edited
by G. J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren. 8 vols., Stuttgart,
1970–1995.
TSAJ Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism
TUAT Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments. Edited by
O. Kaiser et al. Gütersloh, 1984– .
UF Ugarit-Forschungen
Y7557-Toorn.indb 191 5/7/19 11:50 AM

192 Abbreviations
VT Vetus Testamentum
WAW Writings from the Ancient World
ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
ZDMG Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft
Y7557-Toorn.indb 192 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Notes
Unless otherwise identified, all translations are my own.
Chapter 1. Elephantine Revisited

1. For a selective list of the secondary literature until 1912, see Hedwig Anneler, Zur
Geschichte der Juden von Elephantine (Bern: Max Drechsel, 1912), 151–155.
2. Eduard Sachau, Aramäische Papyrus und Ostraka aus einer jüdischen Militär-
Kolonie zu Elephantine (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911).
3. Bezalel Porten, Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Mili-
tary Colony (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968). On recent mono-
graphs, see, e.g., Anke Joisten-Pruschke, Das religiöse Leben der Juden von Ele-
phantine in der Achämenidenzeit (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2008); Alejandro
F. Botta, The Aramaic and Egyptian Legal Traditions at Elephantine (London:
T&T Clark, 2009); Annalisa Azzoni, The Private Lives of Women in Persian
Egypt (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2013); Angela Rohrmoser, Götter,
Tempel und Kult der Judäo-Aramäer von Elephantine (AOAT 396; Münster:
Ugarit-Verlag, 2014); Hélène Nutkowicz, Destins de femmes à Éléphantine au Ve
siècle avant notre ère (Paris: l’Harmattan, 2015); Gard Granerød, Dimensions of
Yahwism in the Persian Period: Studies in the Religion and Society of the Judean
Community at Elephantine (BZAW 488; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016).
4. See Charles F. Nims and Richard C. Steiner, “A Paganized Version of Psalm
20:2–6 from the Aramaic Text in Demotic Script,” JAOS 103 (1983): 261–274;
Sven P. Vleeming and Jan Willem Wesselius, “An Aramaic Hymn from the
Fourth Century B.C.,” BiOr 39 (1982 [1983]): 501–509.
5. See the observations by Sven P. Vleeming and Jan Willem Wesselius, “Betel
the Saviour: Papyrus Amherst 63, col. 7:1–18,” JEOL 28 (1983–1984): 110–140,
esp. 111; Vleeming and Wesselius, Studies in Papyrus Amherst 63: Essays on the
Aramaic Text in Aramaic/Demotic Papyrus Amherst 63 (2 vols.; Amsterdam: Juda
Palache Instituut, 1985–1990), 1:7. See also Richard C. Steiner, “Papyrus Am-
herst 63: A New Source for the Language, Literature, Religion, and History
of the Arameans,” in Studia Aramaica: New Sources and New Approaches (ed.
Markham J. Geller, Jonas C. Greenfield, and Michael P. Weitzman; JSSSup 4;
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 199–207, esp. 204.
193
Y7557-Toorn.indb 193 5/7/19 11:50 AM

194 Notes to Pages 3–6
6. “The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script,” translated by Richard C. Steiner (COS

1.99:309–327).
7. Richard C. Steiner, “The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Text, Translation, and
Notes,” February 28, 2017, at https://www.academia.edu/31662776/ The Ara-
maic Text in Demotic Script: Text, Translation, and Notes.
8. Karel van der Toorn, Papyrus Amherst 63 (AOAT 448; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag,
2018).
9. Tawny L. Holm, Aramaic Literary Texts (WAW; Atlanta: SBL Press,
forthcoming).
10. Quoted in Thomas G. H. James, Howard Carter: The Path to Tutankhamun (rev.
ed.; London: Tauris Parke Paperbacks, 2001), 95.
11. See James, Howard Carter, 11–12.
12. See Archibald Henry Sayce, ed., Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assuan (with the
assistance of Arthur Ernest Cowley, and with appendices by W. Spiegelberg
and Seymour de Ricci; London: A. Moring, 1906).
13. For a brief history of the discovery of the Aramaic papyri from Egypt, most of
them from Elephantine, see Bezalel Porten’s forewords in TAD A:v–vi; B:v–vi;
C:v–vi; D:v–x.
14. See Julius Euting, “Notice sur un papyrus égypto-araméen de la Bibliothèque
impériale de Strasbourg,” Mémoires presentés par divers savants à l’Académie
des Inscriptions et des Belles-Lettres de l’Institut de France: Première série, Sujets
divers d’érudition 11, no. 2 (1903): 297–311 [TAD A4.5]; Arthur Ernest Cowley,
“Some Egyptian Aramaic Documents,” Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Ar-
chaeology 25 (1903): 202–208, 264–266, 311–314, esp. 202–208 [reedited as TAD
B4.2].
15. See Oliver Primavesi, “Zur Geschichte des Deutschen Papyruskartells,”
Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 114 (1996): 173–187, esp. 174–177.
16. See Walter Honroth, Otto Rubensohn, and Friedrich Zucker, “Bericht über die
Ausgrabungen auf Elephantine in den Jahren 1906–1908,” Zeitschrift für ägyp-
tische Sprache und Altertumskunde 46 (1909): 14–61, esp. 14–15.
17. Draft of a letter dated March 29, 1905, probably addressed to Melchior de Vogüé,
then president of the commission responsible for the publication of the Cor-
pus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, quoted in Hélène Lozachmeur, La collection
Clermont-Ganneau: Ostraca, épigraphes sur jarre, étiquettes de bois (Mémoires de
l’Académie des Inscriptions et des Belles-Lettres 35; Paris: de Boccard, 2006),
28–29.
18. See Honroth, Rubensohn, and Zucker, “Bericht über die Ausgrabungen”; Wolf-
gang Müller, “Die Papyrusgrabung auf Elephantine 1906–1908: Das Grabung-
stagebuch der 1. und 2. Kampagne,” Forschungen und Berichte, Staatlichen
Museen zu Berlin 20–21 (1980): 75–88; Müller, “Die Papyrusgrabung auf Ele-
phantine 1906–1908: Das Grabungstagebuch der 3. Kampagne,” Forschungen
und Berichte, Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin 22 (1982): 7–50; Verena M. Lepper,
“Die ägyptische und orientalische ‘Rubensohn-Bibliothek’ von Elephantine,”
Y7557-Toorn.indb 194 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Notes to Pages 6–9 195
in Forschung in der Papyrussammlung: Eine Festgabe für das neue Museum (ed.
Verena M. Lepper; Berlin: Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin—Preussischer Kul-
turbesitz und Akademie Verlag, 2012), 497–502.
19. See Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 28–67; Élisabeth Delange, ed.,
Les fouilles françaises d’Éléphantine (Assouan), 1906–1911: Les archives Clermont-
Ganneau et Clédat (Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres
46; Paris: de Boccard, 2012).
20. See Honroth, Rubensohn, and Zucker, “Bericht über die Ausgrabungen,” 15.
21. Eduard Sachau published his lecture under the title Drei aramäische Papyrus-
urkunden aus Elephantine (Berlin: Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften,
1907).
22. See Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 50.
23. Sachau, Aramäische Papyrus und Ostraka; Arthur Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the
Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1923).
24. See Emil G. Kraeling, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri (New Haven, Conn.:
Yale University Press, 1953).
25. See Edda Bresciani, “Papiri aramaichi egiziani di epoca persiana presso il Museo
Civico di Padova,” Rivista degli Studi Orientali 35 (1960): 11–24, esp. 12 n. 2.
Porten and Yardeni have reedited the Padua papyri as TAD A3.3–4. Giovanni
Battista Belzoni published an account of his travels and experiences in Egypt
under the title Narrative of the Operations and Recent Discoveries within the
Pyramids, Temples, Tombs, and Excavations in Egypt and Nubia (London: John
Murray, 1820), but it does not mention the Elephantine papyri.
26. News of the discovery was first announced by Semi Gabra, “Lettres araméennes
trouvées à Touna el Gebel Hermoupolis ouest,” Bulletin de l’Institut d’Égypte
28 (1945–1946): 161–162. For their publication, see Edda Bresciani and Mu-
rad Kamil, Le lettere aramaiche di Hermopoli (Atti della Accademia Nazionale
dei Lincei, Memorie 8/12.5; Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1966),
356–428.
27. See Ludwig Borchardt, “Nachricht von einem weiteren Funde aramäischer
Urkunden,” in Borchardt, Allerhand Kleinigkeiten: Seiner wissenschaftlichen
Freunden und Bekannten zu seinem 70. Geburtstage am 5. Oktober 1933 überreicht
(Leipzig: s.n., 1933), 47–49. The texts were published by Godfrey R. Driver,
Aramaic Documents of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1954), with revised editions in 1957 and 1965. For the texts, see also TAD
A6.3–16.
28. Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau.
29. The project is funded by the European Research Council and runs from July
2015 to June 2020. It is headed by Professor Verena Lepper from the Egyptian
Museum and Papyrus Collection, Berlin.
30. For an edition of some of the epigraphic discoveries, see Wolfgang Röllig, “Neue
phönizische und aramäische Krugaufschriften und Ostraka aus Elephantine,”
in The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region, Diverse Perspectives (ed. Dietrich
Y7557-Toorn.indb 195 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Raue, Stephan J. Seidlmayer, and Philipp Speiser; SDAIK 36; Berlin: de

Gruyter, 2013), 185–203, pl. 32–41.
31. August von Gall, Die Papyrusurkunden der jüdischen Gemeinde in Elephantine
und ihrer Bedeutung für jüdische Religion und Geschichte (Giessen: Töpelmann,
1912), 5.
32. Sachau, Drei aramäische Papyrusurkunden, 44.
33. Charles Clermont-Ganneau, “Jéhovah à Éléphantine,” RAr 10 (1907): 432–439.
34. See Oskar K. Rabinowitz, “The Shapira Scroll: A Nineteenth-Century Forg-
ery,” JQR 56 (1965): 1–21. For a romanticized version of the events plus a case
for Shapira’s innocence, see John Marco Allegro, The Shapira Affair (Garden
City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965). For references to further literature, see Fred N.
Reiner, “C. D. Ginsburg and the Shapira Affair: A Nineteenth-Century Dead
Sea Scroll Controversy,” in Reiner, Standing at Sinai: Sermons and Writings
(Bloomington, Ind.: AuthorHouse, 2011), 296–322, esp. 316–317. The most re-
cent study is Chanan Tigay, The Lost Book of Moses: The Hunt for the World’s
Oldest Bible (New York: Ecco, 2016).
35. Owen Chadwick, The Secularization of the European Mind in the Nineteenth Cen-
tury (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977).
36. George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis (London: Sampson Low,
Marston, Searle, and Rivington, 1875).
37. Clermont-Ganneau, “Jéhovah à Éléphantine,” 432.
38. See Julius Wellhausen, Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte (7th ed.; Berlin: Rei-
mer, 1914; repr., Berlin: de Gruyter, 1958), 176.
39. Eduard Meyer, Der Papyrusfund von Elephantine: Dokumente einer jüdischen Ge-
meinde aus der Perserzeit (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1912), esp. 53.
40. Wellhausen, Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte, 178.
41. Gall, Die Papyrusurkunden, 25 (“die glänzendste Bestätigung für die Ergebnisse
der modernen alttest. Wissenschaft nach ihrer literarkritischen Seite hin.”)
42. Law of Return, 5710–1950, § 4A(a) (as amended).
43. Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 17, 33, 33 n. 27.
44. Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 251.
45. Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 174–175.
46. Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 122–133, 150, 299.
47. See, e.g., Joisten-Pruschke, Das religiöse Leben; Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und
Kult; Granerød, Dimensions of Yahwism.
48. The following paragraphs have especially benefited from the insights developed
in Daniel R. Schwartz, Judeans and Jews: Four Faces of Dichotomy in Ancient
Jewish History (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2014) [reference courtesy
Benjamin Sommer, Jewish Theological Seminary]; John J. Collins, The Inven-
tion of Judaism: Torah and Jewish Identity from Deuteronomy to Paul (Oakland:
University of California Press, 2017), esp. 1–19. See also Shaye J. D. Cohen, The
Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties (Berkeley: Univer-
sity of California Press, 1999).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 196 5/7/19 11:50 AM

49. See 2 Macc 2:21, 8:1, 14:38 (twice). On the term Ioudaïsmos, see also Martha
Himmelfarb, “Judaism and Hellenism in 2 Maccabees,” Poetics Today 19 (1988):
19–40.
50. See André Lemaire, “Judean Identity in Elephantine: Everyday Life According
to the Ostraca,” in Judah and the Judeans in the Achaemenid Period: Negotiating
Identity in an International Context (ed. Oded Lipschits, Gary N. Knoppers,
and Manfred Oeming; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2011), 365–373, esp.
368; Annalisa Azzoni, “Women of Elephantine and Women in the Land of
Israel,” in In the Shadow of Bezalel: Aramaic, Biblical, and Ancient Near Eastern
Studies in Honor of Bezalel Porten (ed. Alejandro F. Botta; CHANE 60; Leiden:
Brill, 2013), 3–12, esp. 3 n. 1; Manfred Weippert, Historisches Textbuch zum Alten
Testament (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 476–478; Rohrmoser,
Götter, Tempel und Kult, 6; Granerød, Dimensions of Yahwism; Collin Cornell,
“Cult Statuary at the Judean Temple at Yeb,” JSJ 47 (2016): 291–309.
51. Steve Mason, “Jews, Judaeans, Judaizing, Judaism: Problems of Categorization
in Ancient History,” JSJ 38 (2007): 457–512, quotation p. 457.
52. See, e.g., Philip F. Esler, “Judean Ethnic Identity in Josephus’ ‘Against Apion,’”
in A Wandering Galilean: Essays in Honour of Seán Freyne (ed. Zuleika Rodg-
ers, Margaret Daly-Denton, and Anne Fitzpatrick McKinley; Supplements to
the Journal for the Study of Judaism 132; Leiden: Brill, 2009), 73–92; Daniel
Boyarin, “Semantic Differences; or, ‘Judaism’/‘Christianity,’” in The Ways That
Never Parted: Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages
(ed. Adam H. Becker and Annette Yoshiko Reed; TSAJ 95; Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2003), 65–86, esp. 67–68; Boyarin, “Rethinking Jewish Christianity:
An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category (to Which Is Appended
a Correction of My Border Lines),” JQR 99 (2009): 7–36.
53. Paul Auster, The Brooklyn Follies (London: Faber & Faber, 2011), 251.
54. Brent Nongbri, Before Religion: A History of a Modern Concept (New Haven,
Conn.: Yale University Press, 2013).
55. Nongbri, Before Religion, 12.
56. See Wilfred Cantwell Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion: A Revolutionary
Approach to the Great Religious Traditions (New York: Macmillan, 1962).
57. See, e.g., the discussion of thrēskeia in Schwartz, Judeans and Jews, esp. 93–102.
Compare also the Hebrew notion of yirʾat YHWH, “fear of the Lord.”
58. Most authors would put the composition of Tobit in either the late third or early
second century BCE. See Andrew B. Perrin, “An Almanac of Tobit Studies:
2000–2014,” CBR 13 (2014): 107–142, esp. 113–115. A majority of scholars assign
Judith to the Maccabean era, i.e., the second century BCE. See, e.g., Benedikt
Otzen, Tobit and Judith (London: Sheffield Academic, 2002), 132–135.
59. Tobit descends from the tribe of Naphtali (Tob 1:1–2), while Judith is genealogi-
cally linked to Israel and Jacob ( Jdt 8:1).
60. See Tob 1:2; Jdt 8:3–4; 16:21, 23.
61. For references, see Tob 1:6; 14:8–9, 16–17; Jdt 8:21; 15:9; Tob 1:10; Jdt 12:1–4.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 197 5/7/19 11:50 AM

62. Note especially Tob 1:17–18, where refugees from Judah are included in “my peo-
ple” (ek tou genous mou). See also Tob 2:3.
63. See Jdt 7:17, 15:8, 6:17, 13:14.
64. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 1–6, for which see the discussion in Chapter 4.
65. Simon Schama, The Story of the Jews: Finding the Words, 1000 BCE–1492 CE
(London: Bodley Head, 2013), xvi.
66. See Robin Cohen, Global Diasporas: An Introduction (2nd ed.; London: Rout-
ledge, 2008).
67. See Kim D. Butler, “Defining Diaspora, Refining a Discourse,” Diaspora 10
(2001): 189–219.
Chapter 2. The Aramean Heritage

1. See Albin van Hoonacker, Une communauté Judéo-Araméenne à Éléphantine, en
Égypte, aux VIe et Ve siècles av. J.-C. (The Schweich Lectures 1914; London:
Oxford University Press, 1915); Albert Vincent, La religion des Judéo-Araméens
d’Éléphantine (Paris: Geuthner, 1937); Angela Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und
Kult der Judäo-Aramäer von Elephantine (AOAT 396; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag,
2014).
2. Quoted in Thomas G. H. James, Howard Carter: The Path to Tutankhamun (rev.
ed.; London: Tauris Parke Paperbacks, 2001), 95.
3. See TAD B2.2 and B2.1 and the references to their provenance in the foreword
to TAD B:v.
4. For the Lachish letters, see Harry Torczyner, Lachish I: The Lachish Letters (Lon-
don: Oxford University Press, 1938); David Diringer, “Early Hebrew Inscrip-
tions,” in Olga Tufnell, with contributions by Margaret A. Murray and David
Diringer, Lachish III: The Iron Age (2 vols.; London: Oxford University Press,
1953), 1:21–23, 331–339. For the Arad inscriptions, see Yohanan Aharoni, Arad
Inscriptions ( Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1981).
5. For example, Bezalel Porten asserts that Jews “acquired Aramaic as a spoken
language in their new home” (Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an An-
cient Jewish Military Colony [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968], 33
n. 27). So too, well before him, Eduard Meyer, Der Papyrusfund von Elephan-
tine: Dokumente einer jüdischen Gemeinde aus der Perserzeit (Leipzig: Hinrichs,
1912), 38.
6. The phrase “the days of the Egyptian kings,” referring to the time of the Jewish
presence in Egypt before 525 BCE, is found in TAD A4.8:12 (cf. A4.7:13).
7. See Cary J. Martin, “The Demotic Texts,” in Bezalel Porten et al., The Elephan-
tine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-Cultural Continuity and Change
(2nd rev. ed.; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011), 276–384, esp. 288–
294, C1–C3. Note that Günter Vittmann observes that Aramaic was at times
used in correspondence between the Persian authorities and Egyptians (“Ara-
means in Egypt,” in Wandering Arameans: Arameans outside Syria [ed. Angelika
Y7557-Toorn.indb 198 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Berlejung, Aren M. Maeir, and Andreas Schüle; LAOS 5; Wiesbaden: Harras-

sowitz, 2017], 229–279, esp. 229).
8. See TAD A4.5:1.
9. In 1955, Cyrus H. Gordon made similar observations about the linguistic back-
ground of the Elephantine Jews but reached a different conclusion about their
origin (from Yaudi in northern Syria). See Gordon, “The Origins of the Jews
in Elephantine,” JNES 14 (1955): 56–58.
10. Gösta W. Ahlström has suggested that Samaria, once it had been integrated
into the Neo-Assyrian Empire, might have become Aramaic-speaking after
a generation, since Aramaic was the official language of the empire. See Ahl-
ström, The History of Ancient Palestine from the Palaeolithic Period to Alexander’s
Conquest ( JSOTSup 146; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 751 n. 4. Raymond A.
Bowman has discussed the total absence of Hebrew at Elephantine and sug-
gests that Aramaic was the official language in Palestine in Persian times.
See Bowman, “Arameans, Aramaic, and the Bible,” JNES 7 (1948): 65–90, esp.
81–82. In fact, there is no evidence of the use of Aramaic as a colloquial lan-
guage in Samaria in the seventh century.
11. TAD C2.1. For a presentation of the inscription, see Heidemarie Koch, Es kündet
Dareios der König . . . : Vom Leben im persischen Grossreich (Mainz: von Zabern,
1992), 13–22.
12. TAD C3.13. For a discussion, see Gard Granerød, Dimensions of Yahwism in the
Persian Period: Studies in the Religion and Society of the Judean Community at
Elephantine (BZAW 488; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 240–242, 264–265, 320–322.
13. TAD C1.1. For an excellent introduction, translation, and textual notes, see
Ingo Kottsieper, “Die Geschichte und die Sprüche des weisen Achiqar,”
TUAT 1/3.2:320–347. See also James M. Lindenberger, “Ahiqar,” in Old Testa-
ment Pseudepigrapha (ed. James H. Charlesworth; 2 vols.; Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday, 1983–1985), 2:479–507. As part of the European Research Council
grant “Localizing 4000 Years of Cultural History: Texts and Scripts from Ele-
phantine Island in Egypt,” which is directed by Verena Lepper at the Staat-
liche Museen zu Berlin, James D. Moore is preparing for publication over
eight hundred previously unpublished Aramaic papyrus fragments from the
1906–1907 Rubensohn excavations. Of them, nearly two hundred seem to be-
long to the Life and Sayings of Ahiqar ( J. D. Moore, personal communication
with the author).
14. For a presentation of the different versions, see F. C. Conybeare, J. Rendel Har-
ris, and Agnes Smith Lewis, The Story of Ah.ik.ar from the Aramaic, Syriac, Ara-
bic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Old Turkish, Greek and Slavonic Versions (2nd ed.; Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1913).
15. See Charles Clermont-Ganneau, “Jéhovah à Éléphantine,” RAr 10 (1907):
432–439.
16. For the expression “skillful scribe” (spr mhyr), see Ahiqar i 1.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 199 5/7/19 11:50 AM

17. See Andrew B. Perrin, “An Almanac of Tobit Studies: 2000–2014,” CBR 13
(2014): 107–142, esp. 113–115.
18. Tob 1:21–22, 2:10, 11:18–19, 14:10. Also see Jonas C. Greenfield, “Ahiqar in the
Book of Tobit,” in De la Torah au Messie (ed. Maurice Carrez, Joseph Doré, and
Pierre Grelot; Paris: Desclée, 1981), 329–336.
19. See Johannes van Dijk, “Die Inschriftenfunde: II. Die Tontafeln aus dem rēš-
Heiligtum,” in Heinrich J. Lenzen et al., XVIII. vorläufiger Bericht über die von
dem Deutschen Archäologischen Institut und der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft aus
Mitteln der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft unternommenen Ausgrabungen in
Uruk-Warka: Winter 1959 /60 (Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1962), 43–61, esp. 45, lines
19–20.
20. For an example, see the Instructions of Shuruppak in Wilfred G. Lambert,
Babylonian Wisdom Literature (Oxford: Clarendon, 1960), 92–95; Bendt Alster,
The Instructions of Suruppak: A Sumerian Proverb Collection (Copenhagen: Aka-
demisk Forlag, 1974).
21. See Jonas C. Greenfield, “The Dialects of Early Aramaic,” JNES 37 (1978): 93–99,
esp. 97; James M. Lindenberger, The Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar (Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983), 279–304; Ingo Kottsieper, Die Sprache
der Ah.iqarsprüche (BZAW 194; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990), 241–246.
22. See Simo Parpola, “The Forlorn Scholar,” in Language, Literature, and His-
tory: Philological and Historical Studies Presented to Erica Reiner (ed. Francesca
Rochberg-Halton; American Oriental Series 67; New Haven, Conn.: Ameri-
can Oriental Society, 1987), 257–278; Karel van der Toorn, “Scholars at the Ori-
ental Court: The Figure of Daniel against Its Mesopotamian Background,” in
The Book of Daniel: Composition and Reception (ed. John J. Collins and Peter W.
Flint; 2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 2001), 1:37–54.
23. See Karl-Theodor Zauzich, “Demotische Fragmente zum Ahikar-Roman,” in
Folia rara: Wolfgang Voigt LXV. diem natalem celebranti ab amicis et catalogorum
codicum orientalium conscribendorum dedicata (ed. Herbert Franke; Wiesbaden:
Steiner, 1976), 80–85; Joachim Friedrich Quack, “The Interaction of Egyptian
and Aramaic Literature,” in Judah and the Judeans in the Achaemenid Era: Ne-
gotiating Identity in an International Context (ed. Oded Lipschits, Gary N.
Knoppers, and Manfred Oeming; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2011),
375–401, esp. 376–378 (with references to further literature).
24. See Quack, “Interaction of Egyptian and Aramaic Literature,” 381–383.
25. André Lemaire, “Aramaic Literacy and School in Elephantine,” Maarav 21 (2014
[2017]): 295–307, esp. 302–307.
26. The spelling yhh is characteristic of the ostraca, while the spelling yhw is usual
in the papyri. However, the spelling yhh does occur in the papyri. In the two
instances where the scribe Natan son of Ananyah writes the name of Yaho, he
uses the spelling yhh instead of yhw. So this was apparently the orthography
that he had been taught to use. See TAD B2.7:14 (ʾgwrʾ zy yhh ʾlh; 446 BCE);
Y7557-Toorn.indb 200 5/7/19 11:50 AM

B3.3:2 (lh.n zy yhh ʾlhʾ zy byb byrtʾ; 449 BCE). There is yet a third variant in
the Yaho orthography. Haggai son of Shemayah writes the divine name on
one occasion as yh. See TAD B3.4:25 (lh.n lyh byb; 437 BCE). The differences
in spelling reflect different scribal practices within the Jewish community. In
view of the dates of the yhh spelling in the papyri, it is difficult to sustain that
yhh is the older spelling and yhw the younger one.
27. For the Elephantine “pantheon,” see Max L. Margolis, “The Elephantine Docu-
ments,” JQR 2 (1912): 419–443, esp. 435 (“The Elephantine Jews could appar-
ently boast of a pantheon”); E. C. B. MacLaurin, “Date of the Foundation
of the Jewish Colony at Elephantine,” JNES 27 (1968): 89–96, esp. 92 (“The
personnel of the Elephantine pantheon.”); Raik Heckl, “Remembering Jacob
in the Late Persian/Early Hellenistic Era,” in Remembering Biblical Figures
in the Late Persian and Early Hellenistic Periods (ed. Diana V. Edelman and
Ehud Ben Zvi; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 38–80, esp. 46–48;
Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und Kult, 150; James S. Anderson, Monotheism and
Yahweh’s Appropriation of Baal (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015), 32–33
(“pantheon of Elephantine”); Granerød, Dimensions of Yahwism, 245–252 (“The
Pantheons of the Garrisons in Syene and Elephantine”).
28. For the notion of the polytheism of the Elephantine Jews, see, e.g., Van Hoon-
acker, Une communauté Judéo-Araméenne, 82 (“polythéisme relatif ”); Vincent,
La religion des Judéo-Araméens, 100, 143 (“contaminated by polytheism”), 712.
29. See Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 134–135. Very similar, though more so-
phisticated, is the approach in Michael H. Silverman, Religious Values in the
Jewish Proper Names at Elephantine (AOAT 217; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1985).
30. See TAD D7.18:2–3 (byt yhh). Compare also the references in the early papyri:
TAD D1.6, frag. b (bʾgwrʾ; Padua letter; first half fifth century BCE); A3.3:1
([b]yt yhw; Padua letter); D4.9:1 ([by]t yhw; first half fifth century BCE).
31. For references to Shabbat, see Cl.-G. 44:5 = TAD D7.10:5; Cl.-G. 152:2 = TAD
D7.16:2 (reading uncertain); Cl.-G. 186:7 = TAD D7.35:7; Cl.-G. 205:4 (broken
context); TAD D7.12:9; D7.16:2; D7.28:4; D7.48:5 (reading uncertain). For refer-
ences to Pesach, see TAD D7.6:9–10; D7.24:5.
32. For the expression h.y yhh, see Cl.-G. 14, 20, 41, 56, 152 (= TAD D7.16), 174,
185. Also see X16 and Join 8, presented and discussed in Hélène Lozachmeur,
La collection Clermont-Ganneau: Ostraca, épigraphes sur jarre, étiquettes de bois
(Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et des Belles-Lettres 35; Paris: de
Boccard, 2006), 528–529. For the epithet yhh s.bʾt, see Cl.-G. 167:1 ([šlm NN yh]
h s.bʾt yšʾl [bkl ʿdn . . . ]); TAD D7.35:1–2 = Cl.-G. 186:1–2 (šlmk yhh [s.bʾt yšʾ]l bkl
ʿdn). See also Cl.-G. 175+185 (= Join 8):9.
33. See the 402 BCE contract laying down the sale of an apartment, which men-
tions “the temple of Yaho” (ʾgwrʾ zy yhw) as a topographical reference (TAD
B3.12:18–19).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 201 5/7/19 11:50 AM

34. TAD C3.15:126–128.

35. See Simo Parpola and Kazuko Watanabe, Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty
Oaths (SAA 2; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1988), no. 5, col. iv, lines
6′–7′; no. 6, lines 467–468.
36. See Herbert Donner and Wolfgang Röllig, Kanaanäische und Aramäische In-
schriften (3 vols.; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1979), no. 227 (570 BCE). Note the
names bytʾlʿšny, bytʾlydʿ, and bytʾldlny (twice) among nine local names.
37. Henri Seyrig, “Altar Dedicated to Zeus Betylos,” in Excavations at Dura-
Europos: Preliminary Report of the Fourth Season of Work (ed. Paul V. C. Baur,
Michael I. Rostovtzeff, and Alfred R. Bellinger; New Haven, Conn.: Yale Uni-
versity Press, 1933), 68–71, no. 168, pl. XV/1: “To [his] national god (theō patrōō)
Zeus Betylos, [god] of the dwellers along the Orontes, Aurelius Diphilianus,
soldier . . . , has dedicated this altar.” See also Józef Tadeusz Milik, “Les papy-
rus araméens d’Hermoupolis et les cultes syro-phéniciens en Égypte perse,”
Biblica 48 (1967): 546–622, esp. 569, regarding another dedicatory inscription
from Qalat Kalota, about twenty kilometers northwest of Aleppo, which men-
tions Baitylos as one of the “ancestral gods.”
38. See Mark Lidzbarski, Ephemeris für Semitische Epigraphik (3 vols.; Giessen:
Töpelmann, 1902–1915), 2:323–324.
39. In the petition to Bagohi, the Jews are explicit about their wish to build the
second temple “just as it was formerly built.” See TAD A4.7:25.
40. See TAD B7.2:7–8; B7.3:3.
41. For the text, see TAD B6.4. Note that the contract had been drawn up at Ele-
phantine by a Jewish scribe. For other marriage contracts, see TAD B2.6; 3.3;
3.8; 6.1–4.
42. See Silverman, Religious Values, 221–224.
43. For a discussion of the biblical evidence, see Otto Eissfeldt, “Der Gott Bethel,”
Archiv für Religionswissenschaft 28 (1930): 1–30; Sergio Ribichini, “Baetyl,”
DDD 157–159; Wolfgang Röllig, “Bethel,” DDD 173–175.
44. Silverman, Religious Values, 221–224. See also the name “Bethelsharezer”
(Zech 7:2) and the names “Bītil-ibni,” “Bītil-ab-us.ur,” “Bītil-ah-iddin,”
˘
“Bītil-dīnī-īpuš,” “Bītil-hanna,” “Bītil-hisnī,” “Bītil-idrā,” “Bītil-naʾid,” “Bītil-
˘ ˘
natanna,” “Bītil-šar-us.ur” (= “Bethelsharezer”), “Bītil-sūru,” and “Zū-Bātil”
found in the Al-Yahudu tablets (Laurie E. Pearce and Cornelia Wunsch, Doc-
uments of Judean Exiles and West Semites in Babylonia in the Collection of David
Sofer [CUSAS 28; Bethesda, Md.: CDL, 2014], 13–14, 306).
45. See TAD B2.2:3–4.
46. For the first occurrence of Mahseyah, as a witness in 487 BCE, see TAD B4.2:14.
For the latest occurrence, also as witness, see TAD B2.10:18. Yedanyah son
of Gemaryah, leader of the Jewish community in ca. 420–400 (for the dates,
see TAD A4.1 and C3.15), was a grandson of Mahseyah. The genealogical line
descends from Mahseyah the elder (born ca. 570 BCE), through Yedanyah
the elder (born ca. 540), Mahseyah the younger (ca. 500–415), and Gemaryah
Y7557-Toorn.indb 202 5/7/19 11:50 AM

(born ca. 475), to Yedanyah the younger (born ca. 450). Lady Mibtahyah, per-
haps the most prominent woman of the Jewish community around 450 BCE,
was the daughter of Mahseyah and thus a sister of Gemaryah. See, e.g., the
discussion in Annalisa Azzoni, The Private Lives of Women in Persian Egypt
( Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2013), 134–136. For Yedanyah the elder
son of Mahseyah the elder, see the discussion in Lozachmeur, La collection
Clermont-Ganneau, 464–465.
47. For “Mahsah” as the shortened form of his name, see TAD B2.1:9; B2.3:35–36;
Cl.-G. 2:2, for which see Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 175–176.
48. TAD B2.1:2–3 (471 BCE; scribe: Pelatyah son of Ah.yo).
49. TAD B2.2:3–4 (464 BCE; scribe: Itu son of Abah).
50. TAD B2.3:1–2 (459 BCE; scribe: Attar-shuri son of Nabu-zer-ibni). For the
reading of the date, see Bezalel Porten, “The Aramaic Texts,” in Porten et al.,
The Elephantine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-Cultural Continuity
and Change (2nd rev. ed.; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011), 75–275,
esp. 166 n. 3.
51. TAD B2.4:1–2 (459 BCE; scribe: Attar-shuri son of Nabu-zer-ibni).
52. TAD B2.6 (449 BCE; scribe: Natan son of Ananyah). This is the marriage con-
tract of Mibtahyah daughter of Mahseyah to the Egyptian architect Eshor son
of Zeha. For the reading of the date, see Porten, “Aramaic Texts,” 178 and n. 1.
53. TAD B2.7:1–2 (446 BCE; scribe: Natan son of Ananyah).
54. TAD B2.1:2 (471 BCE; scribe: Pelatyah son of Ahyo).
56. TAD B2.9:3–4 (420 BCE; scribe: Mauzyah son of Natan).
57. TAD B2.11:2 (410 BCE; scribe: Nabu-tukulti son of Nabu-zer-ibni).
58. For Meshullam as seller of a house, see TAD B2.7:3. For a reference to a loan,
see TAD B3.1 (456 BCE). In 449, Meshullam gave his “handmaiden” Tamet
(variant: Tapamet) in marriage to Anani, “a temple steward of Yaho the god
who is in Elephantine the fortress” (TAD B3.3). In TAD B3.12 (402 BCE), Ta-
pamet is said to have been his “favorite wife” (ʾntth prypt), viz. of Meshullam
son of Zakkur (line 11) and his gwʾ (line 24), interpreted as “female slave” (see
DNWSI, s.v. “gw”), all of which suggests that Tamet used to be an odalisque
or concubine. Azzoni prefers to translate gwʾ as “member of the household”
(Private Lives, 92–93, and n. 36). For the meaning of lh.n, going back to Ak-
kadian (a)lahhinu (“a kind of temple steward,” see CAD 1.1, s.v. “alahhinu”), see
˘˘ ˘˘
DNWSI, s.v. “lh.n” (“certain type of temple servant”); Stephen A. Kaufman,
The Akkadian Influences on Aramaic (AS 19; Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1974), 66 and n. 176; cf. Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 12–13 (“Let sixty temple
stewards (bny lh.n) sprinkle the stele of the Lord, their palms full of frankin-
cense for the nostrils of Bethel”).
59. As a personal name, ʾāt. ēr is also attested in Ezra 2:16, 42; Neh 7:21, 45; 10:18. For
the meaning “hunchback,” see Martin Noth, Die israelitischen Personennamen
im Rahmen der gemeinsemitischen Namengebung (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1928),
Y7557-Toorn.indb 203 5/7/19 11:50 AM

227; cf. also Hebrew and Palestinian Aramaic ʾit. .t ēr, “left-handed, left-legged.”
For Ater’s real name, Meshullam, see Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-
Ganneau, Join 9 (= Cl.-G. 221+231+X1): 1, 9 (Zakkur son of Meshullam,
twice); 11 (Shillem son of Meshullam). In TAD B2.3:30, the Zekaryah son of
Meshullam who acted as witness to the donation of a house by Mahseyah
son of Yedanyah to his daughter Mibtahyah in 460 BCE, is to be identified
with Zakkur son of Meshullam, the father of Meshullam son of Zakkur son
of Ater.
60. TAD B3.1:3 (456 BCE; scribe: Natan son of Anani).
61. TAD B3.3:2–3 (449 BCE; scribe: Natan son of Ananyah).
62. TAD B3.6:2 (427 BCE; scribe: Haggai = Haggai son of Shemayah). Haggai son
of Shemayah son of Haggai was active as a scribe in Elephantine in 437–400
BCE. For his style and training, see the observations by Alejandro F. Botta, The
Aramaic and Egyptian Legal Traditions at Elephantine (London: T&T Clark,
2009), 40–43. See also TAD B2.7:19 (446 BCE; as witness); B3.4:23 (437 BCE;
as scribe); B3.6:15–16 (427 BCE; as scribe); B3.8:43 (420 BCE); B3.10:23
(404 BCE); B3.11:17 (402 BCE); B3.12:32 (402 BCE); B4.6 (400 BCE).
63. For the full name of Ananyah, see TAD B3.11:8. For his marriage with Yeho-
yishma, see TAD B3.8. For the ration Ananyah received, see TAD B3.13:4 (402
BCE).
65. TAD B3.12:2–3 (402 BCE; scribe: Haggai son Shemayah).
66. TAD B3.13 (402 BCE; scribe: Shaweh-ram son of Eshem-ram son of
Eshem-shezib).
67. TAD B5.2:2 (last quarter fifth century BCE; scribe unknown). PN = Personal
Name.
68. TAD A4.3:1, 12.
69. The expression is swnknn zy byb byrtʾ mh[h.s]nn (TAD A4.10:6; ca. 407–406
BCE).
70. The expression is wyhwdyʾ kl bʿly yb (TAD A4.7:22 // A4.8:21–22; var. klʾ for kl).
See also A4.7:26–27 // A4.8:25–26: “We, and our wives, and our children, and
all the Jews over here” (407 BCE).
71. See, most notably, Edoardo Volterra, “‘YHWDY’ e ‘ʾRMY’ nei papiri aramaici
del V secolo provenienti dall’Egitto,” Rendiconti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei
Lincei, Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche 8/18 (1963): 131–173.
72. Arthur Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford: Clarendon,
1923), xvi.
73. See Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und Kult, 8.
75. See, e.g., Anke Joisten-Pruschke, Das religiöse Leben der Juden von Elephantine in
der Achämenidenzeit (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2008), 84.
76. Pierre Grelot, Documents araméens d’Égypte (LAPO 5; Paris: Cerf, 1972), 174. See
also Botta, Aramaic and Egyptian Legal Traditions, 54.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 204 5/7/19 11:50 AM

77. See TAD B2.4:2; B2.2:3; B2.3:2; A4.7:22 // A4.8:21–22.

78. TAD B5.2:2 (ʾrmy swnkn).
79. TAD A4.10:6.
80. See TAD B3.8:1–2; B3.12:2–3.
81. The precise meaning of mgšyʾ, “the Magian,” in TAD B3.5:24 (twice) is unclear. It
is possible that the reference is to members of a priestly class, but more likely
the term designates ethnicity.
83. TAD B2.7:19 (446 BCE; scribe: Natan son of Ananyah).
84. TAD B3.4:2 (437 BCE; scribe: Haggai son of Shemayah).
85. TAD B3.4:2 (437 BCE; scribe: Haggai son of Shemayah).
87. TAD D2.12:2–3 (403 BCE; scribe unknown).
88. TAD B3.12:4–5 (402 BCE; scribe: Haggai son of Shemayah). Note the ortho-
graphic variants, which betray the difficulty that Jewish scribes had with a
Caspian name: ynbwly (“Yanabulliya,” in B3.12:4); plyn (“Palliyana,” in B3.12:4);
ʾpwly (“Apulliya,” in B3.4:4).
89. Examples of Iranians acting as witnesses include Shatibarzana son of Ataraliya
(TAD B2.1:16; 471 BCE); Phratanzana son of Atrakarana (B2.1:17; 471 BCE);
Yanabulliya son of Darga (B2.1:18; 471 BCE); Barbari son of Dargi (B2.7:19;
446 BCE); Hiru son of Ataraliya (B3.4:23; 437 BCE); Wyzblw son of Ataraliya
(B2.6:39; 449 BCE; B2.7:18; 446 BCE); the “house” of the Caspian Wyzbl (byt
wyzbl kspy; B3.4:24; 437 BCE). See also Atropharna (ʾtrprn) son of Nisaya,
a “Mede” who was witness to the manumission of Tapamet and her daugh-
ter Yeho-yishma by Meshullam son of Zakkur in 427 BCE (TAD B3.6:16–17;
D2.10:9). For examples of Magians as witnesses include Mitra-sarah, mgšyʾ,
and Tata, mgšyʾ (TAD B3.5:24; 434 BCE); cf. Mitra-sarah son of Mitra-sarah
(B2.7:18; 446 BCE). For Iranians as neighbors of Jews, see Dargamana son of
Harshayna, a Horesmian whose house was next to one of Mibtahyah’s houses
(TAD B2.3:5; 459 BCE). Shatibara was the neighbor of Anani son of Azaryah
(TAD B3.7:7; 420 BCE; see H. Zvi Szubin and Bezalel Porten, “Life Estate of
Usufruct: A New Interpretation of Kraeling 6,” Bulletin of the American Schools
of Oriental Research, no. 269 [1988]: 29–45, esp. 36). Phranava son of Ziliya and
his brother Mardava were the new owners of the house that used to belong to
Shatibara, also neighbors of a Jewish family. See TAD B3.12:19 (402 BCE); cf.
Porten, “Aramaic Texts,” 248 n. 38.
90. For the expression “Caspians of Elephantine the fortress,” see TAD B3.5:3–4
(434 BCE; scribe: Mauzyah son of Natan). For the reference to Ubil as kspyʾ
zy swn, see TAD B3.4:2 (437 BCE; scribe: Haggai son of Shemayah).
91. For the Horesmian connection, see TAD B2.2:2–3 (464 BCE; scribe: Itu son of
Abah). For the same man as a Caspian, see TAD B2.7:19 (446 BCE; scribe:
Natan son of Ananyah), assuming “Dargi” is short for “Dargamana.”
Y7557-Toorn.indb 205 5/7/19 11:50 AM

92. The expression is zy ʾtrh byb byrtʾ ʿbyd (TAD B2.2:2–3; B2.7:19; D2.12:2–3). For
the translations, see DNWSI, s.v. “ʾšr”: “whose office is in the fortress of Yeb.”
94. TAD B3.12:4–5.
95. For dgln zy ms.ryʾ, see TAD A4.5:1.
96. TAD D9.11, an ostracon from the mid-fifth century BCE, lists the names
of nine soldiers belonging to the Iranian battalion: Rawata, [PN], Atarali,
Vayarashnu, Malayad, Apulli, Saraya, Malanawari, and Pawasamaka. Non-
Caspians in the Iranian regiment included Arta-frada son of Arvastamara
(B7.2:3–4; 401 BCE) and Barzanarava son of Artabarzana, a Bactrian (D2.12:2–
3; 403 BCE).
97. For Artabanu, see TAD B2.2:3 (464 BCE); D2.3:3 (473–465 BCE). For Nama-
sava, see TAD B3.4:2 (twice; 437 BCE). For Marya, see TAD D2.12:3 (403
BCE); B7.2:3–4 (401 BCE). See also TAD D3.39, frag. b, found at Saqqara,
the necropolis of Memphis, where there is a reference to a Horesmian [and?]
Mushezib-Nabu “belonging to the battalion of Marya” (second half fifth cen-
tury BCE). For the initial publication, see Noël Aimé-Giron, Textes araméens
d’Égypte (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale,
1931), no. 27, line 4.
98. Porten’s reconstruction of the contract TAD D2.3 is therefore to be corrected:
[Zadaq son of ] Qon does not have a contract with another Jew but with
a Caspian or a Horesmian, “belonging to the battalion of Ar[tabanu].” Ac-
cording to TAD B2.2:2, 8–9, “Dargamana son of Harshayna, a Horesmian
stationed in Elephantine the fortress, belonging to the battalion of Artabanu”
was a neighbor of Qonyah son of Zadaq. There is a strong likelihood that
[Zadaq son of ] Qon was the father of Qonyah and that his contract was with
either Dargamana or the latter’s father.
99. TAD B2.2 (464 BCE) deals with a complaint by a Horesmian against a Jew that
was arbitrated by the Persian judiciary. TAD B7.2 (401 BCE) records an oath
taken by a Jew in response to a complaint by Artafrada son of Arvastamara,
of the battalion of Marya, who accused the Jew of breaking and entering.
An older relative of Artafrada acted as a witness in the settlement of a case
that opposed another Jew to a Caspian (TAD B2.2:21; 464 BCE). Cl.-G. 135
(first quarter fifth century BCE) refers to a man with the Caspian name
“Shatirbarzana,” who apparently was making accusations against “the Jews.”
See Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 288–289. For the Caspian
identity of Shati(r)barzana, see TAD B3.5:11.
100. Reuven Yaron, “Who Is Who in Elephantine?,” Iura 15 (1964): 172.
101. Aramean ethnicity: TAD B2.1:2 (twice); B2.6:2; B2.7:2, 3; B2.8:3; B2.10:2;
B2.11:2; B3.3:2; B3.8:2 (twice); B3.9:2, 3; B3.12:2; B4.5:1, 2; B4.6:2; B5.2:2; B6.1:2;
B7.1:2; B7.2:2; D2.3:2; D2.4:2; D.2.10:2. Jewish ethnicity: TAD B2.2:3, 9, 10;
B2.4:2; B2.9:2, 3; B3.1:3; B3.6:2; B3.13:2; B5.5:2 (uncertain); D2.5:2; D2.7a:2;
D2.12:4.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 206 5/7/19 11:50 AM

102. See TAD B2.2.

103. See TAD B2.9.
104. See TAD B3.13.
105. See TAD D2.12.
106. See Herodotus, Hist. 2.29.
109. For images of the statue and a translation of its inscriptions, see Amélie Kuhrt,
The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period (London:
Routledge, 2010), 477–482. See also Heidemarie Koch, “Zu den Satrapien im
Achämenidenreich,” in Koch, Achämeniden-Studien (Wiesbaden: Harrasso-
witz, 1993), 5–48, esp. 38–39.
Chapter 3.The Aramean Diaspora in Egypt

1. See, e.g., Jill Kamil, Aswan and Abu Simbel: History and Guide (Cairo: American
University in Cairo Press, 1993), 33.
2. For a history of Aramaic, see Klaus Beyer, The Aramaic Language: Its Distri-
bution and Subdivisions (trans. John F. Healey; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1986); Holger Gzella, A Cultural History of Aramaic: From the Begin-
nings to the Advent of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 2015).
3. Nadav Naʾaman, “Arpad and Aram: Reflection of a Dimorphic Society in the
Sefîre Treaty,” Revue d’Assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale 110 (2016): 79–88.
4. On the Arameans of Syria, see Herbert Niehr, The Arameans in Ancient Syria
(Handbuch der Orientalistik 106; Leiden: Brill, 2014); K. Lawson Younger Jr.,
A Political History of the Arameans (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2016).
5. On the Arameans of Babylonia, see Manfried Dietrich, Die Aramäer Südbabylo-
niens in der Sargonidenzeit (700–648) (AOAT 7; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1970); Younger, Political History,
655–740.
6. For the expression māt arime (kur a-ri-me; var. a-ra-me) in the inscriptions of
Ashur-bel-kala (r. 1073–1056), see A. Kirk Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early
First Millennium BC (1114–859 BC) (RIMA 2; Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 1991), 93–94, 98, 101–103, 107.
7. For the expression “all of Aram,” see the Sefire Treaty (750 BCE), KAI 222A,
line 5 (ʾrm klh); Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 3 (ʾnty šgl ʿl kl ʾrm, “You are queen
over all of Aram”).
8. See Herodotus, Hist. 2.104; cf. 3.5; 7.39.
9. See Bezalel Porten and John Gee, “Aramaic Funerary Practices in Egypt,” in The
World of the Aramaeans II: Studies in History and Archaeology in Honour of Paul-
Eugène Dion (ed. P. M. Michèle Daviau, John W. Wevers, and Michael Weigl;
JSOTSup 325; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2001), 270–308, esp. 271–279. The
texts from the four sarcophagi can be found in TAD D18.1 (“to Sheil priest of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 207 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Nabu who dwells forever in Syene,” from Saqqara); D18.16 (“Abuti daughter
of Shamash-nuri”); D18.17 (“Hor”); D.18.18 (“Shabbetay”).
10. For the Hermopolis letters, see Edda Bresciani and Murad Kamil, Le lettere
aramaiche di Hermopoli (Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Memorie
8/12.5; Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1966), reedited as TAD A2.1–7
and D1.1. For references to the temples of Bethel and the Queen of Heaven
and of Nabu and Banit, see the temple greetings in TAD A2.1:1; A2.2:1; A2.3:1;
A2.4:1. Note that the texts do not speak of “the temple of Bethel and the
Queen of Heaven” nor of “the temple of Nabu and Banit.” The four deities
each had a separate byt, “house.” In the genitival construction byt DN, the
word byt has a semantic spectrum that runs from “chapel” to “temple.” Com-
pare the expression “the house of the house of Yaho” (byt byt yhw) in TAD
D7.18:2–3. Also see the discussion in Gard Granerød, Dimensions of Yahwism
in the Persian Period: Studies in the Religion and Society of the Judean Community
at Elephantine (BZAW 488; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 94–95.
11. TAD D2.25:9 (late fifth century BCE).
12. TAD D5.37:8 (end fifth century BCE); D7.25:9 (first quarter fifth century BCE);
D9.13:3 (second half fifth century BCE); C4.4:9 (ca. 420 BCE; Syrian or Is-
raelite). For the meaning of the verb ʿqb, “to protect,” see Martin Noth, Die
israelitischen Personennamen im Rahmen der gemeinsemitischen Namengebung
(Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1928), 45–46, 177–178; Herbert B. Huffmon, Amorite
Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study (Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins Press, 1965), 203–204; Ignace Gelb, Computer-Aided Analysis
of Amorite (AS 21; Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago,
1980), 15; HALAT, s.v. “ʿqb II.”
13. TAD D3.13:4 (mid-fifth century BCE). For the meaning of dlh, see Noth, Die
israelitischen Personennamen, 180; HALAT, s.v. “dlh I”; Michael H. Silver-
man, Religious Values in the Jewish Proper Names at Elephantine (AOAT 217;
Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1985),
141–142.
14. TAD A3.2:1 (first half fifth century BCE). Arthur Cowley has read the name as
bytʾlnd[n], which yields a Babylonian form that would be unique in Bethel
names (Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. [Oxford: Clarendon, 1923],
161). Walter Kornfeld and Michael H. Silverman follow Cowley’s reading
(Kornfeld, Onomastica aramaica aus Ägypten [Vienna: Österreichische Akade-
mie der Wissenschapften, 1978], 43; Silverman, Religious Values, 159). The ten-
tative translation of the name is based on Hebrew and Aramaic nt. r (HALAT,
s.v. “nt.r”; DNWSI, s.v. “ns.r”).
15. TAD A2.1:3 (ca. 500 BCE); B6.4:9, 10 (ca. 420 BCE); D3.13:3 (mid-fifth century
BCE); D7.41:2 (first quarter fifth century BCE); D9.10:2 (mid-fifth century
BCE).
16. TAD D9.9:14 (mid-fifth century BCE).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 208 5/7/19 11:50 AM

17. TAD B3.9:11 (416 BCE); D3.13:4 (mid-fifth century BCE; reading uncertain).
For the meaning, see CAD 14, s.v. “rēʾû,” 2a–c; PAT, s.v. “rʿyʾ.”
18. TAD D9.10:7 (mid-fifth century BCE).
19. TAD A3.8:9 (ca. 410 BCE). For the meaning, see Silverman, Religious Values, 136.
20. TAD B4.4:6, 10 // B4.3 (483 BCE). The name belongs to a centurion. For the
meaning, see Silverman, Religious Values, 136.
21. TAD B3.9:11 (416 BCE). For the meaning, see Silverman, Religious Values, 136.
22. TAD D22.21 (first half fifth century BCE).
23. TAD C4.3:12, 16 (mid-fifth century BCE).
24. TAD C4.3:20 (mid-fifth century BCE).
25. TAD B8.4:3 (431 BCE); B8.6:8. The name belongs to a battalion commander. For
the meaning of śgb, see DNWSI, s.v. “šgb.”
26. TAD B8.4:3 (431 BCE). For the meaning of the name, see Judah B. Segal, Ara-
maic Texts from North Saqqâra (London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1983),
49 n. 16.
27. TAD B4.4:6, 10; C3.6:11 (first half fifth century BCE). For the meaning, see
Segal, Aramaic Texts, 67 n. 15.
28. TAD A2.5:6 (ca. 500 BCE).
29. TAD C3.6:12 (first half fifth century BCE).
30. TAD D18.7; D19.2 (sarcophagus and mummy label; fifth century BCE); D19.3
(mummy label; fifth century BCE).
31. See TAD B6.4:9.
32. See TAD D18.7; D19.2.
33. TAD A2.1:3 (ca. 500 BCE). In a list of temple contributions from Elephantine
(400 BCE), there is a reference to “Menahemet daughter of Yedanyah son of
Anati.” See TAD C3.15:111.
34. TAD B6.4:9 (ca. 420 BCE); B3.9:12 (416 BCE).
35. TAD D22.36 (graffito from Jebel Abu-Ghorab).
36. TAD D18.6; D18.10 (sarcophagus).
37. TAD D18.2: “sarcophagus of priest (kmrʾ) Herem-shezib son of Eshah.”
38. TAD D22.5; D22.6 (graffito on pyramid of Senusret III).
39. TAD D22.53 (graffito).
40. TAD D18.7; D19.2 (sarcophagus and mummy label; fifth century BCE); D22.18
(graffito).
41. TAD B3.9:11 (416 BCE).
42. TAD B3.9:11 (416 BCE).
43. Noël Aimé-Giron, Textes araméens d’Égypte (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut
Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1931), 116–117.
44. Henri Seyrig, “Altar Dedicated to Zeus Betylos,” in Excavations at Dura-
Europos: Preliminary Report of Fourth Season of Work (ed. Paul V. C. Baur, Mi-
chael I. Rostovtzeff, and Alfred R. Bellinger; New Haven, Conn.: Yale Uni-
versity Press, 1933), 68–71, no. 168, pl. XV/1: “To [his] ancestral god (theō patrōō)
Y7557-Toorn.indb 209 5/7/19 11:50 AM

210 Notes to Page 49
Zeus Betylos, [god] of the dwellers along the Orontes, Aurelius Diphilianus,
soldier . . . , has dedicated this altar.” See also Józef Tadeusz Milik, who cites
another dedicatory inscription from Qalat Kalota, about twenty kilometers
northwest of Aleppo, mentioning Baitylos as one of the “ancestral gods” (“Les
papyrus araméens d’Hermoupolis et les cultes syro-phéniciens en Égypte
perse,” Biblica 48 [1967]: 546–622, esp. 569).
45. See Mark Lidzbarski, Ephemeris für Semitische Epigraphik (3 vols.; Giessen:
Töpelmann, 1902–1915), 2:323–324.
46. See Simo Parpola and Kazuko Watanabe, Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty
Oaths (SAA 2; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1988), no. 5, col. iv, lines
6′–7′; no. 6, lines 467–468.
47. The name occurs in logographic writing as mèr-dnin.urta. See Michael C.
Astour, “Kingdom of Siyannu-Ušnatu,” UF 11 (1979): 13–28, esp. 21; Nadav
Naʾaman, “On Gods and Scribal Traditions in the Amarna Letters,” UF 22
(1990): 247–255, esp. 254.
48. Name of a centurion: TAD C3.13:54 (ca. 410 BCE); C3.15:20 (400 BCE); C4.4:11
(ca. 420 BCE; reading uncertain, see also Cowley, Aramaic Papyri, no. 12).
49. TAD D11.12:1 (jar).
50. TAD A3.4:3 (last quarter fifth century BCE); D9.10:5 (mid-fifth century BCE).
51. TAD B3.2:11 (451 BCE).
52. TAD B3.2:11 (451 BCE). For this Akkadian name and its meaning, see Johann
Jakob Stamm, Die akkadische Namengebung (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1939), 219;
CAD 8, s.v. “kas.āru,” 1e1′.
53. TAD D1.1:8 (ca. 500 BCE; reading uncertain); B2.1:18 (471 BCE). In later texts,
“Nabu-kudurri” occurs as the name of a battalion commander. See TAD B3.12:3
(402 BCE); B3.13:2 (402 BCE); B4.5:2 (407 BCE); B4.6:2 (400 BCE); B7.2:3
(401 BCE).
54. TAD C4.8:8. Pierre Grelot suggests reading this as Nabu-nura-l[umur], “Nabu-
may-I-see-the-light” (Documents araméens d’Égypte [LAPO 5; Paris: Cerf,
1972], 279).
55. TAD A2.3:14 (ca. 500 BCE); A3.1:3, second letter 4, 6 (first half fifth century
BCE); B2.8:11, 12 (440 BCE); D1.1:8 (ca. 500 BCE; reading uncertain); D9.10:4
(mid-fifth century BCE). The Nabu-natan mentioned in B2.8:11, 12 (440
BCE) is from a scribal family. See Eleonora Cussini, “The Career of Some
Elephantine and Murašû Scribes and Witnesses,” in In the Shadow of Bezalel:
Aramaic, Biblical, and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Bezalel Porten
(ed. Alejandro F. Botta; CHANE 60; Leiden: Brill, 2013), 39–52, esp. 51.
56. TAD B2.8:12, 13 (440 BCE).
57. TAD B2.2:19 (464 BCE).
58. TAD A2.1:2, 15; A2.2:2, 6 (ca. 500 BCE).
59. TAD D11.12:2 (jar, twice; name of a centurion; first half fifth century BCE).
60. TAD B3.9:11 (416 BCE); C3.14:2 (400 BCE). For the name and its meaning,
see Stamm, Die akkadische Namengebung, 187; CAD 17.1, s.v. “šalāmu,” esp. 7a3′.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 210 5/7/19 11:50 AM

In B4.4:8 (483 BCE), the same name occurs under the form nbwšlw. For an-
other instance of confusion between vav and mem in personal names, compare
the spelling šwš for šmš, “Shamash,” in C3.14:13.
61. TAD B2.11:14 (410 BCE; from a scribal family). See Bezalel Porten, Archives from
Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Military Colony (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1968), 237 n. 7.
62. TAD B2.3:28 (460 BCE); B2.4:16 (460 BCE); B2.11:14 (410 BCE; from a scribal
family). See Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 237 n. 7.
63. Name of a battalion commander: TAD B2.9:2 (420 BCE); B3.6:2 (427 BCE);
B3.8:2 (420 BCE); B6.1:2 (446 BCE); B7.1:2 (413 BCE); D2.6:2 (second half
fifth century BCE). For another Iddin-Nabu, see TAD D7.40:8 (first quarter
fifth century BCE).
64. TAD A3.1, second letter 1 (first half fifth century BCE; read [m]⌈š⌉zbnbw);
D3.39b:4 (second half fifth century BCE). Note the absence of Shezib-
DN names in the Akkadian onomasticon, as opposed to the popularity of
Mushezib-DN names. See the index to Stamm, Die akkadische Namengebung.
65. For the reference to a man who was “servant of Nabu the god” (ʿbd nbw ʾlhʾ), see
TAD B8.4:7 (431 BCE).
66. TAD C3.8, scroll IIIA:12. For the name and its meaning, see Stamm, Die akka-
dische Namengebung, 154; CAD 2, s.v. “balāt.u,” 6a4′.
67. TAD A6.2:23, 28 (name of a scribe in the office of the Persian satrap).
68. TAD C4.2, frag. a:2 (mid-fifth century BCE).
69. TAD C4.9 ii 2.
70. TAD D22.30 (493 BCE).
71. TAD C3.8, scroll IIIB:28 (Memphis shipyard journal).
72. TAD B8.4:1 (431 BCE).
73. Judge, TAD B8.4:1, 13 (431 BCE).
74. TAD C3.6:10 = Segal, Aramaic Texts, no. 47, ii 5 (first half fifth century BCE).
For this name, see the comments by Segal, Aramaic Texts, 67 n. 11.
75. See Jan Dušek and Jana Mynářová, “Phoenician and Aramaic Inscriptions from
Abusir,” in In the Shadow of Bezalel: Aramaic, Biblical, and Ancient Near East-
ern Studies in Honor of Bezalel Porten (ed. Alejandro F. Botta; CHANE 60;
Leiden: Brill, 2013), 53–69, esp. 67–69, where the reading mnknʿn must be cor-
rected to mnknbw.
76. For the meaning of this adjective, see CAD 2, s.v. “banû.” For a reference to
Nanay as bānītu, see the Nanaya Hymn of Sargon II in Alasdair Living-
stone, Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea (SAA 3; Helsinki: Helsinki
University Press, 1989), no. 4, verso, col. ii, lines 13′–14′: “Hear, O world, the
praise of Queen Nanaya! Exalt the beautiful one (bānītu), magnify the reso-
nant one!”
77. See Knut L. Tallqvist, Neubabylonisches Namenbuch zu den Geschäftsurkunden aus
der Zeit des Šamaššumukîn bis Xerxes (Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica,
1905), 21–22. For Banitu names in Neo-Assyrian texts, such as Ardi-Banitu,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 211 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Banitu-bel-us.ri, and Banitu-eresh, see Claude H. W. Johns, Assyrian Deeds

and Documents (4 vols.; Cambridge: Deighton Bell, 1901), 3:34–35.
78. For the name “Nanay-bel-us.ri,” see Tallqvist, Neubabylonisches Namenbuch,
159a. For “Banitu-bel-us.ri,” see Tallqvist, Neubabylonisches Namenbuch, 21b.
For “Nanay-kilīli-us.ri,” see Tallqvist, Neubabylonisches Namenbuch, 159a (four
times). For “Banitu-agâ-us.ri,” see Tallqvist, Neubabylonisches Namenbuch, 21b.
See also CAD 8, s.v. “kilīlu A,” 1d.
79. See TAD A2.3:14.
80. See TAD A2.2:5–6.
81. See TAD A2.2:2.
82. For Aramaic personal names compounded with “Banit” outside Egypt, see
the name s.lbnt, “S.il-Banit” (Protection-of-Banit), in a graffito from Tarsus
(ca. 700 BCE), in Niehr, Arameans in Ancient Syria, 321 and n. 34.
83. Cl.-G. 181 (first quarter fifth century BCE).
84. TAD D20.1:1, 3 (earlier published as KAI 268).
85. TAD B2.1:19 (471 BCE). For the meaning of this Babylonian name, see CAD 4,
s.v. “erēšu A,” 1d).
86. TAD A2.2:5; A2.6:8 (ca. 500 BCE).
87. TAD A2.3:2 (ca. 500 BCE).
88. TAD A2.1:8; A2.2:1, 18; A2.3:1, 14; A2.4:1, 14; A2.5:1, cf. 10 (ca. 500 BCE). The
name is also attested at Korobis, Middle Egypt, in a document from 515 BCE,
see TAD B1.1:17.
89. TAD B1.1:16 (515 BCE).
90. TAD A2.1:1, 15; A2.2:4 (ca. 500 BCE). This name (nnyh.m) follows the pattern of
such names as “Ištar-hammat” (Ishtar-is-Mistress). See CAD 6, s.v. “hammatu
˘ ˘
A” (“mistress, female head of the family”).
91. TAD B4.7:1 (second half fifth century BCE).
92. TAD C4.8:8.
93. TAD B2.3:27–28; B2.4:16.
94. TAD B3.2:11.
95. TAD B4.3:23; B4.4:19.
96. TAD B2.2:19.
97. TAD D22.33 (493 BCE).
98. TAD C4.8:6 (late fifth century BCE).
99. TAD B3.9:11 (416 BCE); B3.13:12 (402 BCE); B4.7:1 (second half fifth century
BCE); C4.8:8 (late fifth century BCE); C3.14:1 (400 BCE).
100. TAD D22.18:1–2.
101. TAD B3.9:12 (416 BCE).
102. TAD A2.7:1, 5 (500 BCE). For the meaning of the name, see Kornfeld, Ono-
mastica aramaica aus Ägypten, 68 (“ʿAttar-is-my-force”); cf. DNWSI, s.v.
“dmr” (“to be protector, to protect”).
103. TAD B3.2:13 (451 BCE); B3.9:10 (416 BCE).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 212 5/7/19 11:50 AM

104. TAD C4.2:5 (mid-fifth century BCE).

105. From a scribal family: TAD B2.3:27–28 (459 BCE); B2.4:16 (459 BCE). On the
genealogy of this scribal family, see Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 237 n. 7.
106. TAD B8.4:3, 13 (431 BCE). See the commentary in Segal, Aramaic Texts, 46 n. 4.
107. TAD D2.25:8 (late fifth century BCE).
108. TAD B8.4:3 (431 BCE).
109. TAD B3.2:11 (451 BCE). For the meaning of the name, see Silverman, Religious
Values, 177.
110. TAD C3.13:57.
111. TAD B4.3:23 (483 BCE); B4.4:19 (483 BCE); D2.2:5 (483 BCE); D4.29:2 (late
fifth century BCE).
112. TAD A6.1:7. For the interpretation, see CAD 4, s.v. “erēšu A,” 1d.
113. TAD C3.15:19.
114. TAD B2.2:19; B3.9:10 For the meaning of the name, see CAD 8, s.v. “kašāru C”
(“to replace, to compensate”).
115. See TAD B2.2:19; cf. C3.15:23.
116. For another Babylonian Hadad name, presumably carried by an Aramean
from Babylonia, “Addu-liddin” (May-Adad-give), see TAD B1.1:16 (515 BCE;
from Korobis, west of Oxyrhynchos).
117. For “Marduk-ʿidri,” see TAD C4.2:8 (mid-fifth century BCE; Memphis). For
“Bel-habeh,” see D22.13:1. For “Bel-natan,” see Cl.-G. 269:1.
118. TAD C3.14:14.
119. TAD D1.33, frag. d, line 2 (473 BCE).
120. TAD B3.9:9 (416 BCE).
121. TAD C3.14:13. For the construction of the name, see Stamm, Die akkadische
Namengebung, 275–277.
122. TAD B4.2:12.
123. TAD A2.3:5. For the Babylonian background, see Stamm, Die akkadische Na-
mengebung, 244.
124. TAD D9.10:4. For the Babylonian background, see Stamm, Die akkadische Na-
mengebung, 244.
125. TAD B3.2:12 (451 BCE). For the Babylonian background, see Stamm, Die ak-
kadische Namengebung, 244.
126. See Hélène Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau: Ostraca, épigra-
phes sur jarre, étiquettes de bois (Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et
des Belles-Lettres 35; Paris: de Boccard, 2006), 489–490, with references. For
the Babylonian background of the name, see Stamm, Die akkadische Namenge-
bung, 295.
127. TAD B2.8:13; A4.2:11; C4.8:9; B3.2:10, 13; B5.5:12. See also, from Memphis:
TAD B8.7:2, 3, 6, 9, 10; B8.10:7. For the Babylonian background of the name,
see Stamm, Die akkadische Namengebung, 237–238.
128. Aimé-Giron, Textes araméens d’Égypte, 99–100.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 213 5/7/19 11:50 AM

129. Regarding the Aramean funerary practices in Egypt, Porten and Gee conclude
that “the Aramaic funerary material taken as a whole shows an adoption of
Egyptian burial practices and religious beliefs” (“Aramaic Funerary Practices,”
302). See also Günter Vittmann, “Arameans in Egypt,” in Wandering Arame-
ans: Arameans outside Syria (ed. Angelika Berlejung, Aren M. Maeir, and An-
dreas Schüle; LAOS 5; Wiesaden: Harrassowitz, 2017), 229–279, esp. 254–258.
130. Compare the almost standard invocation of Ptah in the so-called Hermopolis
letters, dispatched from Memphis to Syene and Thebes (TAD A2.1:2; A2.2:2;
A2.3:2; A2.4:2; A2.5:2; A2.6:1; D1.1:2), with the lack of any such invocation in
the letters that Hosea son of Natan sent from Memphis to Elephantine (A3.7;
A3.8; A3.9; presumably A4.2).
131. For the Khnum greeting formula, see TAD D7.21:3 (“I bless you by Yaho and
Khnum”). For Mibtahyah’s oath by the Egyptian goddess Sati, see TAD B2.8:5.
132. For a discussion of Ahutab and references to the occurrences of her name in
the ostraca, see Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 489–490.
133. The full lineage is Yedanyah son of Gemaryah son of Mahseyah son of Ye-
danyah son of Mahseyah. For Yedanyah son of Gemaryah, the great-grandson
of Yedanyah son of Mahseyah, see especially TAD A4.1:1; A4.2:1; A4.3:1, 12;
A4.4:7; A4.7:1 // A4.8:1; A4.10:1; B3.8:44; B3.11:20; C3.13:1–9; C3.15:124.
134. TAD C3.15:23 (400 BCE).
135. TAD B2.2:19.
136. TAD C3.15:6; B5.1:9; C3.15:111.
137. TAD B2.4:1–4 (495 BCE). Yezanyah son of Uriyah was the son of the Uriyah
who is mentioned in the ostraca in connection with sacrifices (Cl.-G. 17); liba-
tions (D7.9); and a tunic left in the temple (D7.18). Yezanyah lived in the house
next to Mibtahyah’s family (TAD B2.2:9–10 [464 BCE]).
138. TAD B2.6 (449 BCE). For the date, see Bezalel Porten, “The Aramaic Texts,”
in Porten et al., The Elephantine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-
Cultural Continuity and Change (2nd rev. ed.; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Lit-
erature, 2011), 75–275, esp. 178 n. 1.
139. See TAD C4.6:5 (400 BCE; Hanan son of Pa-Khnum); C4.4:2 (420 BCE; Har-
men son of Osea); cf. C3.15:4 (Hosea son of Harmen). For the Egyptian name,
see Wolfgang Röllig, “Neue phönizische und aramäische Krugaufschriften und
Ostraka aus Elephantine,” in The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region, Diverse
Perspectives (ed. Dietrich Raue, Stephan J. Seidlmayer, and Philipp Speiser;
SDAIK 36; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2013), 185–203, pls 32–41, esp. 194. Also see TAD
B2.2:17 (464 BCE) and Cl.-G. 177 (Hosea son of Pete-Khnum); A4.4:5 (ca.
410 BCE; Isireshwet wife of Hosea); D3.17:10 (Mauzyah son of Pawesi and
Menahem son of Pawesi); cf. C4.4:6; C3.15:82; D3.17:10; C3.15:84 (400 BCE;
Menahemet daughter of Anani son of Es-Ptah); Cl.-G. 96 (Yedanyah son
of Pa-Khnum); Cl.-G. 143 (Yigdal son of Psamy); B5.3:9 (Zekaryah son of
Psamy); D9.10 (mid-fifth century BCE; Ananyah son of Psamishek).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 214 5/7/19 11:50 AM

140. TAD B3.10:10; 3.11:6. In TAD B3.7:8, Hor is referred to more generally as a
“servant” (ʿbd) of Khnum.
141. TAD B2.7:15. Arthur Cowley reads “son of Palt.o priest of the gods Khnum
and Sati” (Aramaic Papyri, 40, commentary to line 15). The reading “Harwoz
son of Palto” goes back to TAD B2.7:15. Since “Harwoz” (Horus-prospers) is
a good Egyptian name, the reconstruction of “the god Khnum” is plausible,
also in view of the proximity of the temple of Khnum. For the meaning of
the name “Harwoz” and other occurrences, see Lozachmeur, La collection
Clermont-Ganneau, 496.
142. TAD B2.1:13; B2.2:10–11.
143. See Cary J. Martin, “The Demotic Texts,” in Bezalel Porten et al., The Ele-
phantine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-Cultural Continuity and
Change (2nd rev. ed.; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011), no. C27,
line 1; Günter Dreyer, “Katarakt(e),” LÄ 3:356–358; S. Steve Vinson, The Nile
Boatmen at Work (Müncher ägyptologische Studien 48; Mainz: von Zabern,
1998), 112.
144. See Cl.-G. 203, 220. For other references and discussion, see Lozachmeur, La
collection Clermont-Ganneau, 494–495.
145. Pakhoi and Pamet lived next to the gardener of Khnum, facing the house of
Ananyah and his family (TAD B3.12:20).
146. Note the Aramaic expression ʾlpy ʿbwrʾ (TAD D7.2:4 = Cl.-G. 169:4), mean-
ing “ferryboats,” rather than “grain boats,” contra Lozachmeur, La collection
Clermont-Ganneau, 320. The term ʿbwrʾ goes back to the root ʿbr (to cross),
not to the Sumerian ebur, via Akkadian ebūru (harvest, crop).
147. For Jewish business contacts with the Arameans, see TAD A3.8:9 (Bethel-
taden); A4.2:11 (Passu son of Mannuki).
148. TAD B2.11 (410 BCE).
149. The name “Zakkur son of Meshullam” occurs twice in Lozachmeur, La collec-
tion Clermont-Ganneau, Join 9 (= Cl.-G. 221+231+X1). His grandson Zakkur
son of Meshullam is identified as the grandson of Zakkur son of Ater in TAD
B2.7:3. Ater (ʾt. r) is a nickname meaning “hunchback.” See Noth, Die israeliti-
schen Personennamen, 227.
150. TAD B2.7:3 (house sale); B3.1 (loan, 456 BCE).
151. For Yedanyah’s nickname “Didi,” see TAD C4.6:14 (400 BCE).
152. TAD B3.3.
153. TAD B3.9; cf. C4.6:14.
154. See TAD D7.9:3–5: “Morover, take care of our Tetosiri. Let them mark her
(yktbwh) on her arm above the writing that is (already) on her arm.”
155. See TAD B2.1:18–19 (471 BCE); B2.2:19 (464 BCE; Syene); B2.8:13 (440 BCE;
Syene); B3.2:11–14 (451 BCE; Syene [?]); B3.9:10–12 (416 BCE; Syene); B4.2:12
(487 BCE); B4.3:22–24 (483 BCE); B4.4:19–21 (483 BCE).
156. The term is h.ylʾ swnknʾ. See TAD C3.14:32.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 215 5/7/19 11:50 AM


158. Haggai son of Shemayah son of Haggai was active as a scribe in Elephan-
tine in 437–400 BCE. For his style and training, see the observations by Ale-
jandro F. Botta, The Aramaic and Egyptian Legal Traditions at Elephantine
(London: T&T Clark, 2009), 40–43. See TAD B2.7:19 (446 BCE; as witness);
B3.4:23 (437 BCE; as scribe); B3.6:15–16 (427 BCE; as scribe); B3.8:43 (420
BCE); B3.10:23 (404 BCE); B3.11:17 (402 BCE); B3.12:32 (402 BCE); B4.6
(400 BCE).
159. TAD C3.14:11. The grain disbursements have been registered on the basis of the
profession of the beneficiaries, it seems. Haggai son of Shemayah’s name oc-
curs among those of a number of other scribes, such as Zubaidu son of Nabu-
ushallim (TAD C3.14:2) and Eshem-[ra]m son of [Eshem-shezib] (C3.14:4). A
number of the senior scribes mentioned in the disbursement list occur as wit-
nesses in TAD B3.9 (416 BCE), an adoption contract made in the governor’s
scribal office in Syene (Nabu-ushallim son of Bethel-reʿi, Eshem-ram son
of Eshem-shezib). Assuming the first group of barley recipients consisted of
scribes, perhaps TAD C3.14:11 is to be restored as “[Mauzyah son of ] Natan.”
160. TAD A4.10:6.
161. See TAD A4.5:1.
162. See the discussion in Chapter 2, section “The Counter Case of the Iranian
Community.”
163. There are five battalion commanders mentioned in connection with Jews:
(1) Varyazata: TAD B2.1:2, 3 (471 BCE); B2.2:4, 10 (464 BCE); B3.3:3
(449 BCE); B2.6:3 (449 BCE); B2.7:2 (446 BCE); B2.8:3 (440 BCE); B5.5:2
(420–400 BCE); B2.11:2 (410 BCE); (2) Atropharna: B2.2:9 (464 BCE);
B3.6:16 (Atropharna son of Nisaya, a Median, first witness; 427 BCE);
(3) Haomadata: B2.3:2 (459 BCE); B2.4:2 (459 BCE); (4) Iddin-Nabu: B6.1:2
(446 BCE); B3.6:2 (427 BCE); D2.6:2 (date unknown); B3.8:2 (420 BCE);
B2.9:2 (420 BCE); B7.1:2 (413 BCE); (5) Nabu-kudurri: B4.5:2 (407 BCE);
B3.12:3 (402 BCE); B3.13:2 (402 BCE); B7.2:3 (401 BCE); B4.6:2 (400 BCE).
In view of these names, the majority opinion holds that there were several
Jewish battalions. See, e.g., Hedwig Anneler, Zur Geschichte der Juden von Ele-
phantine (Bern: Max Drechsel, 1912), 57; Porten, Archives from Elephantine,
30–31. Angela Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und Kult der Judäo-Aramäer von
Elephantine (AOAT 396; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2014), 48. Porten estimates
there were six battalions at Elephantine. Given the dates, it is more likely that
Varyazata was the founder of the battalion and that the four others were its
successive commanders.
164. For Iddin-Nabu, see TAD B6.1:2 (446 BCE); B3.6:2 (427 BCE); D2.6:2 (date
unknown); B2.9:2 (420 BCE); B3.8:2 (420 BCE); B7.1:2 (413 BCE). For Nabu-
kudurri, see B4.5:2 (407 BCE); B3.12:3 (402 BCE); B3.13:2 (402 BCE); B7.2:3
(401 BCE); B4.6:2 (400 BCE).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 216 5/7/19 11:50 AM

165. See, e.g., TAD B3.13:1–2 (“Anani son of Haggai son of Meshullam, a Jew of
the battalion of Nabu-kudurri, said to Pa-Khnum son of Besa, an Aramean of
Syene of that battalion also, saying . . .”).
166. See TAD B4.4:6, 10 // B4.3:9 (483 BCE; Bethel-taqum and Nabu-shalew);
Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, X2 (first quarter fifth century
BCE; Nabu-shezib); C4.4:11 (ca. 420 BCE; Nabu-ʿaqab; for the reading, see
Cowley, Aramaic Papyri, 36); C3.13:54 (after 411 BCE; Nabu-ʿaqab); C3.15:20
(400 BCE; Nabu-ʿaqab); C3.15:19 (400 BCE; Sin-iddin).
167. See Stephanie Dalley, “Yahweh in Hamath in the 8th Century BC: Cunei-
form Material and Historical Deductions,” VT 40 (1990): 21–32; Ziony Zevit,
“Yahweh Worship and Worshippers in 8th-Century Syria,” VT 41 (1991): 363–
366. Dalley and Zevit appear to have been unaware that they were recycling,
in a slightly different form, an idea already formulated in the early twentieth
century. See Hermann Gunkel, Genesis (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup-
recht, 1917), 54. On the two Ya’u names, see John D. Hawkins, “Izrijau,” RlA
5:227; “Jau-biʾdi,” RlA 5:272–273.
Chapter 4.The Origins of the Elephantine Jews

1. See, e.g., Bezalel Porten, Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish
Military Colony (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 11–13, 119 (ca.
650 BCE, time of Manasseh); Albert Vincent, La religion des Judéo-Araméens
d’Éléphantine (Paris: Geuthner, 1937), 90, 483–486 (ca. 622 BCE, time of Jo-
siah’s reform); Gösta W. Ahlström, The History of Ancient Palestine from the
Palaeolithic Period to Alexander’s Conquest ( JSOTSup 146; Sheffield: JSOT
Press, 1993), 751 (end seventh century BCE); Pierre Grelot, Documents ara-
méens d’Égypte (LAPO 5; Paris: Cerf, 1972), 38–40 (610–580 BCE); Hedwig
Anneler, Zur Geschichte der Juden von Elephantine (Bern: Max Drechsel, 1912),
101–117 (585–570 BCE).
2. See, e.g., Bob Becking, “Die Gottheiten der Juden in Elephantine,” in Der eine
Gott und die Götter: Polytheismus und Monotheismus im antiken Israel (ed. Man-
fred Oeming and Konrad Schmid; Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten
und Neuen Testaments 82; Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 2003), 203–226, esp.
208 (after 525 BCE); E. C. B. MacLaurin, “Date of the Foundation of the
Jewish Colony at Elephantine,” JNES 27 (1968): 89–96 (descendants of the
Israelites who did not join the exodus but stayed behind in Egypt).
3. See TAD A4.7:13–14 // A4.8:12–13.
4. See Cornelius von Pilgrim, “XII. Der Tempel des Jahwe,” MDAIK 55 (1999):
142–145.
5. See Jeremiah 43–44; 2 Kgs 25:26.
6. See, e.g., Albin van Hoonacker, Une communauté Judéo-Araméenne à Éléphantine,
en Égypte, aux VIe et Ve siècles av. J.-C. (The Schweich Lectures 1914; London:
Oxford University Press, 1915), 82–85; Vincent, La religion des Judéo-Araméens,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 217 5/7/19 11:50 AM

passim; Manfred Weippert, Historisches Textbuch zum Alten Testament (Göt-

tingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 478.
7. See A. Leo Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization
(rev. ed. completed by Erica Reiner; Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1977), 13–29.
8. See Tawny L. Holm, “Nanay and Her Lover: An Aramaic Sacred Marriage Text
from Egypt,” JNES 76 (2017): 1–37, esp. 3 and n. 12.
9. See Percy E. Newberry, The Amherst Papyri, Being an Account of the Egyptian
Papyri in the Collection of Lord Amherst of Hackney (London: Bernard Quaritz,
1899).
10. Holm, “Nanay and Her Lover,” 3 and n. 14.
11. For the story behind the Amherst papyrus, see Richard C. Steiner, “Papyrus Am-
herst 63: A New Source for the Language, Literature, Religion, and History
of the Aramaeans,” in Studia Aramaica: New Sources and New Approaches (ed.
Markham J. Geller, Jonas C. Greenfield, and Michael P. Weitzman; JSSSup 4;
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 199–207, esp. 199; Holm, “Nanay and
Her Lover,” 2–3. I owe some of the details of the story to private communica-
tions with Richard Steiner.
12. Raymond A. Bowman, “An Aramaic Religious Text in Demotic Script,” JNES 3
(1944): 219–231, esp. 227. The 1901 photographs of the Amherst papyrus had first
come into the possession of Wilhelm Spiegelberg, professor of Egyptology at
Strasbourg, who bequeathed them to his student William F. Edgerton, then
Egyptologist at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Bowman
also had a position at the Oriental Institute. Two Egyptology colleagues—
George R. Hughes and Charles F. Nims—were studying the photographs and
asked Bowman’s opinion. It led to the solution of the problem. For many years
after, Nims would continue to work on the papyrus, first with Bowman and
later with Steiner.
13. The discovery of the parallel between Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 11–19 and (parts of )
Psalm 20 was made by Richard Steiner and, independently, about a year later,
by Jan Willem Wesselius. Their discoveries appeared in print at almost the
same time. See Charles F. Nims and Richard C. Steiner, “A Paganized Version
of Psalm 20:2–6 from the Aramaic Text in Demotic Script,” JAOS 103 (1983):
261–274; Sven P. Vleeming and Jan Willem Wesselius, “An Aramaic Hymn
from the Fourth Century B.C.,” BiOr 39 (1982 [1983]): 501–509.
14. See Terryl L. Givens, By the Hand of Mormon: The American Scripture That
Launched a New World Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002),
132–135.
15. “The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script,” translated by Richard C. Steiner (COS
1.99:310).
16. Richard C. Steiner, “The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Text, Translation, and
Notes,” February 28, 2017, at https://www.academia.edu/31662776/The Ara-
maic Text in Demotic Script: Text, Translation, and Notes, 3.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 218 5/7/19 11:50 AM

17. Tawny L. Holm, Aramaic Literary Texts (WAW; Atlanta: SBL Press, forthcom-
ing). The manuscript of the present monograph was finished before Holm’s
volume came out.
18. See Karel van der Toorn, Papyrus Amherst 63 (AOAT 448; Münster: Ugarit-
Verlag, 2018).
19. Readers should be aware of the fact that in Steiner’s count, there are only twenty-
two columns. Following the interpretation offered in the 1901 photographs of
the papyrus, now in the collections of the Oriental Institute of the University
of Chicago, Steiner distinguishes between column iv(a) and iv(b). Most other
scholars of the papyrus, including Wesselius and Holm, identify column iv(b)
as column v. The contents of the text show that they are right.
20. The scribes signal the end of a composition with the words sak pĕrāšāʾ, “end of
section” (see, e.g., Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 17, xv 4). The normal sign marking
the end of one composition and the transition to another is sp, “end,” possibly
an abbreviation for sak pĕrāšāʾ. See Sven P. Vleeming and Jan Willem Wesse-
lius, “Betel the Saviour: Papyrus Amherst 63, col. 7:1–18,” JEOL 28 (1983–1984):
110–140, esp. 136.
21. See Richard C. Steiner, “The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: The Liturgy of
a New Year’s Festival Imported from Bethel to Syene by Exiles from Rash,”
JAOS 111 (1991): 362–363; Steiner, “Papyrus Amherst 63,” 206–207.
22. For references to Bethel in the Syrian section, see Papyrus Amherst 63, vi 22; viii
13; ix 9, 13; x 9. For references to Bethel as “the Lord,” see vi 1; vii 2, 7, 8, 12, 13;
viii 2, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 20, 22; ix 1, 8, 11, 16, 20 (twice); x 3, 8, 10, 15, 17, 20, 23; xi
1, 2, 5, 6, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19. For references to “the God of Rash,” see vi 15; vii 7, 11;
ix 3, 16, 18 (twice), 20; x 15, 22; xi 6, 14. For the titles “the Resident of Hamath”
and “the Guardian of Siyan,” see ix 6, 10 and x 14 and parallels, respectively.
23. For Nanay, see Papyrus Amherst 63, iv 17; v 9 (twice), 11, 14. For Nabu, see iii 1,
12. For the title “Queen of Heaven,” see ii 11.
24. See especially Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 3–4; xvi 4–12; xvii 17–19.
25. For the Hermopolis letters, see Edda Bresciani and Murad Kamil, Le lettere
aramaiche di Hermopoli (Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Memorie
8/12.5; Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1966), reedited as TAD A2.1–
2.7; D1.1. Most of the documents from Memphis (Saqqara) are published in
Noël Aimé-Giron, Textes araméens d’Égypte (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut
Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1931); Judah B. Segal, Aramaic Texts from
North Saqqâra (London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1983). Many of them
have been reedited in TAD (see the concordances there), but note Günter
Vittmann’s observation that “only some [of the texts published by Segal] have
been incorporated in TAD” (“Arameans in Egypt,” in Wandering Arameans:
Arameans outside Syria [ed. Angelika Berlejung, Aren M. Maeir, and Andreas
Schüle; LAOS 5; Wiesaden: Harrassowitz, 2017], 253 and n. 142).
26. See the temple greetings in TAD A2.1:1; 2.2:1; 2.3:1; 2.4:1.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 219 5/7/19 11:50 AM

27. For the meaning of the adjective, see CAD 2, s.v. “banû.” For a reference to
Nanay as bānītu, see the Nanaya Hymn of Sargon II in Alasdair Livingstone,
Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea (SAA 3; Helsinki: Helsinki University
Press, 1989), no. 4, verso, col. ii, lines 13′–14′: “Hear, O world, the praise of
Queen Nanaya! Exalt the beautiful one (bānītu), magnify the resonant one!”
“Banitu” occurs regularly in Neo-Babylonian personal names, especially among
women. Such names as “Banitu-dannat” (Banitu-is-strong), “Banitu-et.irat”
(Banitu-saves), and “Banitu-ramat” (Banitu-is-elevated) leave no doubt about
the use of “Banitu” as the name of a deity. See Knut L. Tallqvist, Neubaby-
lonisches Namenbuch zu den Geschäftsurkunden aus der Zeit des Šamaššumukîn
bis Xerxes (Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1905), 21–22. For Banitu
names in Neo-Assyrian texts (such as “Ardi-Banitu,” “Banitu-bel-us.ri,” and
“Banitu-eresh”), see Claude H. W. Johns, Assyrian Deeds and Documents
(4 vols.; Cambridge: Deighton Bell, 1901), 3:34–35. A comparison between
the names “Nanay-bel-us.ri” (Nanay-protect-the-lord) and “Banitu-bel-us.ri”
(Banitu-protect-the-lord), on the one hand, and “Nanay-kilīli-us.ri” (Nanay-
protect-my-wreath) and “Banitu-agâ-us.ri” (Banit-protect-the-crown), on
the other, are suggestive of the close correspondence between Nanay and Ba-
nitu. For the names “Nanay-bel-us.ri” and “Nanay-kilīli-us.ri” (four times), see
Tallqvist, Neubabylonisches Namenbuch, 159a. For the names “Banitu-bel-us.ri”
and “Banitu-agâ-us.ri,” see Tallqvist, Neubabylonisches Namenbuch, 21b. See also
CAD 8, s.v. “kilīlu A,” 1d.
28. See Walter Kornfeld,Onomastica Aramaica aus Ägypten (Vienna: Österreichische
Akademie der Wissenschapften, 1978); Michael H. Silverman, Religious Values
in the Jewish Proper Names at Elephantine (AOAT 217; Kevelaer: Butzon &
Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1985).
29. The Aramaic expression is dr h.mt. See Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 6, 10.
30. The Aramaic expression is h.rd syn. See Papyrus Amherst 63, x 14 and paral-
lels. For the interpretation, see Sven P. Vleeming and Jan Willem Wesselius,
Studies in Papyrus Amherst 63: Essays on the Aramaic Text in Aramaic/Demotic
Papyrus Amherst 63 (2 vols.; Amsterdam: Juda Palache Instituut, 1985–1990),
2:40; Ingo Kottsieper, “Anmerkungen zu Pap Amherst 63, I, Teil II–V,” UF 29
(1997 [1998]): 385–434, esp. 408–409. The alternative interpretation “(May he
guard) our rear/loins” (Steiner, Holm) fails to catch the parallelism between
“the Guardian of Siyan” and “the God of Rash.” For a discussion, see Van der
Toorn, Papyrus Amherst 63, 147–148.
31. See Michael C. Astour, “The Kingdom of Siyannu-Ušnatu,” UF 11 (1979): 13–28;
Wilfred van Soldt, “Studies in the Topography of Ugarit (2): The Borders
of Ugarit,” UF 29 (1997): 683–703, esp. 701–703; Trevor Bryce, The Routledge
Handbook of the Peoples and Places of Ancient Western Asia: The Near East from the
Early Bronze Age to the Fall of the Persian Empire (London: Routledge, 2009),
658; Van Soldt, “Sijannu,” RlA 12:480–428.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 220 5/7/19 11:50 AM

32. Written as either kur or uru Si-an-nu /Si-a-nu. See Hayim Tadmor, The In-
scriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III King of Assyria ( Jerusalem: Israel Academy of
Sciences and Humanities, 1994), 60–61 (Annals 19*:5); 66–67 (Annals 13*:6);
102–103 (Stele II B 10′, with commentary); 148–149 (Summary Inscription
5, II 18).
33. For the Zakkur inscription, with references to previous literature, see K. Lawson
Younger Jr., A Political History of the Arameans (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2016),
476–481.
34. For the text, see Papyrus Amherst 63, vii 1–18.
35. Papyrus Amherst 63, x 13–17 (// x 21–24; xi 6–8; xi 13–16).
36. The Aramaic term is mnbt, related to Akkadian munnabtu, “fugitive, refugee” (see
CAD 10.2, s.v. “munnabtu”). Steiner’s suggestion to understand it as .t mn ʾbd,
“He shelters those perishing” (“Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Text,” 35 and
elsewhere) is hard to reconcile with the writing dmm2nbʾt (the Demotic signs
representing Aramaic d mnbt, “of the fugitives”) in Papyrus Amherst 63, xi 16.
37. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xi 8–13.
38. Papyrus Amherst 63, vi 1–5.
39. For the conquest and sack of Hamath, see John David Hawkins, “Hamath,”
RlA 4:67–70, esp. 69. For the Zakkur inscription, with references to previous
literature, see Younger, Political History, 476–481.
40. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 11–19; xiii 1–10; xiii 11–17.
41. For a detailed study of the history of the text, see Karel van der Toorn, “Psalm
20 and Amherst Papyrus 63, XII, 11–19: A Case Study of a Text in Transit,” in
Le-maʿan Ziony: Essays in Honor of Ziony Zevit (ed. Frederick E. Greenspahn
and Gary A. Rendsburg; Eugene, Ore.: Cascade, 2017), 244–259.
42. On the basis of the orthography of yhh as a free variant of yhw, the divine name
was presumably pronounced “Yaho.” See Weippert, Historisches Textbuch, 477.
43. The name “Yaho” occurs in Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 11, 14 (twice), 15 (twice), 17;
xiii 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 (twice), 17. For “Adonai,” see xii 12, 16; xiii 3, 4, 8, 12, 14.
44. Two clear illustration are the forms nzbh., “we will sacrifice,” for ndbh. (Papyrus
Amherst 63, xiii 2) and m(y), “who,” for mn (xiii 11–12; three times).
45. See Karel van der Toorn, “Celebrating the New Year with the Israelites: Three
Extrabiblical Psalms from Papyrus Amherst 63,” JBL 136 (2017): 657–673.
46. See 1 Samuel 1, 9–10, 20.
47. Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 16–18. The text uses the term tr, “Bull,” the Aramaic
equivalent of the Hebrew šôr.
48. For the Kuntillet ʿAjrud pithos 1, with reference to secondary literature, see Jo-
hannes Renz and Wolfgang Röllig, Handbuch der althebräischen Epigraphik (2
vols.; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2016), 1:61. For the bib-
lical evidence, see Exodus 32 and 1 Kgs 12:25–33. For the expression “Calf of Sa-
maria,” see Hos 8:5, 6; 10:5. Compare also the personal name ʿglyh, “Calf-(of-)
Yaho,” from Samaria Ostracon 41.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 221 5/7/19 11:50 AM

49. See Tryggve D. Mettinger, “Cherubim,” DDD 189–192.

50. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 1–6.
51. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xxi 17 (“With the Tartan at the head of the troo[p]”).
For the word gayyās, see Jastrow, s.v. “gayyās”; DJBA, s.v. “gayysāʾ 1”; Holm,
“Nanay and Her Lover,” 7.
52. Richard Steiner and Tawny Holm both interpret the text to read “a band of
Samarians.” See Steiner, “Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Text,” 63; Holm,
53. Contra Steiner and Holm, who both translate it as “my brother.”
54. See Karel van der Toorn, Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel (SHANE
7; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 339–344; Israel Finkelstein, The Forgotten Kingdom: The
Archaeology and History of Northern Israel (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2013), 154.
55. For the campaign, see Nazek Khalid Matty, Sennacherib’s Campaign against Ju-
dah and Jerusalem in 701 B.C.: A Historical Reconstruction (BZAW 487; Berlin:
de Gruyter, 2016).
56. Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 1–2.
57. Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 2–3, 6–11.
58. The Aramaic terms are bʾr, “well,” and rt, “channel”; cf. Akkadian rātu, see
CAD 14, s.v. “rāt.u.” For a description of wells and cisterns, see Philip J. King
and Lawrence E. Stager, Life in Biblical Israel (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster
John Knox, 2001), 123–127.
59. Steiner, “Papyrus Amherst 63,” 205.
60. Vleeming and Wesselius, Studies in Papyrus Amherst 63, 2:72–74.
61. See 1 Kgs 22:38. On this cistern, see also Helga Weippert, Palästina in vorhel-
lenistischer Zeit (Munich: Beck, 1988), 535.
62. For a survey and translation of the Mesopotamian sources on the fall of Samaria,
see Bob Becking, The Fall of Samaria: An Historical and Archaeological Study
(SHANE 2; Leiden: Brill, 1992), 21–45.
63. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 4–7.
64. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 7 (h.ls. tmr).
65. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 4 (bʿrb).
66. Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 1–2 (pqdy qr lmdbr).
67. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 18 (ʿl yd lh.mh); xvii 17–18 (ʾdmʾ ʿl p-mqrt).
68. Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 15 ( trʿ ʾytm); xvi 8, 9 (mh.bb ʾytn).
69. See Steiner, “Papyrus Amherst 63,” 204; Holm, “Nanay and Her Lover,” 22.
70. Note especially the presence of the benediction of the city in Papyrus Amherst
63, xvi 3–4; xvii 17–18. This serves as a chorus bracketing the compositions in
between, including the narrative about the Samarians in xvii 1–6.
71. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 4 (ngd rš).
72. Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 2–3 (ns. mrty mn rš / ʾnty šgl ʿl kl ʾrm). For the expression
kl ʾrm, see also the Sefire Treaty (750 BCE), KAI 222A, line 5 (ʾrm klh, “all of
Aram”).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 222 5/7/19 11:50 AM

73. Steiner, “Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Liturgy,” 362–363; Steiner, “Papyrus
Amherst 63: A New Source,” 205. Tawny Holm follows Steiner. See Holm,
74. For Rashu near Elam, see Simo Parpola, “Rāši/u,” RlA 11:255–256.
75. For references to Elam (ʿylm), see Papyrus Amherst 63, xi 18; xvi 15. In xvi 10,
there is a reference to a “vessel from Anshan” (mn d ʾnšn), Anshan being a city
in Elam.
76. For references to Rash, see Papyrus Amherst 63, i 14; iv 10, 13; vi 12 (twice); vii 7,
13; viii 2, 8 (twice), 15, 16; ix 3, 14, 16; x 1; xi 1, 3, 8, 9, 10, 16; xii 13; xiv 2, 18; xvi 4,
17; xvii 15.
77. The name occurs in the Demotic spellings ʾlhrʾrʾšʾH (Papyrus Amherst 63, vi 15;
ix 3); ʾlhrʾr2šʾH (vii 7); ʾlhrršʾH (vii 11; xi 6); ʾlhrʾšʾH (ix 16, 18 [twice]); ʾlhršH
(ix 20); ʾlhʾršʾH (x 15); ʾlhršH (x 22); ʾlhʾr2ʾšʾH (xi 14). Especially the occurrence
of the multiconsonantal sign hr and the reduplication of the resh convey the
impression of its being a stock epithet.
78. In Papyrus Amherst 63, xi 3, there is a reference to “Rash, the land (mt) of our
God.” This must have been the “land” (mt) in which trembling dwelled and
whose “towns” or “cities” (qryk, “your cities”) had been destroyed (vi 2). In the
dream that one song describes, a man is transported back to Rash and there
descries a city (qry): “I spotted a city in Rash” (xi 9). Another song refers to
Rash as “the land” (ʾrq) that Bethel loves (viii 15–16).
79. Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 16 (bnt rš).
80. See Papyrus Amherst 63, vii 13; xvi 17.
81. See DNWSI, s.v. “drg”; cf. Akkadian daraggu (see CAD 3, s.v. “duruggu” [“moun-
tain path”]) and durgu (see CAD 3, s.v. “durgu”). For the metaphorical use of
rʾš, “head,” see Edouard Dhorme, L’emploi métaphorique des noms de parties du
corps en hébreu et akkadien (Paris: Geuthner, 1963), 22.
82. Papyrus Amherst 63, x 9 (dr .t ryʾ).
83. Papyrus Amherst 63, xi 1.
84. Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 15–19.
85. See Manfred Weippert, “Libanon,” RlA 6:641–650, esp. §5.
86. Compare also Herbert Niehr, “Die Wohnsitze des Gottes El nach den My-
then aus Ugarit,” in Das biblische Weltbild und seine altorientalischen Kontexte
(ed. Bernd Janowski and Beate Ego; Forschungen zum Alten Testament 32;
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 325–360, esp. 330–339. Niehr makes the case
that the Jebel Ansariya was the abode of El according to the Ugaritic texts. For
a possible reference to Rash outside the Amherst papyrus, see Rainer Degen,
“Die aramäischen Inschriften aus Taimāʾ und Umgebung,” in Neue Ephemeris
für Semitische Epigraphik (ed. Rainer Degen, Walter W. Müller, and Wolfgang
Röllig; 3 vols.; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1972–1978), 2:79–98 and tables VII–
VIII, esp. 87–88 no. 6. This votive stele reads lph.wr zy ršh, which Degen trans-
lates as “(belonging) to the potter of Rasha.” Whether ph.wr refers to a potter is
Y7557-Toorn.indb 223 5/7/19 11:50 AM

not certain. The word could be a calque upon Ugaritic phr and Akkadian puhru,
˘ ˘
“assembly,” frequently used in the phrase phr ilm or puhur ilī, “assembly of the
˘ ˘
gods.” The text might be a dedication “to the (divine) assembly of Rash.”
87. See the classic presentation by Michael Rostovtzeff, Caravan Cities: Petra, Jerash,
Palmyra, Dura (trans. D. Talbot Rice and T. Talbot Rice; Oxford: Clarendon;
New York: Oxford University Press, 1932).
88. See Jean Starcky and Michael Gawlikowski, Palmyre (2nd ed.; Paris: Adrien
Maisonneuve, 1985), 57–72.
89. Note also the oracle for a king in section four of Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 1–3.
90. Josephus, Ant. 8.153–154 (Whiston).
91. See Michael P. Streck, “Palmyra,” RlA 10:292–293. For variant spellings, see Dan-
iel Arnaud, Recherches au pays d’Aštata: Emar VI (4 vols.; Paris: Éditions Re-
cherche sur les Civilisations, 1985–1987), vol. 3, no. 21:16, 18 (“Tadmer”); Francis
Joannès, “Palmyre et les routes du désert au début du deuxième millénaire av.
J.-C.,” MARI 8 (1997): 393–415 (“Tadmir”); Ernst Weidner, “Die Feldzüge und
Bauten Tiglatpilesers I.,” Archiv für Orientforschung 18 (1957–1958): 342–360,
reedited by A. Kirk Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium
BC (1114–859 BC) (RIMA 2; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991), 34
A.0.87:4, lines 34–36; 37. A.0.87.3, lines 29–35 (“Tadmar”).
92. See 1 Kgs 9:18, where the name of the city is written as tmr (“palm, place of
palms”), to be pronounced, according to the masoretic signs added to the text,
as “Tadmor.”
93. The meaning “fortress, watch-post,” is based on the root dmr, “to protect, guard.”
See DUL, s.v. “/ḏ-m-r/ (I)” and the etymology section there. For the word tmr,
“date palm,” in the Semitic languages, see HALAT, s.v. “tāmār I”; John Hueh-
nergard, Ugaritic Vocabulary in Syllabic Transcription (Harvard Semitic Studies
32; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), 185; DNWSI, s.v. “tmr”; DQA, s.v. “tmrh”;
DJBA, s.v. “tĕmartāʾ, tûmartāʾ, pl. tamrê”; Sokoloff, s.v. “tmartāʾ.”
94. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 7 (h.ls. tmr).
95. See Jacob Hoftijzer, Religio Aramaica (Leiden: Ex Oriente Lux, 1968), 27; Javier
Teixidor, The Pantheon of Palmyra (Études préliminaires aux religions orien-
tales dans l’Empire romain 79; Leiden: Brill, 1979), 1–11, esp. 1; Starcky and
Gawlikowski, Palmyre, 90–92.
96. On the name “Yamūt-Bāl” (written ba-la), see Albrecht Goetze, “Sumu-
Yamūtbāl, a Local Ruler of the Old-Babylonian Period,” Journal of Cuneiform
Studies 4 (1950): 65–72, esp. 72.
97. Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 21 (“Howl and [mo]an to Bol: ‘Bol, have mercy, have
compassion! [Shake off ] the sleep that is upon you!’”).
98. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xv 7 (mr bʾl).
99. See Adnan Bounni, “Nabu palmyrénien,” Orientalia 45 (1976): 46–52; Paul
Collart and Jacques Vicari, Le sanctuaire de Baalshamîn à Palmyre (Rome: In-
stitut Suisse de Rome, 1969).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 224 5/7/19 11:50 AM

100. See Harald Ingholt, Henri Seyrig, and Jean Starcky, eds., Recueil de tessères de
Palmyre (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, Geuthner, 1955), nos. 134 (“Symposium
of Bel and Herta and Nanay”); 238 (“Herta Nanay”); 240 (“Herta and Nanay”),
241 (“Herta Nanay”); 242 (“Herta and Nanay”); PAT, no. 2766 (priests of Herta
have erected a statue for PN because of his beneficence “for Herta and Nanay
and Resheph the gods”). See also PAT, s.v. “nny.”
101. For Baʿaltak at Palmyra, see the references in PAT s.v. “bʿltk.” “Baʿaltak” is a
fossilized form of the unattested reconstruction “Baʿalat-Ayak” and is not to
be interpreted as “Your Lady,” contra Jozef Tadeusz Milik, Dédicaces faites par
des dieux (Paris: Geuthner, 1972), 174–175.
102. For the expression mrt ʾyk or mrtʾ dy ʾyk, see Papyrus Amherst 63, i 4, 15; iii 1,
12–13; iv 1, 14; v 2. Note the variant in viii 6. For Bēlat-ayakki, see the references
in CAD 1.1, s.v. “ajakku,” b; and Rintje Frankena, Tākultu (Leiden: s.n., 1953),
80. See Hoftijzer, Religio Aramaica, 46–47.
103. For Herta (written h.rtʾ), see Ingholt, Seyrig, and Starcky, Recueil de tes-
sères, no. 133 (“Symposium of Bel and Herta”); no. 134 (“Symposium of Bel
and Herta and Nanay”); no. 238 (“Herta Nanay”); no. 239 (“Herta”); no. 240
(“Herta and Nanay”); no. 241 (“Herta Nanay”); no. 242 (“Herta and Nanay”).
Also see PAT, no. 2766 (priests of Herta have erected a statue for NN because
of his beneficence “for Herta and Nanay and Resheph the gods”).
104. See Papyrus Amherst 63, x 4.
105. For Shalmat, see Hoftijzer, Religio Aramaica, 44 n. 118; Teixidor, Pantheon of
Palmyra, 84–85. There are two votive inscriptions (see PAT, nos. 2752, 2783),
plus the occurrence of šlm as a theophoric element in personal names from
Palmyra. See André Caquot, “Remarques linguistiques sur les inscriptions
des tessères de Palmyre,” in Recueil de tessères de Palmyre (ed. Harald Ingholt,
Henri Seyrig, and Jean Starcky; Paris: Imprimerie nationale, Geuthner, 1955),
139–203, esp.178.
106. See Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 16, 20.
107. The meaning of the name “Yarhi-Bol” is contested. Scholars have traditionally
interpreted it as “Moon of Bol,” which made little sense since Yarhi-Bol is a
sun god. In light of the chorus to the sun in Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 12–13 //
17–19, yrh. should be interpreted on the basis of Akkadian yarahhu, “gold.” See
˘˘
Karel van der Toorn, Papyrus Amherst 63 (AOAT 448; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag,
2018), 198.
108. Note the reference to “Yarhibol, the good god, sacred stone of the source
(ms.bʾ dy ʿynʾ).” See PAT, no. 1099; Lucinda Dirven, The Palmyrenes of Dura-
Europos (Religions in the Graeco-Roman World 138; Leiden: Brill, 1999),
233–235; cf. ms.b ʿynʾ, PAT, no. 0410:6.
109. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 18–19: “On the chariot of the King of Rash, the
Bull, put a stele (skn)! On the throne, on the throne of the Bull-of-Babylon,
our guard.”
Y7557-Toorn.indb 225 5/7/19 11:50 AM

110. The Aramaic term is ʾytn, variant ʾytm, see Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 15; xvi 8,
9; see also the discussion in HALAT, s.v. “ʾêtān I” and compare the place name
ʾētām, a location in the desert (Exod 13:20; Num 33:6, 7, 8).
111. See especially Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 13–17, and the discussion of Eshem-
Bethel in Chapter 5.
112. See Hoftijzer, Religio Aramaica, 38–40; PAT, s.vv. “ʾlh,” “bryk šmh lʿlmʾ,” “t.b,”
“skr,” “rh.mn.”
113. For “the Lord of the Throne” (mrʾ myt[bʾ]), see Michel Gawlikowski, Recueil
d’inscriptions Palmyréniennes (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, Klincksieck, 1974),
no. 145 = PAT, no. 1931. For the deified throne (mwtb) in Nabatean inscrip-
tions, see Hoftijzer, Religio Aramaica, 23; DNWSI, s.v. “mšb.” For the reference
to “Throne-of-Yaho” (krs yhw), see Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 7.
114. For the litany, see Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 5–6. On the identification of the
Ayakku with Eanna, see CAD 1.1, “ajakku.” For Assyrian worship of Nanaya
and Nabu, see Livingstone, Court Poetry, nos. 4–6, 9.
115. This is the so-called Psalm in Praise of Uruk. See Livingstone, Court Poetry,
no. 9.
116. For Nanay’s title mrt ʾyk or mrtʾ dy ʾyk, see Papyrus Amherst 63, i 4, 15; iii 1,
12–13; iv 1, 14; v 2. For “Bēlat-ayakki,” see Frankena, Tākultu, 80, no. 20; CAD
1.1, s.v. “ajakku.”
117. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xv 7.
118. The Aramaic expression is pr bbl. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 19.
119. Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 2–3, 18.
120. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 16.
121. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 5, 18–19.
122. See Wilfred G. Lambert, Babylonian Creation Myths (Winona Lake, Ind.:
Eisenbrauns, 2013), 275–277, 346–349.
123. See TAD B2.2:19 (hddnwry bblyʾ).
124. For the relevant Assurbanipal annals, with references to various prisms, see
Rykle Borger, Beiträge zum Inschriftenwerk Assurbanipals (Wiesbaden: Harras-
sowitz, 1996), 232–235. For studies of the parallels, see Ingo Kottsieper, “Die
literarische Aufnahme assyrischer Begebenheiten in frühen aramäischen Tex-
ten,” in La circulation des biens, des personnes et des idées dans le Proche-Orient an-
cien (ed. Dominique Charpin and Francis Joannès; Rencontre Assyriologique
Internationale 38; Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1992), 283–
289; Stephanie Dalley, “Assyrian Court Narratives in Aramaic and Egyptian:
Historical Fiction,” in Proceedings of Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale 45
(ed. Tzvi Abusch et al.; Bethesda, Md.: CDL, 2001), 149–162.
125. Note the repeated instructions to the Tartan (commander in chief ) to spare the
life of Shamshshumukin (Papyrus Amherst 63, xxi 18; xxii 8–9). According to
the report of the Tartan, he was not responsible for the death of Shamashshum-
ukin: “His own army burned him. They set fire to the house of the one who
Y7557-Toorn.indb 226 5/7/19 11:50 AM

controls heaven and earth,” thereby killing Shamashshumukin, who had made
Marduk’s temple his final place of refuge (Papyrus Amherst 63, xxiii 6–7).
126. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xviii 1–4.
127. Kottsieper, “Anmerkungen zu Pap Amherst 63,” 385–434, esp. 387–399.
128. See especially the descriptions in Papyrus Amherst 63, xxii–xxiii. The Assur-
banipal annals’ explicit denial of any harm done to the Babylonian citizens
suggests that there was something to deny.
129. See, e.g., Hoftijzer, Religio Aramaica, 26–33; Teixidor, Pantheon of Palmyra, 1–11;
Starcky and Gawlikowski, Palmyre, 90–92.
130. See PAT, s.vv. “nbw,” “nny,” “nrgl,” and “šmš I,” with references to the second-
ary literature. Note also Ingholt, Seyrig, and Starcky, Recueil de tessères, no. 285:
“Nanay (and) Shaknay, the saviors of Babylon” (nny škny šyʿt bbl). PAT, s.v.
“bbl,” translates “DN (and) DN, who accompany Babylon.”
131. See the survey of the theophoric names in Chapter 3, section “The Arameans
from Babylonia.” Note also the greeting by “Bel and Nabu, Shamash and Ner-
gal” in an Elephantine ostracon (TAD D7.30).
132. Note the insertion of the reference to Zion, the Anointed One, and the king,
and see Van der Toorn, “Psalm 20,” 253–254.
133. For the expression mʾbd ym, “Destroyer of Yamm,” see Papyrus Amherst 63,
viii 16. For descriptions of Bethel as a god of thunderstorms, see Papyrus Am-
herst 63, x 9; xi 4–5.
134. Vleeming and Wesselius find the conformity between the Tale of Two Broth-
ers and the Assyrian annals so striking that they conclude that “the story
underlying this text, if not the actual composition, must be dated quite close
to the events it describes, certainly not later than the sixth century BC” (Stud-
ies in Papyrus Amherst 63, 1:32).
135. Steiner, “Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Liturgy,” 362–363.
136. See Papyrus Amherst 63, v 8 (brš šnn). Compare also the phrase mn šrw, “from
the beginning (of the year),” in one of the Israelite songs (xiii 12). For the in-
terpretation, see Vleeming and Wesselius, Studies in Papyrus Amherst 63, 1:75;
Sokoloff, s.v. “šry” in the pael; Jastrow, s.v. “šêrûy.”
137. For a translation of section 1 (columns i–v), see the Appendix. The descriptions
have more affinity with the references and allusions to the New Year rituals in
the older Mesopotamian texts than with the Babylonian Akitu festival as we
know it from first-millennium BCE texts. Compare, for instance, the Sumerian
Inanna Hymn of Ishme-Dagan from Isin (Thorkild Jacobsen, The Harps That
Once . . . : Sumerian Poetry in Translation [New Haven, Conn.: Yale University
Press, 1987], 112–124); the Old Babylonian Ishtar Hymn of Ammiditana (Ben-
jamin R. Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature [2 vols.;
Bethesda, Md.: CDL, 1993], 1:65–68); the Old Babylonian Nanay Hymn of
Samsuiluna (Foster, Before the Muses, 1:69–71); and the Old Babylonian love
lyrics of Nanay and Muati of Abieshuh (Foster, Before the Muses, 1:96–97).
138. See Van der Toorn, “Celebrating the New Year,” 657–673.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 227 5/7/19 11:50 AM

139. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 1–2 (“Order cold for the desert!”); xvi 4 (“At sun-
set Haddu is strong”); xvi 6 (“Nabu . . . has adorned <you> with stars of gold”);
xvi 12–13 // 17–19.
140. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 1–3; xvii 7–14.
141. For the stele (skn = sikkannu) on the chariot, see Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 18–
19. For hints at the inauguration of the renovated temple, see especially xv 7–9.
142. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xv 2–3; xvi 10–12; xvii 6.
143. For the dedicatory text, see PAT, no. 1347. For comments, see Hoftijzer, Religio
Aramaica, 27; Han J. W. Drijvers, The Religion of Palmyra (Iconography of
Religions 15; Leiden: Brill, 1976), 9.
144. See Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 19–20 (“Our Master, we will set up your dwell-
ing. Please do come out, O Lord, and please enter the abode”); ix 9–10, 12–13.
145. See Bounni, “Nabu palmyrénien,” 46–52.
146. Steiner, on the contrary, claims to have found several references to Egypt. In
1991, he read one line of the text (Papyrus Amherst 63, x 17) as “raise up our
home, Syene (swynʾ)” (“Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Liturgy,” 363), but
he abandoned this reading in his 1997 translation (“Aramaic Text in Demotic
Script,” COS 1.99:309–329). He finds two references to the Egyptian month
Epiph (= Tishri) (“Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Liturgy,” 362 [ix 13; xvi
2, see there for commentary]) and a mention of “Horus and Osiris” in viii 7,
instead of “Yaho and Asherah” (COS 1.99:314). See also his interpretation of xi
1–6 as “a prayer for the rising of the Nile” (COS 1.99:316).
147. See, e.g., the Babyloniaca of Berossus, in Felix Jacoby, Die Fragmente der
griechischen Historiker (3 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1958), 3.C.1, no. 680, esp. line 15.
See also the Letter of Aristeas 12–13 (“And even before this time large num-
bers of Jews had come with the Persians; and in an earlier period still others
had been sent to Egypt to help Psammetichus in his campaign against the
King of the Ethiopians”).
148. See Mordechai Cogan, “Sukkoth-Benoth,” DDD 821–822. Note also the ren-
dering of bĕnôt (Benoth) as Bainith in the Greek translation of the Hebrew
Bible (LXX).
149. Compare a fragmentary ostracon from Saqqara, written around 600 BCE,
which attests to the presence of an Aramaic-speaking community in Mem-
phis, see Aimé-Giron, Textes araméens d’Égypte, no. 2; Vittmann, “Arameans
in Egypt,” 253.
Chapter 5. A Military Colony and Its Religion

Kolonie zu Elephantine (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911).
2. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 1–6. The Aramaic term is nys, which may be linked
with the Hebrew nēs, a military emblem. See Heinz-Josef Fabry, “nēs,” ThWAT
5:468–473, esp. 470–471.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 228 5/7/19 11:50 AM

3. For a discussion of the Assyrian evidence, see Israel Ephʿal, The Ancient Arabs:
Nomads on the Borders of the Fertile Crescent 9th–5th Centuries B.C. ( Jerusalem:
Magnes, 1984), 93, 100, 159–164. On Arak (Greek Aracha, modern Erek), see
René Dussaud, Topographie historique de la Syrie antique et médiévale (Paris:
Geuthner, 1927), 247–322, chapter 5: “Palmyre et la Damascène”; Alois Musil,
Palmyrena (New York: American Geographical Society, 1928), esp. 86 n. 22;
Henri Seyrig, “L’incorporation de Palmyre à l’Empire romain,” Syria 13 (1932):
266–277, esp. 270; Michael Gawlikowski, “Palmyre et l’Euphratène,” Syria 60
(1983): 53–68.
4. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 7: “To me, you have indeed conducted much booty
(bz sgy).” Also see xvi 11: “Divide, divide the fines imposed upon the enemy.
Divide the booty (bz)!”
5. See Jer 42:1–43:7. The prophecy about Pharaoh Hophra ( Jer 44:29–30) gives a
time frame for the Judean migration to Egypt. Hophra is to be identified with
Apries, who ruled from 589 to 570 BCE.
6. For the term “Pathros,” see David W. Baker and Donald B. Redford, “Pathros,”
ABD 5:178.
7. See Sylvie Honigman, “Jewish Communities in Hellenistic Egypt: Different
Responses to Different Environments,” in Jewish Identities in Antiquity: Stud-
ies in Memory of Menahem Stern (ed. Lee I. Levine and Daniel R. Schwartz;
TSAJ 130; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 117–135, esp. 120–125; Günter Vitt-
mann, “Arameans in Egypt,” in Wandering Arameans: Arameans outside Egypt
(ed. Angelika Berlejung, Aren M. Maeir, and Andreas Schüle; LAOS 5; Wies-
baden: Harrassowitz, 2017), 229–279, esp. 250–252.
8. See Philip Kaplan, “Cross-Cultural Contacts among Mercenary Communities
in Saite and Persian Egypt,” Mediterranean Historical Review 18 (2003): 1–31;
Kaplan, “Sojourner in the Land: The Resident Alien in Late Period Egypt,”
in Walls of the Prince: Egyptian Interactions with Southwest Asia in Antiquity:
Essays in Honour of John S. Holladay, Jr. (ed. Timothy P. Harrison, Edward B.
Banning, and Stanley Klassen; Leiden: Brill, 2015), 396–413. For the Phoeni-
cians, see Philip C. Schmitz, The Phoenician Diaspora: Epigraphic and Histori-
cal Studies (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2012), 32–42, 43–53. There was a
Phoenician military colony at Memphis, according to Herodotus, Hist. 2.112
(Tyriōn stratópedon, “camp of the Tyrians”). For Arab soldiers, see Isaac Rabi-
nowitz, “Aramaic Inscriptions of the Fifth Century B.C.E. from a North-
Arab Shrine in Egypt,” JNES 15 (1956): 1–9; the texts have been reedited as
TAD D15.1–4.
9. See Serge Sauneron and Jean Yoyotte, “Une campagne nubienne,” Bulletin de
l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 50 (1952): 157–207.
10. See, e.g., Kaplan, “Cross-Cultural Contacts.”
11. The Aramaic term for these wages is prs. See TAD A3.3:3–5.
12. For mercenaries in the south, see TAD A2.3.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 229 5/7/19 11:50 AM

13. Note the phrase “and it will be subtracted from their account in Syene.” For
the interpretation, see especially Pierre Grelot, Documents araméens d’Égypte
(LAPO 5; Paris: Cerf, 1972), 152 n. j.
14. See Hélène Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau: Ostraca, épigraphes sur
jarre, étiquettes de bois (Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et des Belles-
Lettres 35; Paris: de Boccard, 2006), X11.
15. TAD D7.9:10–12: “Moreover, when you hear (pl.) that they have started disburs-
ing salary (yhbn prs) in Syene, send word to me.” See also Lozachmeur, La
collection Clermont-Ganneau, Cl.-G. 170, cc 4–5: “Lo, with respect to the wages
(prs) of Yedanyah, I/you have been delayed.” See also Cl.-G. 235:11–14, with a
possible reference to prs in line 14.
16. See TAD B4.2:5–6 (ca. 487 BCE).
17. See, e.g., TAD B4.3 // B4.4. For a discussion of the texts and an estimation of the
size of the rations allotted, see Grelot, Documents araméens d’Égypte, 266–271.
For another example, see TAD C3.14.
18. For ʾws.r mlkʾ, “the royal treasury,” see TAD B3.13:4. For byt mlkʾ, “the royal
storehouse,” see TAD B5.5:8. The identity between “(royal) treasury” and “royal
storehouse” is implied by the phrase “at the royal storehouse (byt mlkʾ) and
before the scribes of the treasury (spry ʾws.rʾ)” (TAD B4.4:12). Furthermore, the
“salary” (prs), the normal term for mercenary wages, was paid out by “the royal
storehouse” (byt mlkʾ; B4.4:16) or “the treasury” (ʾws.rʾ; TAD B4.2:6)—appar-
ently the same place. The term for ration is ptpʾ. See TAD B3.13:5. For other
occurrences of ptp, “ration,” see TAD A6.9:2, 4, 5, 6; A6.12:1 (letters by Arsames
the satrap); D3.12 (fragment with a single word). The word ptp is an Aramaic
calque upon the Persian pithfa. See Jan Tavernier, Iranica in the Achaemenid Pe-
riod (ca. 550–330 B.C.): Lexicon of Old Iranian Proper Names and Loanwords, At-
tested in Non-Iranian Texts (OLA 158; Leuven: Peeters, 2007), 410, no. 4.4.3.15.
19. See TAD B5.5:8, 10.
20. Arthur Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford: Clarendon,
1923), 12.
21. See Christelle Fischer-Bovet, Army and Society in Ptolemaic Egypt (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2014), 118–123.
22. See TAD C3.14; B4.3 // 4.4.
23. See TAD A5.2. The Aramaic term for “field” or “land” is h.ql. See TAD A5.2:2, 4;
DNWSI, s.v. “h.ql.”
24. See TAD B2.9:7.
25. The first text is TAD B5.1, which employs the Aramaic term mnh, “share, por-
tion” (B5.1:3). For the expression hwh lhh.snw[th], see TAD B5.2:4.
26. For the interpretation of the Jewish soldiers as cleruchs, see also Eduard Meyer,
Der Papyrusfund von Elephantine: Dokumente einer jüdischen Gemeinde aus der
Perserzeit (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1912), 29; Hedwig Anneler, Zur Geschichte der
Juden von Elephantine (Bern: Max Drechsel, 1912), 59; Abraham Schalit and
Y7557-Toorn.indb 230 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Lidia Matassa, “Elephantine,” EncJud 6:311–314; Angela Rohrmoser, Götter,

Tempel, und Kult der Judäo-Aramäer von Elephantine (AOAT 396; Münster:
Ugarit-Verlag, 2014), 48. For a different view, see Elias Joseph Bickerman, The
Jews in the Greek Age (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America,
1988), 39 (“Native Egyptian soldiers received land on condition of fulfilling
their military service; foreign mercenaries obtained houses in cities but, it
seems, no fields to cultivate”).
27. For the reference to ploughing, rdyt, “I ploughed,” see TAD A5.2:4. For the prac-
tice of leasing out the land, see TAD B1.1.
28. See Raymond O. Faulkner, “Egyptian Military Organization,” JEA 39 (1953):
32–47, esp. 45.
29. Herodotus, Hist. 2.168.
30. The Aramaic expression is mindat h.aylāʾ. See Judah B. Segal, Aramaic Texts
from North Saqqâra (London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1983), no. 24:11; TAD
C3.5:7.
31. Amélie Kuhrt, The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period
(London: Routledge, 2010), 671.
32. See the discussion in Joseph Naveh and Shaul Shaked, Aramaic Documents from
Ancient Bactria from the Khalili Collections (London: Khalili Family Trust,
2012), 30.
33. Another document that seems to hint at taxation on the produce of the fields is
TAD A6.1, which refers to an order from Arsames to supply him with detailed
monthly reports about the “plots” (mntʾ; line 2) that had been given out (yhb)
in the province (bmdyntʾ), presumably in view of the tax to be levied. The min-
dah, according to another Arsames letter, is levied on domains; it is the mndt
bgyʾ (TAD A6.13:4). TAD D7.27 is an early fifth-century ostracon that refers to
silver in payment of “the tax” (krgʾ; line 8) by Jews at Elephantine (reading and
context uncertain).
34. See the discussion in Matthew Stolper, Entrepreneurs and Empire: The Murašû
Archive, the Murašû Firm, and Persian Rule in Babylonia (Istanbul: Nederlands
Historisch-Archeologisch Instituut, 1985), 70–103, esp. 98–99.
35. The expression is byb byrtʾ mhh.snn. See TAD A4.10:6.
36. Bread (lh.m): TAD D7.1:13; D7.8:13; D7.10:3; D7.19:5; D7:44; D7.48:3; Cl.-G. 13:2;
33:2; 50:3; 112:1; 133:2–3; 154:1; 280:10–11; Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-
Ganneau, Join 7:20–21. Barley (sʿrn/šʿrn): TAD D7.12:4; D7.16:5; D7.45; D7.50:2;
Cl.-G 2:3; 14:3; 15:2; 22:7, 10; 25:2; 120:2–3; Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-
Ganneau, Join 2:8, 11 [?]. Flour (qmh.): TAD D7.1:13; Cl.-G. 11:4; Lozachmeur,
La collection Clermont-Ganneau, X7:3. Salt (mlh.): TAD D7.2:2; D7.7:2; D7.28:2;
D7.35:5; Cl.-G. 128:9.
37. For the reference to grinding, see TAD D7.10:7.
38. Tunic (ktwn): TAD D7.7:7; D7.14:2, 6; Cl.-G. 108; 159:2; 237:3; 241:2. Sandals
(šʾnyʾ): Cl.-G. 112:6; 115:13.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 231 5/7/19 11:50 AM

39. Thread (h.wt. ): Cl.-G. 241:3.

40. Pickaxe (tly): TAD D7.7:6; Cl.-G. 3:2. Axe (mgzrh): Cl.-G. 109:1. Saw (mnšr):
Cl.-G. 115:6, 9.
41. Wood (ʿq): TAD D7.5:6; D7.36:4; D7.37:3; Cl.-G. 41:17; 81:7; 126:5; 154:2; 233:3;
280:8; Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, Join 3:2.
42. Vegetables (bql): TAD D7.16:1; Cl.-G. 126:6; 233:3. Cucumbers (qt. yn): Cl.-G.
115:3. Figs (šqmn): Cl.-G. 246:2. Fish (nwnn): TAD D7.35:8; Cl.-G. 55:7; 128:2, 4.
43. For a study of the archaeological remains of the walls of the fortress at Ele-
phantine, see Cornelius von Pilgrim, “Die ‘Festung’ von Elephantine in der
Spätzeit: Anmerkungen zum archäologischen Befund,” in In the Shadow of
Bezalel: Aramaic, Biblical, and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Bezalel
Porten (ed. Alejandro F. Botta; CHANE 60; Leiden: Brill, 2013), 203–208.
44. The term is hndyz, “(said of soldiers) being held (sc. in the fortress), con-
fined (sc. to the fortress)” (DNWSI, s.v. “hndyz”) or “garrisoned” (Tavernier,
Iranica, 45).
45. See TAD A4.5:2–8, discussed in Chapter 6.
46. TAD B2.7:4–6.
47. Ahiqar ix 6.
48. The references to these temples are nearly all from the so-called Hermopolis
papyri. See TAD A2.1:1; A2.2:1, 12; A2.3:1; A2.4:1. Note also the inscription
identifying a sarcophagus as belonging to “Sheʾil, the priest of Nabu, who
dwells forever (ytb tqmʾ) in Syene” (D18.1).
49. See Rabinowitz, “Aramaic Inscriptions.”
50. TAD C3.5:11 has a reference to silver paid by kmrn bbty ʾlhyʾ, “priests in the
temples of the gods” (Memphis papyrus).
51. See André Dupont-Sommer, “Une stèle araméenne d’un prêtre de Baʿal trouvée
en Égypte,” Syria 33 (1956): 79–87. See also TAD D21.17. Noël Aimé-Giron
made a rapid examination of the stele in 1926, when it was in the possession
of an Egyptian antiquities dealer who said it was found at Saqqara (Mem-
phis). See Textes Araméens d’Égypte (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français
d’Archéologie Orientale, 1931), 107–108. Dupont-Sommer bought the stele
thirty years later from an antiquities dealer in Paris, “par un hasard peu ordi-
naire” (“Une stèle araméenne,” 80).
52. Note also the reference to two “Magians” who acted as witnesses to a house doc-
ument that a Jew wrote for his wife (see TAD B3.5:24). It is not clear whether
mgšyʾ serves as a term of ethnicity or as a reference to the priestly class that
these men belonged to. If the latter is the case, this would be an indication of
a Zoroastrian cult among the Iranians of Elephantine Island.
53. Famously, Julius Wellhausen characterized the Elephantine Jews as a “vestige of
Hebraism from before the Torah” (Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte [7th ed.;
Berlin: Reimer, 1914; repr., Berlin: de Gruyter, 1958], 176).
54. See the expression “in Edfu the fortress” (bt. bh byrtʾ) in TAD D1.17:3.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 232 5/7/19 11:50 AM

55. See TAD C3.28:85 (“Yohanan the priest”), 113 (“Shelemyah the priest”), 114. For
an insightful discussion of the evidence, see Honigman, “Jewish Communi-
ties,” 121–123.
56. See Josephus, J.W. 7.420–425; Ant. 13.62–73.
57. See the observations in Reinhard G. Kratz, Historical and Biblical Israel: The His-
tory, Tradition, and Archives of Israel and Judah (trans. Paul Michael Kurtz;
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 137–147, esp. 143. Kratz may have over-
stated his case (“the situation at Elephantine would typify Judaism of the Per-
sian epoch, a standard manifestation not only in the Israelite-Samarian region
but also in Judah itself ”), but his argument against Elephantine being the
exception is valid.
58. See TAD D7.18:2–3 (byt yhh). For references to the temple in early papyri, see
TAD A3.3:1 ([b]yt yhw; Padua letter; second quarter fifth century BCE); D1.6,
frag. b (bʾgwrʾ; Padua letter; first half fifth century BCE); D4.9:1 ([by]t yhw;
first half fifth century BCE).
59. See DNWSI, s.v. “ʾgwr”; CAD 4, s.v. “ekurru A”; AHw, s.vv. “Ekur,” “ekurru.”
60. See TAD A4.7:9–13 // A4.8:8–12. For the archaeological remains of the temple,
see Cornelius von Pilgrim, “XII. Der Tempel des Jahwe,” MDAIK 55 (1999):
142–145.
61. The Aramaic expression is yhw ʾlhʾ škn yb byrtʾ, see TAD B3.12:2, see the vari-
ant yhw ʾlhʾ (zy) byb byrtʾ, see B3.3:2; B3.5:2; B3.10:2; B3.11:2. The expression
is reminiscent of the biblical phrase yhwh s.ĕbāʾôt haššōkēn bĕhar s.iyyôn and its
variants (see, e.g., Isa 8:18; Joel 4:17, 21). Compare also the expression “Nabu
residing forever in Syene,” nbw ytb tqmʾ bswn (TAD D18.1).
62. See the discussion in P. Kyle McCarter Jr., “Aspects of the Religion of the Is-
raelite Monarchy: Biblical and Epigraphic Data,” in Ancient Israelite Religion:
Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (ed. Patrick D. Miller, Paul D. Hanson,
and S. Dean McBride; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 137–155, esp. 139–143.
63. Bezalel Porten argues that the Elephantine temple was oriented toward Jeru-
salem as a token of the abiding loyalty of the community to the sacred cen-
ter (“The Structure and Orientation of the Jewish Temple at Elephantine:
A Revised Plan of the Jewish District,” JAOS 81 [1961]: 38–42). See also Jörg
Frey, “Temple and Rival Temple: The Cases of Elephantine, Mt. Gerizim, and
Leontopolis,” in Gemeinde ohne Tempel/Community without Temple: Zur Subs-
tituierung und Transformation des Jerusalemer Tempels und seines Kults im Alten
Testament, antiken Judentum, und frühen Christentum (ed. Beate Ego, Armin
Lange, and Peter Pilhofer; Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament 118; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 171–203. For a critique, see
Gard Granerød, Dimensions of Yahwism in the Persian Period: Studies in the Re-
ligion and Society of the Judean Community at Elephantine (BZAW 488; Berlin:
de Gruyter, 2016), 116–124.
64. See A. Leo Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization
Y7557-Toorn.indb 233 5/7/19 11:50 AM

(rev. ed. completed by Erica Reiner; Chicago: University of Chicago, 1977),

183–198.
65. For the priests, see, e.g., TAD A4.3:1, 12 (“Uriyah and the priests of Yaho the
God”); A4.7:1 (“Yedanyah and his colleagues the priests”). For the temple
steward Ananyah son of Azaryah, see TAD B3.2 (451 BCE). Ananyah son of
Azaryah was presumably the brother of Menahem son of Azaryah, married to
Shelewah (TAD A3.7; B2.9:17 [420 BCE]; B3.8:44 [420 BCE]; C3.13:10–19).
The word for priest is khn, a specifically Jewish term as opposed to the desig-
nation kmr used for priests of Egyptian or Aramean gods. For the term lh.n, see
DNWSI, s.v. “lh.n” (“certain type of temple servant”); CAD 1.1, s.v. “alahhinu,”
˘˘
esp. the discussion on p. 296; Stephen A. Kaufman, The Akkadian Influences on
Aramaic (AS 19; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 66 and n. 176.
For a seventh-century BCE occurrence of lh.n in Phoenician, see Frank Moore
Cross, “Inscriptions in Phoenician and Other Scripts,” in Ashkelon 1: Intro-
duction and Overview (1985–2006) (ed. Lawrence E. Stager, J. David Schloen,
and Daniel M. Master; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2008), 333–372, esp.
343–344. Papyrus Amherst 63 contains a reference to bny lh.n in viii 12–13: “Let
sixty temple stewards (bny lh.n) sprinkle the stele of the Lord, their palms full
of frankincense for Bethel’s nostrils.” It is clear that the word lh.n was not
distinctly Jewish. See also the occurrence of the term for an Aramean temple
steward (lšrh lh.nʾ) in TAD D21.2.
66. TAD A4.9:3 (byt mdbh.ʾ ).
67. For references to the offerings in the Jewish temple at Elephantine, see especially
TAD A4.7:25–28 // A4.8:25–27; A4.9:9–11; A4.10:10–11; C3.13.
68. For the marzeah ostracon, see D7.29. For references to the marzeah in Palmyra,
see PAT s.v. “mrzh..” The Hebrew texts are found at Jer 16:5 and Amos 6:7. For
a study of the marzeah institution, see Mark S. Smith, The Ugaritic Baal Cycle
(2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1994), 1:140–144, with references to further literature.
Although the term marzeah does not occur in Papyrus Amherst 63, there are
several references to banquets in the temple (e.g., xiii 1–10; xv 1–3; xvi 9–12).
69. “[Greetings to the t]emple of Yaho in Elephantine” (TAD A3.3:1); “Greetings
to the temple of Bethel (byt btʾl) and the temple of the Queen of Heaven
(wbyt mlkt šmyn)” (A2.1:1); “Greetings to the temple of Banit (byt bnt) in
Syene” (A2.2:1; 2.4:1); “Greetings to the temple of Nabu (byt nbw)” (A2.3:1).
The interpretation of the temple greeting as a periphrastic blessing addressed
to the recipient of the letter is unnecessary, contra F. Mario Fales, “Aramaic
Letters and Neo-Assyrian Letters: Philological and Methodological Notes,”
JAOS 107 (1987): 451–469, esp. 455–456 (“The well-being of the temple of DN to
PN from PN”). Fales’s interpretation has been adopted by Dirk Schwiderski,
Handbuch des nordwestsemitischen Briefformulars: Ein Beitrag zur Echtheitsfrage
der aramäischen Briefe des Esrabuches (BZAW 295; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2000),
esp. 146–149.
70. See TAD A4.8:1.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 234 5/7/19 11:50 AM

71. See TAD A4.5:3, 8 (Khnub); A4.7:5 // A4.8:4 (Khnub); A5.4:2 (Egyptian priest);
B2.7:15 (Khnum?); C3.5:11 (“the priests in the temples”); D5.10:2; D18.1:1
(Nabu); D18.2; D23.1 ii 9.
72. See Cary J. Martin, “The Demotic Texts,” in Bezalel Porten et al., The Elephan-
tine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-Cultural Continuity and Change
(2nd rev. ed.; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011), 276–384, esp. 276–
287 and nos. 1–3.
73. See Brent Nongbri, Before Religion: A History of a Modern Concept (New Ha-
ven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2013), and the more extended discussion in
Chapter 1, section “Jews or Judeans.”
74. See especially TAD A4.8:1.
75. See Eleonora Cussini, “Witnesses in Aramaic Legal Documents and Inscrip-
tions,” in Witnessing in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the Round Table
Held at the University of Verona (ed. Nicoletta Bellotto and Simonetta Ponchia;
Acta Sileni 2; Padua: Sargon, 2010), 191–224; Cussini, “The Career of Some
Elephantine and Murašû Scribes and Witnesses,” in In the Shadow of Bezalel:
Aramaic, Biblical, and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Bezalel Porten
(ed. Alejandro F. Botta; CHANE 60; Leiden: Brill, 2013), 39–52.
76. An Akkadian wisdom text from Ugarit mentions the fee for the oath: šukun
kaspī ša māmīti itti ilī teleqqe, “Deposit the money for the oath: you will get it
back from the gods.” See Wilfred G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Literature
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1960), 116, line 1.
77. The Aramaic expression is twb mn (TAD B7.1:5); cf. the parallel Akkadian ex-
pressions ištu māmīti târu and ašar ilāni târu (CAD 18, s.v. “târu,” 3d).
78. For the “oath of litigation,” mwmʾ nprt, see TAD B8.9:5 (a papyrus from Mem-
phis). For the oath as “a declaration by gods,” mqryʾ ʿl ʾlhn, see TAD B7.2:6.
For gods as witnesses of the oath, see the following expressions: “You swore
to me (ly) by Yaho (byhw) the god in Elephantine the fortress” (TAD B2.2:4);
“And an oath to him was imposed upon me, and I swore to him (lh)” (B2.3:24);
“Then an oath came upon you and you swore to me (ly) about them (ʿlyhm)
by Sati (bsty) the goddess” (B2.8:4–5); “[an oa]th to you (lk) by Yaho (byhw)
the god that [I] did not steal fish [from you]” (B7.1:4); “I will declare to you
(lk) upon (ʿl) Herem-Bethel the god” (B7.2:7–8); “Oath (mwm[ʾh] which PN
swore to (l) PN by (b) He[rem the go]d in the sanctuary and by (b) Anat-
Yaho” (B7.3:1–3).
79. See TAD B7.2:8, 10. The earlier translation of the term as “avengers” (Cowley,
Aramaic Papyri, 21, comments to no. 7, line 8) is based on the reading nqmn/
nqmyʾ. The new Porten/Yardeni edition of the text in TAD B7.2 has established
that the reading must be mqmn/mqmyʾ. Derived from verb qwm, mqm refers
to someone standing in attendance, in our case attending (and witnessing) the
oath ceremony. The fact that the juror (and his opponent) was positioned “be-
tween (byn) the four attendants” suggests that each party was entitled to bring
two witnesses.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 235 5/7/19 11:50 AM

80. See TAD B2.2:4 (464 BCE); B7.1:4 (413 BCE).

81. The expression is attested in Cl.-G. 14; 20; 41; 56; 152 (= TAD D7.16); 174; 185;
and in collection X16 and Join 8, presented and discussed in Lozachmeur, La
collection Clermont-Ganneau, esp. 528–529.
82. TAD C3.15, esp. lines 1, 123–128.
83. For references to Eshem-Bethel, see Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 1, 14, 15. For the
Assyrian references to Anat-Bethel, see Simo Parpola and Kazuko Watanabe,
Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty Oaths (SAA 2; Helsinki: Helsinki University
Press, 1988), no. 5, column iv, line 6; no. 6, line 467. The term theoi sunnaoi is
borrowed from Manfred Weippert, Historisches Textbuch zum Alten Testament
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 477.
84. TAD B7.2:7–8.
85. See TAD B7.3:3. For Menahem son of Shallum, see TAD D3.17:1–2; B2.10:18 (416
BCE); B3.13:13 (402 BCE); B4.6 (400 BCE); C3.13:46–47 (after 411 BCE);
D1.13 (late fifth century BCE). For Meshullam son of Nathan, see TAD
D3.17:9.
86. For the reference to Herem-Bethel, see Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 14. For the
interpretation of Herem as “sacred property,” now to be abandoned, see Karel
van der Toorn, “H . erem-Bethel and Elephantine Oath Procedure,” ZAW 98
(1986): 282–285.
87. See the observations in Karel van der Toorn, “The Iconic Book: Analogies be-
tween the Babylonian Cult of Images and the Veneration of the Torah,” in The
Image and the Book (ed. Karel van der Toorn; Leuven: Peeters, 1997), 229–248,
esp. 241–242. See also the reference to the ark (ʾrn) of Bethel in Papyrus Am-
herst 63, ix 3, and see the comments in Karel van der Toorn, Papyrus Amherst 63
(AOAT 448; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2018), 135.
88. See 1 Kgs 12:25–33; Exodus 32; and Nicholas Wyatt, “Calf,” DDD 180–182. For
the bethel, see Gen 28:10–22.
89. See TAD A4.7:9–13 // A4.8:8–12. The two quotations translate the Aramaic
phrases ʾšrnʾ wʾh.rn zy tmh hwh (TAD A4.7:11–12) and wmzrqyʾ zy zhbʾ wksp
wmndʿmtʾ zy hwh bʾgwrʾ zk (A4.7:12; cf. A4.8:11). For the meaning of ʾšrnʾ,
see Tavernier, Iranica, 437, under 4.4.8.1. See also TAD C3.13, a cumulative list
of memoranda drawn up by the temple administration not long before the
destruction. It lists such implements and materials as bronze and silver cups,
sweet-smelling reeds, and costly instruments used for libations.
90. Ernst Axel Knauf, “Elephantine und das vor-biblische Judentum,” in Religion
und Religionskontakte im Zeitalter der Achämeniden (ed. Reinhard G. Kratz;
Veröffentlichungen der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Theologie 22;
Gütersloh: Kaiser, 2002), 179–188, esp. 185; Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und Kult,
197; Collin Cornell, “Cult Statuary at the Judean Temple at Yeb,” JSJ 47 (2016):
291–309, esp. 15. There is no need to assume a one-to-one relation between the
money raised for the three deities and the actual costs involved in the produc-
tion of these symbols, contra Knauf, “Elephantine,” 185.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 236 5/7/19 11:50 AM

91. See TAD B2.2:4 (464 BCE); B7.1:4 (413 BCE).

92. See, most notably, Albert Vincent, La religion des Judéo-Araméens d’Éléphantine
(Paris: Geuthner, 1937), 25–143 (Yaho), 562–592 (Bethel), 593–621 (Herem-
Bethel), 622–653 (Anat), 654–680 (Eshem-Bethel); Anke Joisten-Pruschke,
Das religiöse Leben der Juden von Elephantine in der Achämenidenzeit (Wies-
baden: Harrassowitz, 2008), 83–95; Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und Kult, 107–
126 (Yaho), 127–134 (Bethel), 134–141 (Anat), 141–144 (Eshem-Bethel), 144–149
(Herem-Bethel).
93. For a careful discussion, see Manfred Weippert, “Jahwe,” RlA 5:246–253, esp.
246–250. See also Joüon §16f.
94. For occurrences of “Yaho,” see Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 7; xii 11, 14 (twice), 15
(twice), 17; xiii 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 (twice), 17. For “Adonai,” see Papyrus Am-
herst 63, xii 12, 16; xiii 3, 4, 8, 12, 14.
95. The expression is trn, “our Bull” (Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 17).
96. Quotations from Hos 8:5–6, with emendation of the form “he rejects” into “I
reject” (divine speech). For other criticism of the “golden” or “molten” calf
(or calves), see Exodus 32; Deut 9:13–21; 1 Kgs 11–12; 13:33–34; 14:7–11; 2 Kgs
10:29–31; 17:16; Hos 10:5–6; 13:2; Ps 106:19; 2 Chr 11:15; 13:8.
97. See the discussion by Arvid Kapelrud, “ʾābîr,” ThWAT 1:43–46, esp. 44.
98. Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 18–19; xvi 13–14; xii 17.
99. See, e.g., Helga Weippert, Palästina in vorhellenistischer Zeit (Munich: Beck,
1988), 408–409; Othmar Keel and Christoph Uehlinger, Göttinnen, Götter und
Gottessymbole (Freiburg: Herder, 1992), 57; Izak Cornelius, The Iconography of the
Canaanite Gods Reshef and Baʿal (OBO 140; Fribourg: Universitätsverlag; Göt-
tingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994), esp. 226–229. In view of the iconogra-
phy, it is possible the “calf of Samaria” served in fact as the pedestal or vehicle
of the invisible god, as argued in Moses Aberbach and Leivy Smolar, “Aaron,
Jeroboam, and the Golden Calves,” JBL 86 (1967): 129–140, esp. 134–135. How-
ever, the fact that the first Israelite psalm of the Amherst papyrus addresses
Yaho as “our Bull” suggests that the bull actually symbolized Yaho. Note also
the formulation in Hos 8:6, “It is not a god,” referring to the calf of Samaria.
100. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xiii 13–15, especially the phrase “Yaho, the host of
heaven proclaims to us your rule” (yhw dr šmyn qry ʾln mrwtk).
101. The Aramaic expression is dr šmyn. The Ugarit phrase is dr dt šmm. The “as-
sembly of the stars” is the phr kkbm, for which see KTU 1.10 i 3–5; Simon B.
˘
Parker, ed., Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (WAW 9; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997),
181–186. For the concept of the council of heaven, see E. Theodore Mullen Jr.,
The Assembly of the Gods (HSM 24; Chico, Cal.: Scholars Press, 1980), esp. 195.
102. See, e.g., Job 38:7; Judg 5:20. See also Fabrizio Lelli, “Stars,” DDD 809–815.
103. The texts use the verb brk, “to bless,” in the sense of “to congratulate.” See Pa-
pyrus Amherst 63, xii 18–19; xiii 15–16. See also the references to Yaho’s incom-
parability in Papyrus Amherst 63, xiii 11–12 (“Who is like you, Yaho, among the
Gods?”).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 237 5/7/19 11:50 AM

104. The Aramaic expression is yhh s.bʾt. See Cl.-G. 167; 175. See also the proposed
restoration in TAD D7.35:1–2 (= Cl.-G. 186).
105. See Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, “Yahweh Zebaoth,” DDD 920–924.
106. See, e.g., André Lemaire, “Judean Identity in Elephantine: Everyday Life Ac-
cording to the Ostraca,” in Judah and the Judeans in the Achaemenid Period:
Negotiating Identity in an International Context (ed. Oded Lipschits, Gary N.
Knoppers, and Manfred Oeming; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2011),
365–373, esp. 369.
107. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 18.
108. See, e.g., August von Gall, Die Papyrusurkunden der jüdischen Gemeinde in
Elephantine und ihrer Bedeutung für jüdische Religion und Geschichte (Giessen:
Töpelmann, 1912), 20; Weippert, Historisches Textbuch, 478.
109. For Bethel’s battle against the sea, see the epithet “Destroyer of Yamm” (mʾbd
ym) in Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 16. Note also xi 4–5 (“He throws, he howls
with his thunders, illuminating with fire the places drenched by the sea”). An
allusion to Bethel’s kingship is extant in ix 3 (“He takes precedence over all the
gods”). For the construction of Bethel’s palace, see ix 9–10, 12–13.
110. Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 8–9; x 9–13; xi 1–6.
111. See, e.g., John Day, God’s Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea: Echoes of a Ca-
naanite Myth in the Old Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1985).
112. See especially the story of the contest between Elijah and the Baal prophets
in 1 Kgs 18:20–46. Also see Hermann Gunkel, Elijah, Yahweh, and Baal (trans.
K. C. Hanson; Eugene, Ore.: Cascade, 2014).
113. Another striking example is the phrase “father of the orphan, judge of
the widow,” applied to Bethel in Papyrus Amherst 63, x 17, and to Yahweh in
Ps 68:6.
114. See Papyrus Amherst 63, vii 14–15; xi 11–12. See also the prayer against enemies
in xi 16–20.
115. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 13–17, and see the discussion of Eshem-Bethel
below.
116. Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 16–19.
117. Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 11–12.
118. Quotations from Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 18–20; x 1–4.
119. See Harald Ingholt, Henri Seyrig, and Jean Starcky, eds., Recueil de tessères
de Palmyre (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, Geuthner, 1955), nos. 155, 162 (no in-
scription), 471 (no inscription); cf. nos. 122 (obv. “Symposion of Bel” [ʾgn bl];
rev. “Agli-Bol” and representation of crescent and two bull’s heads), 146 (Agli-
Bol represented by a bull’s head supported by crescent). See the discussion
by Monika Bernett and Othmar Keel, Mond, Stier und Kult am Stadttor: Die
Stele von Betsaida (et-Tell) (OBO 161; Fribourg: Universitätsverlag; Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998), 41.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 238 5/7/19 11:50 AM

120. See Garth Bawden et al., “Preliminary Archaeological Investigations at

Taymā,” Atlal 4 (1980): 69–106 and pls. 60–69, esp. p. 83.
121. See photographs in Garth Bawden, “Khief El-Zahrah and the Nature of
Dedanite Hegemony in the Al-ʿUla Oasis,” Atlal 3 (1979): 63–72 and pls. 44–
49, esp. pl. 49/B; Bawden et al., “Preliminary Archaeological Investigations,”
pl. 69/A.
122. For a photograph, see Bawden et al., “Preliminary Archaeological Investiga-
tions,” pl. 69/B. For drawings of the scenes, see Stephanie Dalley, “The God
S.almu and the Winged Disk,” Iraq 48 (1986): 85–101, esp. 87, figs. 1 and 2.
123. See Basile Aggoula, “Studia aramaica, II,” Syria 62 (1985): 61–76, esp. 70; Mo-
hammed Maraqten, “The Aramaic Pantheon of Taymaʾ,” Arabian Archaeology
and Epigraphy 7 (1996): 17–31.
124. For a thorough study of the Bethsaida stele and a survey of related evidence,
see Bernett and Keel, Mond, Stier und Kult.
125. See Sven P. Vleeming and Jan Willem Wesselius, Studies in Papyrus Amherst 63:
Essays on the Aramaic Text in Aramaic/Demotic Papyrus Amherst 63 (2 vols.; Am-
sterdam: Juda Palache Instituut, 1985–1990), 1:51 (“He adorns the moon in the
sky”); Richard C. Steiner, “The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Text, Trans-
lation, and Notes,” February 28, 2017, at https://www.academia.edu/31662776/
The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script: Text, Translation, and Notes, 43 (“O bow
in heaven, crescent moon”); Tawny Holm, private communication with the
author: “O Bow in Heaven, Śahar (the moon-god).”
126. See Brian Schmidt, “Moon,” DDD 585–593, esp. 590.
127. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xiii 1–10.
128. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 7–14. See Tawny L. Holm, “Nanay and Her
Lover: An Aramaic Sacred Marriage Text from Egypt,” JNES 76 (2017): 1–37.
Note the conjunction of Herem and Anat-Yaho in TAD B7.3:3.
131. The word for “bow” is qšt; cf. Papyrus Amherst xii 16–17: “Some by the bow
(qšt), some by the spear—behold, as for us, my Lord, our God is Yaho!” The
word for “combat hammer” is pt. yš, for which see Helga Weippert, “Hammer,”
BRL, 133–134.
132. The Aramaic term used in the Eshem-Bethel song is h.mt, “venom, poison.”
Against the phrase h.mtk ktnnn, “Your venom is like asps,” compare h.ămat tan-
nînim yênām, “Their wine is the venom of asps” (Deut 32:33). The Hebrew term
in Job 6:4 is the same (h.ămātām, “their poison”).
133. See, e.g., Pss 50:7–23; 60:8–10; 81:7–14; 95:8–11; 132:11–18.
134. According to cuneiform sources, there is divine protection against demons
(“you should know that I have entered into the kidinnu-protection of my lords
[i.e., gods]”) and against human enemies (Babylon is an āl kidinni, “city under
divine protection”). See CAD 8, s.v. “kidinnu.” See also James Nathan Ford,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 239 5/7/19 11:50 AM

“The Ancient Mesopotamian Motif of Kidinnu ‘Divine Protection (of Temple

Cities and Their Citizens)’ in Akkadian and Aramaic Magic,” in Encounters by
the Rivers of Babylon: Scholarly Conversations between Jews, Iranians and Baby-
lonians in Antiquity (ed. Uri Gabbay and Shai Secunda; TSAJ 160; Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2014), 271–283.
135. See Papyrus Amherst 63, vii 13.
136. The scribes of the Amherst papyrus write the name “Eshem-Bethel” as ʾšbytl
(Papyrus Amherst 63, xvi 1, 15) or ʾšʾbytʾl (xvi 14). In view of the orthographic
variants h.nwm (the usual spelling) and h.nwb (TAD A4.5:3, 8; A4.7:5) for the
Egyptian god H . num in the Elephantine papyri, the elision of the mem be-
fore a bet in composite divine names should be no cause for wonder. To mark
the elision, we might adapt the transliteration slightly so as to read either
ʾš<m>bytl or ʾš<b>bytl.
137. For surveys, see Rainer Degen, “Die aramäischen Inschriften aus Taimāʾ und
Umgebung,” in Neue Ephemeris für Semitische Epigraphik (ed. Rainer Degen,
Walter W. Müller, and Wolfgang Röllig; 3 vols.; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz,
1972–1978), 2:79–98 and tables VII–VIII; Klaus Beyer and Alasdair Living-
stone, “Die neuesten aramäischen Inschriften aus Taima,” ZDMG 137 (1987):
285–296; Beyer and Livingstone, “Eine neue reichsaramäische Inschrift aus
Taima,” ZDMG 140 (1990): 1–2; Solaiman Abdal-Rahman al-Theeb, Aramaic
and Nabataean Inscriptions from North-West Saudi Arabia (Riyadh: King Fahd
National Library, 1993), 30–54; Ricardo Eichmann, Hanspeter Schaudig, and
Arnulf Hausleiter, “Archaeology and Epigraphy at Tayma (Saudi-Arabia),”
Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 17 (2006): 163–176, esp. 168. For the first
publication with the correct reading of the name, see Livingstone et al.,
“Taimāʾ: Recent Soundings and New Inscribed Material,” Atlal 7 (1983): 102–
116, esp. 111. Livingstone credits Hamid I. Abu Duruk with the discovery.
138. Erra Epic, tablet I, lines 10, 21–22. See Luigi Cagni, L’epopea di Erra (Studi
Semitici 34; Rome: Istituto di Studi del Vicino Oriente, 1969), 58–60. For
Ishum in general, see Dieter O. Edzard and Claus Wilcke, “Die Hendursanga-
˘
Hymne,” in Kramer Anniversary Volume (ed. Barry L. Eichler; AOAT 25;
Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1976),
139–176, esp. 143; Edzard, “Išum,” RlA 5:213–214, §2. On Ishum as the god of
street-lighting, see Andrew R. George, “The Gods Išum and Hendursanga:
˘
Night Watchmen and Street-Lighting in Babylonia,” JNES 74 (2015): 1–8.
139. See Dennis Pardee, Les textes rituels (2 vols.; Ras Shamra-Ougarit 12; Paris:
Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 2000), 779–806, RS 24.643:31, see dis-
cussion on pp. 801–802. A ritual from Emar speaks of the fifteenth day of the
month as the day of Shaggar, which suggests that Shaggar was more particu-
larly the god of the full moon. See Daniel Arnaud, Recherches au Pays d’Aštata:
Emar VI (4 vols.; Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1985–1987),
vol. 3, no. 373:42 (i-na u.15.kám i-na u-mi š[a-a]g-ga-ri); cf. line 192′.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 240 5/7/19 11:50 AM

140. See the discussion about the lunar aspect of Bethel above.
141. For the name, see Berlin Papyrus 13481:6 = TAD C4.8:6. For the meaning, see
Johann Jakob Stamm, Die akkadische Namengebung (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1939),
43; CAD 8, s.v. “kudurru C.”
142. See Edouard Paul Dhorme, “Les dieux Uraš et Išum,” Orientalische Literatur-
zeitung 12 (1909): 114–115; Jean Bottéro, “Les divinités sémitiques anciennes en
Mésopotamie,” in Le antiche divinità semitiche (ed. Sabatino Moscati; Studi
Semitici 1; Rome: Istituto di Studi Orientali, 1958), 17–63, esp. 43–43. Note the
cautious observations in Edzard, “Išum,” §5.
143. See William Foxwell Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel (Balti-
more: Johns Hopkins Press, 1942), 171, repeated in subsequent editions. Al-
bright has a wide following. See, e.g., William Fulco, “Ashima,” ABD 1:487;
Mordechai Cogan, “Ashima,” DDD 105–106, esp. 106.
144. For the equation of Eshem with Ishum, see Arthur Ungnad, Aramäische Papy-
rus aus Elephantine: Kleine Ausgabe unter Zugrundelegung von Eduard Sachau’s
Erstausgabe (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911), 41; Friedrich Eduard König, “Die Gott-
heit Aschima,” ZAW 34 (1914): 16–30, esp. 23–25.
145. Contra Anneler, Zur Geschichte der Juden, 84.
146. See TAD B7.2:7–8 (“Herem-Bethel the god”); B7.3:3 (“He[rem] the [god]). For
other occurrences, see the Herem names discussed in Chapter 3.
147. See Grelot, Documents araméens d’Égypte, 94; Meir Malul, “Taboo,” DDD
824–827, esp. 824.
148. Contra Holm, who identifies Baal-Shamayin/Hadad as Nanay’s lover (“Nanay
and Her Lover,” esp. 18–19). Holm’s interpretation fails to recognize the paral-
lel between Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 17–19 and xvi 3–4, and it mistakenly links
bšmwhy, “in his heavens” (xvii 14) with “May the Lord bless from Rash” as “In
his heavens, may Mar from Rash bless” (xvii 5).
149. See Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 7–14.
150. See Samuel J. Greengus, “The Old Babylonian Marriage Contract,” JAOS 89
(1969): 505–532, esp. 515–520. One instance of the verba solemnia is found in
Theophilus G. Pinches, “Some Recent Discoveries in the Realm of Assyriol-
ogy, with Special Reference to the Private Life of the Babylonians,” Journal of
the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 26 (1892–1893): 123–185, esp. 154, col. ii,
line 14 (atta lu aššatu anāku lu mutka, “You be my wife, I your husband”).
151. See Samuel Noah Kramer, Le mariage sacré (translated, adapted, and supple-
mented by Jean Bottéro; Paris: Berg International, 1983); Wilfred G. Lambert,
“Devotion: The Language of Religion and Love,” in Figurative Language in
the Ancient Near East (ed. M. Mindlin, M. J. Geller, and J. E. Wansbrough;
London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1987), 25–39; Martti Nis-
sinen and Risto Uro, eds., Sacred Marriages: The Divine-Human Sexual Meta-
phor from Sumer to Early Christianity (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2008);
Nissinen, “Akkadian Rituals and Poetry of Divine Love,” in Mythology and
Y7557-Toorn.indb 241 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Mythologies: Methodological Approaches to Intercultural Influences (ed. Robert M.

Whiting; Melammu Symposia 2; Helsinki: Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Proj-
ect, 2001), 93–136; Nissinen, “Love Lyrics of Nabû and Tašmetu: An Assyrian
Song of Songs?,” in Und Mose schrieb dieses Lied auf: Festschrift Oswald Loretz
(ed. Manfried Dietrich and Ingo Kottsieper; AOAT 250; Münster: Ugarit-
Verlag, 1998), 585–634.
152. See Walter Farber, Beschwörungsrituale an Ištar und Dumuzi: Attī Ištar ša
harmaša Dumuzi (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1977). On the Akkadian harmu,
˘ ˘
see also the observations by Julia Assante, “The kar.kid / harimtu, Prostitute or
˘
Single Woman? A Reconsideration of the Evidence,” UF 30 (1998): 5–96, esp.
13–14 (reference courtesy of Tawny Holm).
153. See CAD 6, s.v. “harīmtu.”
˘
154. See Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 10 (“Kiss his/the Courtesan,” šq lh.rmt).
155. At one time, Tammuz was venerated in Jerusalem (Ezek 8:14), and his cult was
familiar in Palmyra. see PAT, s.v. “tmwzʾ,” with references to secondary litera-
ture. A reference to the wailing for Hadad-Rimmon on the plain of Megiddo
(Zech 12:11) alludes to the cult of the god as a young lover who met an un-
timely death.
156. See TAD B7.3.
157. See DNWSI, s.v. “msgd.”
158. See Tg. Neb. Jer 7:18; 44:17–19, 25. Isaac of Antioch (fifth century CE) inter-
preted the Queen of Heaven as Kaukabta, “the Star.” See Cees Houtman,
“Queen of Heaven,” DDD 678–680, esp. 679.
159. See Urs Winter, Frau und Göttin (OBO 53; Fribourg: Universitätsverlag; Göt-
tingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983), 455–460. For the meaning of the ex-
pression lĕhaʿăs.ibāh, see HALAT, s.v. “ʿs.b I.”
160. See Papyrus Amherst 63, viii 9 (sgd lʿnt, “Bow to Anat”).
161. See Papyrus Amherst 63, ix 16, 20 (šlm for šlmʾ); ix 20 (špr for šprʾ); ix 20, x 7
(klʾ and klt); x 4, 5 (hrtʾ); x 5 (mlkt).
˘
162. See Papyrus Amherst 63, i–v and, more particularly, ii 11 (ml[kt] šmyn).
163. For Nanay as “the maiden,” see Papyrus Amherst 63, xiv 4, 5, 10, 16; xvii 12. For
Nanay as royal wet-nurse, see Amherst Papyrus 63, i 17–21 and parallels. For
Anat as “maiden,” see Neal H. Walls, The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth (SBL
Dissertation Series 135; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), 79–82. For Anat as wet-
nurse, see Walls, Goddess Anat, 152–154.
164. For Nanay as a warrior goddess, see, e.g., the Nanaya Hymn of Sargon II in
Alasdair Livingstone, Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea (SAA 3; Helsinki:
Helsinki University Press, 1989), no. 4. For Anat as warrior goddess, see KTU
1.3 ii; Walls, Goddess Anat, 161–215.
165. Papyrus Amherst 63, xvii 14.
166. See A. Kirk Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles (Texts from Cunei-
form Sources 5; Locust Valley, N.Y.: Augustin, 1975), 102:12. See the comments
Y7557-Toorn.indb 242 5/7/19 11:50 AM

in Francis Joannès and André Lemaire, “Trois tablettes cunéiformes à ono-

mastique ouest-sémitique,” Transeuphratène 17 (1999): 17–34, esp. 24–25.
Chapter 6. Becoming Diaspora Jews

1. See TAD A4.7:13–14 // 4.8:12–13.
2. See Hélène Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau: Ostraca, épigraphes
sur jarre, étiquettes de bois (Paris: de Boccard, 2006), X11:1–2 (ʾlh yhwdyʾ zy
lqh.w prs).
3. Cl.-G.182:3 ([y]hwdy[ʾ zy]).See Lozachmeur,La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 332.
4. Cl.-G. 135:6, 7. See Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 288–289.
5. See TAD B2.2.
6. See the discussion in Chapter 2, section “Ethnicity at Elephantine.”
7. Note especially TAD A3.8:12. As the sender and the recipient of the letter are
both members of the Elephantine community, the reference to the “the Jews”
is not to the community as a whole but to its leadership. Compare also TAD
A4.3:1; A4.3:12.
8. See Jeremiah 43–44, esp. Jer 44:1, 15, where “Pathros” is the name of the southern
province; cf. 2 Kgs 25:25–26.
9. On the Jewish neighborhood and its houses, see Bezalel Porten, Archives from
Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Military Colony (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1968), 94–102; Cornelius von Pilgrim, “VI. Das aramäische
Quartier im Stadtgebiet der 27. Dynastie,” MDAIK 58 (2002): 192–197.
10. See, e.g., Jonathan Hyslop, “Gandhi 1869–1915: The Transnational Emergence of
a Public Figure,” in The Cambridge Companion to Gandhi (ed. Judith M. Brown
and Anthony Parel; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 30–50, esp. 32.
11. See the edition of the letter in TAD A3.3.
12. Cf. Ezek 29:10 (NJPS): “I will reduce the land of Egypt to utter ruin and desola-
tion, from Migdol to Syene, all the way to the border of Nubia.”
13. The father addresses his son both as “my son” and “my brother,” because they
are father and son and, at the same time, brothers in arms. The references to
prskn (“your salary,” (lines 4, 6) and the verbal form tʾtwn (“you come,” line 5)
indicate that the son had left the Nile delta as part of a military convoy or with
his family.
14. The father’s question, “How is the family?” (ʾyk bytʾ ʿbyd, line 6), means that
the son either visited the family in Elephantine or that he brought the family
along.
15. See Laurie E. Pearce and Cornelia Wunsch, Documents of Judean Exiles and West
Semites in Babylonia in the Collection of David Sofer (CUSAS 28; Bethesda,
Md.: CDL, 2014), 13–14.
16. See Jer 48:13; the equation of Bethel and Yaho in Papyrus Amherst 63, xii 11–19;
as well as the occurrence of Anat-Bethel alongside Anat-Yaho, discussed in
Chapter 5.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 243 5/7/19 11:50 AM

17. See Karel van der Toorn, Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel (SHANE
7; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 339–344; Israel Finkelstein, The Forgotten Kingdom: The
Archaeology and History of Northern Israel (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2013), 154.
18. The ethnic designation occurs in the name āl-Yāhūdāya. See Pearce and Wunsch,
˘
Documents of Judean Exiles, 312.
19. There had been a Samarian diaspora since 721 BCE. Neo-Assyrian sources rec-
ognize them as a distinct ethnic group; witness the references to “Samarians.”
See Angelika Berlejung, “Sāmerīna,” RlA 11:623–624. It is unclear whether, a
century later, the Babylonians distinguished between a Judean and a Samarian
diaspora, just as it is unclear whether, after the fall of Jerusalem, Judah became
a separate province or part of the Samarian province.
Kolonie zu Elephantine (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911), 36–40 and table 6; Arthur
Ungnad, Aramäische Papyrus aus Elephantine: Kleine Ausgabe unter Zugrun-
delegung von Eduard Sachau’s Erstausgabe (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911), 13, no. 6
(“Sendschreiben betreffend das Passahfest”). The letter has been reedited as
TAD A4.1.
21. Instead of a complete list, the reader is referred to some of the more significant
studies. See Albert Vincent, La religion des Judéo-Araméens d’Éléphantine (Paris:
Geuthner, 1937), 234–311; Pierre Grelot, “Le papyrus pascal d’Éléphantine et le
problème du Pentateuque,” VT 5 (1955): 250–265; Ingo Kottsieper, “Die Reli-
gionspolitik der Achämeniden und die Juden von Elephantine,” in Religion
und Religionskontakte im Zeitalter der Achämeniden (ed. Reinhard G. Kratz;
Veröffentlichungen der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Theologie 22;
Gütersloh: Kaiser, 2002), 150–178, esp. 150–158; Reinhard G. Kratz, “Temple
and Torah: Reflections on the Legal Status of the Pentateuch between Ele-
phantine and Qumran,” in The Pentateuch as Torah: New Models for Under-
standing Its Promulgation and Acceptance (ed. Gary N. Knoppers and Bernard
M. Levinson; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2007), 77–103, esp. 84–87; An-
gela Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und Kult der Judäo-Aramäer von Elephantine
(AOAT 396; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2014), 341–357.
22. See Baruch M. Bokser, “Unleavened Bread and Passover, Feasts of,” ABD
6:755–765.
23. For references to Pesach in the ostraca, see Cl.-G. 62, rev. 4, for which see Lo-
zachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau, 229–230; TAD D7.6; D7.24.
24. TAD A4.3:7.
25. TAD A4.1:1, cf. 10.
26. The second occurrence of the phrase is in the heading of the collection account
of 400 BCE. See TAD C3.15:1.
27. Kottsieper, “Die Religionspolitik der Achämeniden,” esp. 157.
28. For the expression h.ylʾ swnknyʾ, see TAD C3.14:32. For the Jews’ self-reference
as “Syenians,” see TAD A4.10:6. Hedwig Anneler points out the problematic
fact that the Syenian garrison had a commander (see TAD A5.2:7; last third
Y7557-Toorn.indb 244 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of the fifth century BCE [“garrison commander of Syene”]), while there is

not a single mention of a garrison commander of the Jews (Zur Geschichte der
Juden von Elephantine [Bern: Max Drechsel, 1912], 55–56). Bezalel Porten is not
totally clear on the matter. The second chapter of his book is devoted to the
“Elephantine-Syene Garrison”—a title that suggests there was in fact only one
garrison (Archives from Elephantine, 28). But later in the chapter, Porter writes
that “by the Persian period, both towns [i.e., Syene and Elephantine] had gar-
risons and wharves” (Archives from Elephantine, 36).
29. See Albin van Hoonacker, Une communauté Judéo-Araméenne à Éléphantine, en
Égypte, aux VIe et Ve siècles av. J.-C. (The Schweich Lectures 1914; London:
Oxford University Press, 1915), 82–83 (“Il est evident que cette ‘armée’ dont
Jedonja-bar-Gemarja et consorts sont les chefs, et dont font partie les femmes,
n’est pas autre chose que la société nationale-religieuse des serviteurs de Jahô à
Éléphantine; c’est l’équivalent du qhl ou du ʿm hébreu”).
30. TAD A4.1:2.
31. See, e.g., Vincent, La religion des Judéo-Araméens, 259; Pierre Grelot, Documents
araméens d’Égypte (LAPO 5; Paris: Cerf, 1972), 381. For the use of the term in
connection with the Ezra decree, see, e.g., Reinhard G. Kratz, “Judean Am-
bassadors and the Making of Jewish Identity: The Case of Hananiah, Ezra,
and Nehemiah,” in Judah and the Judeans in the Achaemenid Period (ed. Oded
Lipschits, Gary N. Knoppers, and Manfred Oeming; Winona Lake, Ind.:
Eisenbrauns, 2011), 421–444, esp. 432; Gary N. Knoppers, “The Construction
of Judean Diasporic Identity in Ezra-Nehemiah,” Journal of Hebrew Scrip-
ture 15 (2015): 1–21 (e.g., 8, 10); Dieter Böhler, I Esdras (trans. Linda M. Malo-
ney; International Exegetical Commentary on the Old Testament; Stuttgart:
Kohlhammer, 2016), commentary on 1 Esd 8:8.
32. See Karen Barkey, “Rethinking Ottoman Management of Diversity,” in Democ-
racy, Islam, and Secularism in Turkey (ed. Ahmet T. Kuru and Alfred Stepan;
New York: Columbia University Press, 2012), 12–31; Julia Phillips Cohen, Be-
coming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), esp. xi–xiii.
33. For an illustration of this policy with respect to the Egyptians, compare the
reference to the law codification on the reverse side of the Demotic Chronicle
(see Wilhelm Spiegelberg, Die sogenannte Demotische Chronik des Pap. 215 der
Bibliothèque Nationale zu Paris [Demotische Studien 7; Leipzig: Hinrichs,
1914], esp. 30–32) with the description of the mission of Udjahorresnet (see
Eberhard Otto, Die biographischen Inschriften der ägyptischen Spätzeit [Leiden:
Brill, 1954], 169–173, no. 30, esp. 172–173). For more recent translations, see Mir-
iam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature (3 vols.; Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1973–1980), 3:36–41; Ursula Kaplony-Heckel, “Der Naoforo
Vaticano des Oberartzes Udja-Hor-resenet, 519/8 v. Chr.,” TUAT 1/1.3:603–
608. See also Alan B. Lloyd, “The Inscription of Udjah.orresnet: A Collabora-
tor’s Testament,” JEA 68 (1982): 166–180.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 245 5/7/19 11:50 AM

34. For Jerusalem as “the holy city” (ʿîr haqqōdeš), see Neh 11:1.
35. For the archaeological evidence for the temple demolition and the remains of
a second temple, see Cornelius von Pilgrim, “XII. Der Tempel des Jahwe,”
MDAIK 55 (1999): 142–145; Pilgrim, “VI. Das aramäische Quartier”; Pilgrim,
“Tempel des Jahu und ‘Strasse des Königs’: Ein Konflikt in der späten Perser-
zeit auf Elephantine,” in Egypt: Temple of the Whole World: Studies in Honour of
Jan Assmann (ed. Sibylle Meyer; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 303–317.
36. Among a spate of publications showcasing the destruction of the Yaho temple
at Elephantine as a symbol of “the emergence of an anti-Jewish tradition,”
see David Nirenberg, Anti-Judaism: The Western Tradition (New York: Norton,
2013), 17–19; Peter Schäfer, Judeophobia: Attitudes towards the Jews in the Ancient
World (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997) 121–135.
37. Yedanyah son of Gemaryah, leader of the Jewish community between ca. 420
and 400 BCE (for the dates, see TAD A4.1; C3.15), was a grandson of Mah-
seyah. The genealogical line descends from Mahseyah the elder (born ca.
570 BCE), through Yedanyah the elder (born ca. 540), Mahseyah the younger
(ca. 500–415), and Gemaryah (born ca. 475 BCE), to Yedanyah the younger
(born ca. 450 BCE). Lady Mibtahyah, perhaps the most prominent woman
of the Jewish community around 450 BCE, was the daughter of Mahseyah
the younger and thus a sister of Gemaryah. See, e.g., the discussion in Anna-
lisa Azzoni, The Private Lives of Women in Persian Egypt (Winona Lake,
Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2013), 134–136. For Yedanyah the elder son of Mahseyah
the elder, see the discussion in Lozachmeur, La collection Clermont-Ganneau,
464–465.
38. The translation here offered is based on the second draft (TAD A4.8:3–16), the
damaged parts of which have been supplemented by the first draft of the peti-
tion (A4.7:4–17).
39. See Bezalel Porten, “The Aramaic Texts,” in Porten et al., The Elephantine Papyri
in English: Three Millennia of Cross-Cultural Continuity and Change (2nd rev.
ed.; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011), 75–275, esp. 141.
40. Quotation from TAD A4.7:19–22 // A4.8:18–21.
41. For references to the mourning of the Jewish community, see TAD A4.7:15, 19–21
// A4.8:14, 19–20. For the carpe diem counsel in Gilgamesh, see the Old Baby-
lonian Sippar tablet, iii 6–13, a translation of which is conveniently accessible
in Andrew George, The Epic of Gilgamesh: A New Translation (London: Allen
Lane, 1999), 124. The parallel passage in the book of Ecclesiastes is found in
9:7–9. For the possible relationship between the two, see Karel van der Toorn,
“Echoes of Gilgamesh in the Book of Qohelet?,” in Veenhof Anniversary Vol-
ume (ed. Wilfred H. van Soldt; Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije
Oosten, 2001), 503–514.
42. See TAD A4.8:27–28 // A4.7:29 (“Also, we sent, in our name, all these words
in one letter to Delayah and Shelemyah sons of Sanballat the governor of
Y7557-Toorn.indb 246 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Samaria”). The formulation of the petition to Samaria was a copy of the text
sent to Bagohi.
43. See TAD A4.9.
44. See Ernest Renan, Qu’est-ce qu’une nation? (Paris: Lévy, 1882); repr. in Renan,
Discours et conférences (Paris: Lévy, 1887), 277–310. The phrase here quoted is
a slightly modified version of the sentence “L’oubli, et je dirai même l’erreur
historique, sont un facteur essentiel de la création d’une nation.”
45. The case of the stolen stone can be reconstructed on the basis of six letters: TAD
A3.6; A3.7; A3.8; A4.2; A4.3; A4.4. Their chronological order is TAD A3.7;
A3.6; A4.3 (all from the fall of 411 BCE); A4.2 ( January–February 410); A3.8
(May 410); A4.4 (May–June 410). For a detailed study, see Karel van der Toorn,
“Previously, at Elephantine,” JAOS 138 (2018): 255–270.
46. In TAD A3.7, Hosea son of Natan sends respectful greetings to various women
that participate in the business consortium whose interests he manages in
Memphis. Shelewah was married to Menahem, to be identified with Me-
nahem son of Azaryah, a temple steward (TAD B3.8:44; B2.9:17; C3.13:45, 48;
C3.13:10–19). Yeho-yishma was the daughter of Anani the temple steward
(TAD B3.5; B3.7). Meshullemet was the sister of Yedanyah son of Gemaryah,
the leader of the Jewish community. She was married to Zakkur son of Hosea
son of Zakkur and, thereby, was sister-in-law of Abihi (TAD C3.15:2–3). Abihi
had married Shelomam son of Hodawyah, the brother of Haggus son of Hodo.
Hazzul was the daughter of Hodawyah and thus was the sister of Shelomam
and Haggus and the sister-in-law of Abihi (TAD B6.3 and C3.15:114–115).
47. See the discussion in DNWSI, s.v. “s.rp.”
48. See CAD 16, s.v. “s.arpu A.” A Middle Assyrian text has abnu and s.arpu occur-
ring in the same phrase: “She must not give to any palace official either gold
or silver or precious stones (lu hurās.a lu s.arpa u lu abna).” See Martha T. Roth,
˘
Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor (WAW 6; Atlanta: Schol-
ars Press, 1995), 199. Compare the Syriac s.rāpāʾ, “pure metal.” See Sokoloff,
s.v. “s.rāpāʾ 2.” The association with silver may underlie the Jewish Aramaic
s.arrāp, “money changer.” See DJBA, s.v. “s.arrāpāʾ”; cf. Syriac s.arāpāʾ (same
meaning).
49. See TAD A3.7:4 (“Sell it for gold”; hbh bzhb).
50. Mauzyah son of Natan was from a scribal family, some of whose members served
in the capacity of secretary of the Jewish community. Mauzyah’s full lineage
is Mauzyah son of Natan son of Ananyah son of Hosea son of Hodawyah.
On the scribal family that Mauzyah belonged to, see Porten, Archives from
Elephantine, 193 and n. 19; Alejandro F. Botta, The Aramaic and Egyptian Legal
Traditions at Elephantine (London: T&T Clark, 2009), 40–43; Eleonora Cus-
sini, “The Career of Some Elephantine and Murašû Scribes and Witnesses,”
in In the Shadow of Bezalel: Aramaic, Biblical, and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
in Honor of Bezalel Porten (ed. Alejandro F. Botta; CHANE 60; Leiden: Brill,
Y7557-Toorn.indb 247 5/7/19 11:50 AM

2013), 39–52, esp. 39–40. To their discussion of the evidence, it may be added
that the scribe Ananyah (variant: Anani) was the son of Hosea. See Lozach-
meur, La Collection Clermont-Ganneau, X11:5. In view of the scribal profession
that ran in the family, we may identify this Hosea, father of he scribe Ananyah,
with Hosea son of Hodawyah, who was the secretary-treasurer of the Jewish
community of Elephantine during the first quarter of the fifth century BCE.
See TAD B5.1:9 (495 BCE; as witness); B4.4:1–2, 18 (// B4.3:1–2, 21; 483 BCE;
as scribe); D7.6 (message addressed to Hosea [hwšʿyh], where it is implied that
he is responsible for determining the date of Pesach); D7.24 (with a reference
to a letter order by Rawaka, garrison commander at the time, to be shown to
Hosea).
51. TAD A4.3. Some of the more recent treatments of this letter include “Rec-
ommendation to Aid Two Benefactors,” translated by Bezalel Porten (COS
3.48:119–121); James M. Lindenberger, Ancient Aramaic and Hebrew Letters
(2nd ed.; WAW 14; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003), 67–68, no. 31;
Ingo Kottsieper, “Aramäische Briefe aus Ägypten,” TUAT 2/3.6:360–361;
Anke Joisten-Pruschke, Das religiöse Leben der Juden von Elephantine in der
Achämenidenzeit (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2008), 168–173; Porten, “Aramaic
Texts,” 75–275, esp. 131–133; Rohrmoser, Götter, Tempel und Kult, 388–390.
52. The Aramaic has the term ʾbns.rp, followed by the sign for the numeral one,
implying that it is an item in a (hypothetical) series. The correct translation is
“one precious stone” or “a precious stone, one,” rather than “a precious stone.”
53. See TAD A6.2:23 (411 BCE). For a discussion, see Porten, Archives from Elephan-
tine, 56–57.
54. Ingo Kottsieper argues that Anani combined his duties as chancellor with ac-
tivity as commissioner for Jewish affairs in Egypt (“Die Religionspolitik der
Achämeniden,” 165–166).
55. TAD A4.3:7.
57. This is Simon Schama’s suggestion in The Story of the Jews: Finding the Words,
1000 BCE–1492 CE (London: Bodley Head, 2013), 25. For an earlier suggestion
to the same effect, see Arthur Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C.
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1923), 62.
58. TAD A4.5:1.
59. The contracts contain little evidence of any expansions of the Jewish quarter that
would reflect a growth in number and influence. The only deed of sale where
a Jew buys a house from a non-Jew is B3.4 (437 BCE). For property issues
involving Jews and non-Jews, see TAD B2.2 (464 BCE); B7.2 (401 BCE).
60. See TAD A4.2. For recent treatments of the letter, see Joisten-Pruschke, Das
religiöse Leben, 162–167; Porten, “Aramaic Texts,” 128–130; Rohrmoser, Götter,
Tempel und Kult, 386–388.
61. See TAD A4.7:4–5 // A4.8:4. See also A4.5:2–3.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 248 5/7/19 11:50 AM

62. See TAD A6.4 (Psamshek succeeds his father Ahhapi as pĕqîd, “official”); A6.9
(Nahthor is appointed as new pĕqîd).
63. See TAD A4.5:4; A4.7:5 // A4.8:5; A4.7:7 // A4.8:6; B2.9:4–5. On the function
of frataraka, “governor,” see Jan Tavernier, Iranica in the Achaemenid Period (ca.
550–330 B.C.): Lexicon of Old Iranian Proper Names and Loanwords, Attested in
Non-Iranian Texts (OLA 158; Leuven: Peeters, 2007), 412.
64. See TAD C3.14:35; D3.19:7; C3.14:38 ([mdynt t]št. rs); B3.13:11; C3.19:14. According
to Porten, “It is likely that the two terms in the Aramaic papyri, ‘province of
Thebes’ and ‘province of Tshetres,’ usually taken as two distinct administrative
districts, are actually synonymous” (Archives from Elephantine, 43). Tshetres is
biblical Pathros ( Jer 44:1, 15) and Assyrian Paturisi. Most commentators prefer
to translate mzdyzn as a proper name, because the reference to someone as a
worshipper of a particular deity is unusual in antiquity. See, e.g., Grelot, Docu-
ments araméens d’Égypte, 332–333. I take the term as a deprecative reference to
a Persian official known to Hosea and his superiors for his devotion to the cult
of Mazda. For a dedicatory text of a Mazdean socle by an unknown garrison
commander of Syene (458 BCE), see TAD D17.1.
65. Translation based on this reconstruction of line 3: [ksp lʾ] bydy [k]zy h[š]kh.t k[lyʾ]
⌈b⌉ksp kršn IIIII.
66. See TAD A3.8. For a recent treatment of the letter, see Porten, “Aramaic Texts,”
111–113.
67. See TAD B3.10:24 (404 BCE); C3.15:7 (400 BCE).
68. In view of the name of his father (“Hodo” being the abbreviated form of
“Hodawyah”), Haggus was the brother of Shelomam. This Shelomam was
married to Abihi (the Lady Abihi who was one of Hosea’s clients), the
daughter of Hosea son of Zakkur and the sister of Zakkur son of Hosea son
of Zakkur. For the marriage between Shelomam son of Hodawyah and Abihi,
see TAD B6.3 (ca. 430 BCE). For the ancestry of Abihi, see TAD C3.15:93
(daughter of Hosea), her father to be identified with Hosea son of Zakkur
mentioned in D6.1. For Zakkur son of Hosea son of Zakkur, see TAD C3.15:3,
where he is linked with Meshullemet daughter of Gemaryah son of Mah-
seyah, sister of the leader of the Jewish community, and presumably wife of
Zakkur son of Hosea son of Zakkur. Zakkur, brother of Abihi, was presum-
ably the first witness to her marriage with Shelomam (TAD B6.3:13).
69. TAD A4.4, being a join of Cowley, Aramaic Papyri, nos. 56 and 34. For re-
cent treatments of the letter, see Lindenberger, Ancient Aramaic, 68–70, no. 32;
“Report of Imprisonment of Jewish Leaders,” translated by Bezalel Porten
(COS 3.49:121–122); Porten, “Aramaic Texts,” 134–135; Rohrmoser, Götter, Tem-
pel und Kult, 391–393; Caryn Tamber-Rosenau, “Female Diplomats in Jewish
Elephantine? A New Look at a Papyrus from the Yedaniah Archive,” Journal
for the Study of the Old Testament 40 (2016): 491–510; Bob Becking, “Burglars,
Diplomats, or Victims? Remarks on the Interpretation of a Document from
Y7557-Toorn.indb 249 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Elephantine,” Zeitschrift für Altorientalische und Biblische Rechtsgeschichte 23

(2017): 223–228. The recipient of the report is here tentatively identified as Yis-
lah son of Gaddul son of Yigdal. He belonged to a family of scribes associated
with the Yaho temple and was the paternal uncle of Yislah son of Natan.
70. Line 2 reads, “he went to Syene wʿbd lyhwd[yʾ . . . ].”
71. See TAD A4.10:4–5. For other mentions of Hosea son of Yatom, see TAD B3.5:24
(434 BCE; as witness); C4.4:3 (ca. 410 BCE; in list of names); B3.10:23–24 (407
BCE; as witness). For other mentions of Hosea son of Nattun, see TAD D3:17
(in list of names) and C3.15:50 (400 BCE; listed as contributor to the temple).
For his brother Haggai son of Nattun, see TAD C4.4:1.
72. Rami wife of Hodo was presumably the mother of Haggus and the mother-in-
law of Lady Abihi. Lady Abihi belonged to the business consortium (TAD
A3.7:2).
73. TAD A4.7:4–6.
74. TAD A4.8:3–5.
75. TAD A4.5:2–4.
76. See TAD A4.2:8: “If only we had shown ourselves to Arsames before (he left),
then it would not have been like this [for us].” The letter was written in Janu-
ary–February 410.
77. The memorandum of Bagohi and Delayah of early 406 (?) implies that Ar-
sames is back in Egypt. See TAD A4.9:2–3 (“You may say in Egypt before
Arsames”).
78. For a discussion of the duration of Arsames’s absence, see Godfrey R. Driver,
Aramaic Documents of the Fifth Century B.C. (abr. and rev. ed.; Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1957), 8–10.
79. See also TAD A4.8:28–29 // A4.7:30.
80. See TAD A4.1:2. The earliest mention of Arsames as satrap of Egypt occurs in
a document from 427 BCE (TAD A6.1).
81. See TAD A4.5:10, 19, 21, 22 (mrʾn, restored in line 22).
82. The following terms are old Iranian loanwords with a particular technical nu-
ance: dwškrt, “crime, evil act” (line 3; see Tavernier, Iranica, 448); hmwnyt,
“in agreement with, in league with” (line 4; see Tavernier, Iranica, 411); ywdn,
“grain-house, barley house” (line 5; see Tavernier, Iranica, 441); hndyz, “gar-
risoned, confined in the fortress” (line 7; see Tavernier, Iranica, 451); ʾzd, “in-
quiry” (line 8; see Tavernier, Iranica, 411); typt, “police officer” (line 9; see Taver-
nier, Iranica, 431; Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 50 n. 83); gwšk, “hearer,
member of intelligence system, informer, spy” (line 9; see Tavernier, Iranica,
423); ʾtrwdn, “brazier” (line 17; see Tavernier, Iranica, 461); ʾšrn, “furniture,
equipment” (line 18; see Tavernier, Iranica, 437).
83. See also Ingo Kottsieper, “Die Religionspolitik der Achämeniden,” esp. 159
and n. 34.
84. The reason that Bezalel Porten and Ada Yardeni date this draft in “410 B.C.E. or
slightly later” is presumably the reference to an inquiry by the Persian authori-
Y7557-Toorn.indb 250 5/7/19 11:50 AM

ties to establish the truth of the Jewish allegations. See TAD A4.5:8–10. The
necessity of an inquiry could mean the events were so recent that the central
administration did not know about them yet. Alternatively, though, the refer-
ence is to an investigation ordered by Arsames upon his return to Egypt in
order to find out exactly what had happened in his absence. For the suggested
date of 410 BCE, see TAD A:62; Lindenberger, Ancient Aramaic, 70.
85. For the striking correspondences between the lines about Arsames’s absence,
the role of the priests of Khnub, and the complicity of Vidranga, see TAD
A4.7:4–6; A4.8:3–5; A4.5:2–4. For another similarity, see TAD A4.5:18 (“They
took the equipment and made it their own”), which corresponds with A4.7:12–
13 // A4.8:11–12 (“But the gold and silver basins and other things that were in
that temple—all of these they took and made their own”).
86. TAD A4.5 is a draft of the petition sent to Arsames in Memphis; A4.7 and A4.8
are drafts of the petition sent to Bagohi the governor of Judah. A4.7:29 //
A4.8:28 mentions a written petition sent out to Delayah and Shelemyah sons
of Sanballat the governor of Samaria. TAD A4.9 is the memorandum with a
statement of support by Bagohi and Delayah in response to the petitions they
had received.
87. See TAD A4.8:16–18 // A4.7:17–19.
88. TAD A4.5.
89. Compare the similar phrases in TAD A4.7:7–8 (“Let them demolish the tem-
ple that is in Elephantine the fortress”) // A4.8:6–7 (“Let them demolish the
temple of Yaho the god that is in Elephantine the fortress”) and A4.7:23 //
A4.8:22–23 (“If it please our lord, take thought of that temple to rebuild it since
they do not let us rebuild it”).
90. See Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 287; Kottsieper, “Die Religionspolitik
der Achämeniden,” 159–160; Schama, Story of the Jews, 24.
91. See, e.g., Porten, Archives from Elephantine, 279; Kottsieper, “Die Religionspoli-
tik der Achämeniden,” 160 n. 37.
92. The Aramaic phrase is kzy ms.ryn mrdt wh.ylʾ hndyz hww (TAD A6.7:6). Com-
pare the reference in TAD A6.10:1 (kzy ms.ryʾ mrdw, “when the Egyptians
rebelled”).
93. See TAD A6.7:7. Tawny Holm has proposed to read the name as Inaros,
[y]n[h.]rw (“The Sheikh Fadl Inscription in Its Literary and Historical Con-
text,” Aramaic Studies 5 [2007]: 193–224, esp. 208–209). If the reading is correct,
this cannot be the Inaros of an earlier rebellion, since the latter reportedly
died in Susa in 454. Note the considerations about Inaros in Pierre Briant,
“Ethno-classe dominante et populations soumises dans l’Empire achéménide:
Le cas de l’Égypte,” in Achaemenid History 3: Method and Theory: Proceedings of
the London 1985 Achaemenid History Workshop (ed. Amélie Kuhrt and Heleen
Sancisi-Weerdenburg; Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten,
1988), 137–173, esp. 144 n. 16 (“Le nom d’Inaros est probablement générique en
ce qu’il exprime un sentiment d’hostilité aux étrangers”).
Y7557-Toorn.indb 251 5/7/19 11:50 AM

94. See TAD A6.11:1–2, 4 (kzy ywzʾ hwh bms.ryn, “when there was turmoil in
Egypt”).
95. For this line of interpretation, see Driver, Aramaic Documents, 9; Edda Bre-
sciani, “The Persian Occupation of Egypt,” in The Cambridge History of Iran
(ed. Ilya Gershevitch; 7 vols.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985),
2:502–528, esp. 511.
96. The verb used for the Egyptian insurrection is consistently mrd, “to rebel, to
revolt.” The response to the revolt is also the same: the garrison is summoned
to the fortress to defend it, referred to with the circumlocution hndyz hwy, “to
be garrisoned, to be confined to the fortress.”
97. Contra Briant, “Ethno-classe dominante,” 144–147. See also Briant, Histoire de
l’Empire Perse: De Cyrus à Alexandre (Paris: Fayard, 1996), esp. 620–623. For
a more popularized version, see Briant, “Une curieuse affaire à Éléphantine
en 410 av. n. è.: Widranga, le temple de Yahweh et le sanctuaire de Khnûm,”
Méditerranées 6 (1996): 115–135. The Swiss archaeologist Cornelius von Pilgrim
follows Briant’s interpretation of the events and marshals archaeological evi-
dence to support it. See especially Pilgrim, “Tempel des Jahu.”
98. See TAD A4.9:6; A6.7:7. See also the use of this term to qualify Vidranga in the
petition to Bagohi in TAD A4.7:7 // A4.8:6.
99. Contrast F. Mario Fales who translates klbyʾ as “auxiliaries,” on the basis of
Akkadian kallāb/pu (“Aramaic Letters and Neo-Assyrian Letters: Philological
and Methodological Notes,” JAOS 107 (1987): 451–469, esp. 468–469). James M.
Lindenberger proposes translating kblwhy as “his entrails, guts,” on the basis
of Babylonian qablu (“What Ever Happened to Vidranga? A Jewish Liturgy
of Cursing from Elephantine,” in The World of the Arameans III: Studies in
Language and Literature in Honour of Paul-Eugène Dion [ed. P. M. Michèle
Daviau, John W. Wevers, and Michael Weigl; JSOTSup 326; Sheffield: Shef-
field Academic, 2001], 134–157). Jacob Nahum Epstein was the first to suggest
translating kblwhy as “his anklets,” an ornament purportedly carried as a sign
of rank (“Glossen zu den ‘aramäischen Papyrus und Ostraka,’” ZAW 32 (1912):
128–138, esp. 128).
100. See Laura Kataja and Robert M. Whiting, Grants, Decrees and Gifts of the
Neo-Assyrian Period (SAA 12; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1995), no.
25, recto 31; no. 26, recto 31 (pagaršu in la qebēri libas.s.iru kalbū). For other in-
stances, see CAD 8, s.v. “kalbu,” esp. 1b. For illustrations from the Hebrew
Bible, see 1 Kgs 14:11; 16:4; 21:19, 23, 24; 22:38; 2 Kgs 9:10, 36.
101. The interpretation here advanced implies that the Vidranga mentioned in a
source dated 399 BCE is not our Vidranga but a different man by the same
name, contra Emil G. Kraeling, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri (New
Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1953), 283. Note also the interpretation of
TAD D17.1 advanced in André Lemaire, “Recherches d’épigraphie araméenne
en Asie mineure et en Égypte et le problème de l’acculturation,” in Asia Minor
Y7557-Toorn.indb 252 5/7/19 11:50 AM

and Egypt: Old Cultures in a New Empire (ed. Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg

and Amélie Kuhrt; Achaemenid History 6; Leiden: Netherlands Institute of
the Near East, 1991), 199–206, esp. 199–201.
102. Schama, Story of the Jews, 25.
104. The phrase “anti-Jewish outburst” goes back to Schäfer, Judeophobia, 135, and
the term “proto-pogrom” is found in Schama, Story of the Jews, 24.
Epilogue
1. On the assimilation and Hellenization of the Jewish community of Herak-
leopolis, see James M. S. Cowey and Klaus Maresh, Urkunden des Politeuma
der Juden von Herakleopolis (144/3–133/2 v. Chr.) (P. Polit. Jud.): Papyri aus den
Sammlungen von Heidelberg, Köln, München und Wien (Papyrologica Coloni-
ensia 39; Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag, 2001), esp. 23–29. The papyri offer
no evidence of specifically Jewish judicial practices, although there are refer-
ences to “ancestral law” (patrios nomos). In fact, the occasional application of
a 24 percent interest rate on loans runs against Torah prescriptions. See also
Sylvie Honigman, “Jewish Communities of Hellenistic Egypt: Different Re-
sponses to Different Environments,” in Jewish Identities in Antiquity: Stud-
ies in Memory of Menahem Stern (ed. Lee I. Levine and Daniel R. Schwartz;
TSAJ 130; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 117–135.
Appendix
The translation is adapted from Karel van der Toorn, Papyrus Amherst 63
(AOAT 448; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2018) and published with permission by
Ugarit-Verlag.
Y7557-Toorn.indb 253 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

General Index
Abdi-Anati, 49 Aram, 44–45, 76, 77, 81

Abihi, 247n46, 249n68 Aramaic, 43–45; as daily language of
Abu Simbel, 90 Elephantine Jews, 21–23
Abydos, 121, 129, 130 Arameans: in Babylonia, 44; from
Adonai, 69, 85, 102 Hamath, 45–49
adoption, 216n159 Arashu, 76
Agli-Bol, 79, 80, 106 ark, 101
Ahiqar, 24–27, 146; Demotic, 26–27 arrow, 108
Ahura-Mazda, 23 Arsames, 8, 122, 132, 137, 141; letters
Ahutab, 54 from, 140; petition to, 136–140
Aimé-Giron, Noël, 48–49, 53 Artaxerxes I, 92
Akitu festival, 227n137 Ashima, 49, 87, 106, 109
Aleppo, 43, 53, 76, 210n44 Assurbanipal, 82, 90
altar house, 98 Ater, 33
Al-Yahudu, 114, 120 ʿAttar, 51–52
Amherst, Lord, 3–5, 63 Azri-Yaʾu, 60
amnesia, cultural, 146
Amurru, 78 Baal, 79, 103, 104; temple in Memphis,
Anani, chancellor of satrap in Mem- 96
phis, 130, 132, 137 Baal-Shamayin, 67, 75, 76, 79, 83, 103
Ananyah: son of Azaryah, 205n89, Baʿaltak, 79, 225n101
234n65; son of Haggai, 33; son of Baal-Zaphon, 103
Hosea, 248n50 Babylonia, Arameans from, 53, 81–83
Anat, 47–48, 66, 107, 114; as “maiden” Bagohi, 141, 251n86; petition to,
and “wet-nurse,” 113 137–138, 141
Anat-Bethel, 29–30, 49, 59–60, 66, 67, Bāl, 79
88, 100, 107, 112, 114 Banit, 46, 50–51, 66, 87, 221n76; temple
Anat-Yaho, 29–30, 59, 101, 107, 112, 114 of, 95, 208n10
aniconism, 101 banquet, sacrificial, 98
Anshan, 223n75 Barsippa, 81
anti-Judaism, 141–142 battalion, 38–39, 58, 90; commander,
appendix, 74, 84 216n163; holding fields, 92–93
Apries, 229n5 battle gear, of storm god, 108
Arak, town of, 90 Behistun inscription, 23–24
255
Y7557-Toorn.indb 255 5/7/19 11:50 AM

256 General Index
Bel, 44, 52, 78, 81–83, 86, 225n103 Darga-and-Rash, 77, 108–109
Belat-ayakki, 79, 81 Darius II, 122
Belzoni, Giovanni Battista, 8 decalogue, 11
bethel, 80, 101 Delayah, 141, 251n86
Bethel (god), 29–30, 46–49, 59–60, 65, demons, 239n134
66, 67–68, 70, 73, 76–77, 79, 80, 85, Demotic Chronicle, 245n33
88, 100, 104–106, 112, 120, 202n37; desert, 75, 76; Syrian, 77
and Eshem-Bethel, 109; successor Deuteronomy, 12
of Baal, 104; temple of, 95, 208n10 diaspora, 18–20, 119–120; Aramean,
Bethel (town), 72 42–60; Judean, in Babylonia, 120;
Bethsaida stele, 106 story, 26
boatmen, 56 dogs, 141
Bol, 78–80, 81–82 Dumuzi, 111
Bowman, Raymond, 63 Dura-Europos, 29
bribery, 127, 132, 136, 140
bull: calf image, 101; as divine title, 69, Eanna temple, 81
80, 81, 102, 108 Edessa, 53, 80
burial practices, 54, 214n129 Edfu, 90, 232n54; Jews at, 96; Yaho
business consortium, 128–129, 135 temple at, 96
Efca, 78, 80
calendar, Jewish festival, 121–122, 124, El, 51–52; bull of, 108; sons of, 103
127 Elam, 76
calf: golden, 70; of Samaria, 70, 71, 103 Esarhaddon, 24, 25, 82
Cambyses II, 61, 73, 115 Eshem-Bethel, 29–30, 47–49, 51–52, 66,
caravan: city, 66, 76; route, 90 67, 80, 86, 88, 100, 103, 107–110
Carter, Howard, 4, 21 Eshmun, 110
Caspians, 37–39 Eshor (Natan) son of Zeha, 32, 55,
Cecil, Mary, 3–5, 22, 63 203n52
chancellor, of satrap in Egypt, 130, 132 Espemet son of Peftuaneith, 56
cherubim, 70 ethnicity, 30–41, 145
circumcision, 40 etymology, folk, 110
Clermont-Ganneau, Charles, 5, 10–11, evening star, 79, 85
12, 24
cleruchs, 91, 93 fast, 126
coffin, with Aramaic inscription, 45, ferry, 56, 94
232n48 fire, as divine weapon, 108–109
council of heaven, 103, 237n101 firman, ferman, 122–123
cow, as divine title, 81 fortress, 95
Cowley, Arthur E., 7, 35, 91–92
Creation Epic, Babylonian, 83 Gall, August von, 12
crescent, as divine title, 105–106 garrison: border, 93; cities in Egypt,
90; commander, 42, 92, 121; Jew-
Damascus, 76, 78 ish, 57–58, 95, 122
Daniel, book of, 5, 26 German Papyrus Cartel, 5
Y7557-Toorn.indb 256 5/7/19 11:50 AM

General Index 257
Geshur, 106 Iranians, at Elephantine, 37–39, 58

Gilgamesh Epic, 127 Ishtar, 82, 111
god, anonymous, 80 Ishum, 109–110, 240n138
graffiti, 90, 209nn35,38,39,40, 212n82 ius sanguinis, 14
Grelot, Pierre, 36
Jeroboam, 69–70
Hadad, 44, 52, 76, 79, 80, 81–82, 86, 103, Jerusalem, 114; fall of, 90; holy city, 124;
112, 213n116 temple of, 233n63
Hadad-nuri, 55, 82 Jongeling, Karel, 129
Hadad-Rimmon, 242n155 Judaism, 15–18, 96, 197n49
Haggai son of Shemayah, 57, 201n26, judges, Persian, 42, 92, 99–100, 133
204n62 Judith, 17
Haggus son of Hodo, 132–133, 247n46,
249n68 Khnum, 54, 121, 131, 142, 214n131,
Hamath, 44, 59–60, 65, 67–68, 106; 215n145, 240n136; priests of, 22, 56,
Arameans from, 45–49, 66–68; 98, 126, 130, 139; temple of, 56
fall of, 72 Knauf, Ernst-Axel, 101
Hananyah, 120–124, 130, 137, 146 Korobis, 212n88, 213n116
Han-Ilat, 96 Kottsieper, Ingo, 83, 122
Harwoz, 215n141 Kuhrt, Amélie, 93
Hatti, 78
Hebrew, 144 land-for-service system, 92–93
Herakleopolis, 253n1 Lebanon, 77
Herem-Bethel, 29–30, 47–48, 66, 88, Lemaire, André, 27
100, 101, 110–112, 113 Leontopolis, 96
Hermopolis, 66; letters, 208n10, libations, 214n137, 236n89
214n30 loan, 253n1
Herodotus, 40, 45; at Elephantine, Lozachmeur, Hélène, 9
40, 42 Ludlul bēl nēmeqi, 26
Herta, 79
Hoftijzer, Jacob, 129 Mahseyah son of Yedanyah, 31–32,
Holm, Tawny L., 3, 64 202–203n46
holocaust, 19 Makki-Banit, 91
Hophra, 229n5 Malkiyah son of Yathom, 55
Horesmians, 37–39, 40 Mārat-ʾayāk, 79, 81, 225n102
Hosea: son of Hodawyah, 248n50; son Marduk, 52
of Natan, 128, 129, 131, 133, 136 marriage: contracts, 30; sacred, 85,
house sales, 94 105–106, 110–112
Mason, Steve, 15–16
images, divine, 101 Mattan son of Yashobyah, 34
Inaros, 140, 251n93 matzoth, 121–122
intermarriage, 39, 47; Jewish-Aramean, Mauzyah son of Natan, 129, 247n50
54–55; Jewish-Egyptian, 55 Mazdaism, 249n63
Ioudaios, 15–18 Megiddo, 242n155
Y7557-Toorn.indb 257 5/7/19 11:50 AM

258 General Index
memory, cultural, 146 oasis, 76

Memphis, 90, 128, 129, 130, 134, 141, oath, 29; judicial, 99–100, 101
213n127, 214n130, 229n8; Arameans offerings, temple, 98
in, 46, 48, 50, 66, 91, 96, 228n149 Oppenheim, A. Leo, 61–62, 97
Menahem: son of Azaryah, 234n65, oracle: frozen, 108; for king, 86, 107
247n46; son of Shallum, 236n85 ordeal, 99
mercenaries, 71, 73, 90–95, 144 Orontes, 29, 44, 49, 210n44
Meshullam: son of Natan, 236n85; son orphan, 238n113
of Zakkur, 33, 55, 56, 205n89 ostraca, 22, 28, 116–117
Meshullemet, 247n46 ownership, versus possession, 92, 94
Meyer, Eduard, 12
Mibtahyah: daughter of Mahseyah, Padua letter, 91
32, 55, 56, 95, 203nn46,52, 214n137, palm trees, 78
246n37; sister of Yedanyah, 91 Palmyra, 45, 76–80, 82, 83, 86, 87–88,
Migdol, 90, 91, 119 90, 106, 144–145
military colony, 89, 93 Paltiyah (Pilti), 56
millet system, 123 pantheon, of Elephantine, 28, 201n27
misthophoroi, 91 Papyrus Amherst 63, 62–88; translated
mobilization, of the troops, 95 text of, 149–187
moon: associated with Ishum and Passover Papyrus, 121
Eshem, 109; as divine manifesta- Pathros, 90, 112, 249n64
tion, 103, 105–107; god, 106; new, perennial source of water, 66, 75, 80
85, 105 perjury, 99
Morgan, J. Pierpont, 63 Pesach, 28, 121, 130–131, 201n31
Mormon, Book of, 63 Phoenicians, 40
mummy label, 209nn30,40 pluralism, religious, 66, 74, 80
polytheism, Jewish, 28, 201n28
Nabu, 44, 46, 49–51, 53, 65, 66, 76, 79, Porten, Bezalel, 9, 13–15, 18, 19–20, 35,
81–83, 85–86; priest of, 232n48; 38, 57, 89, 130, 142
temple of, 95, 96, 208n10 priest of Yaho temple, 55, 57, 97
Nanay, 51, 65, 66, 75, 76, 79, 81–82, prison, 133, 134–135
85–86, 101, 110–111, 211n76, 225n103; Psammetichus the Younger, 90
as Queen of Heaven, 86; temple Ptah, 214n130
of, 86
Naphaina son of Vidranga, 141 Qonyah son of Zadaq, 32, 206n98
Natan son of Ananyah, 200n26 Queen of Heaven, 30, 46, 48, 59, 65, 66,
nation, 123–124, 127 85, 112–114; temple of, 95, 208n10
nationalism, religious, 124
Nebuchadnezzar II, 87 rainbow, 108
necropolis, 206n97 Rash, 76–77, 81; god of, 77
Nergal, 52–53, 83 religion, concept of, 15–18
New Year, 65; festival, 69, 70, 85–86, 105 Renan, Ernest, 127, 146
Nongbri, Brent, 16 Resheph, 225n103
Nushku, 51–52 retribution, divine, 99
Y7557-Toorn.indb 258 5/7/19 11:50 AM

General Index 259
revolt, Egyptian, 136–142 storehouse, royal treasury, 91, 95, 139

Rubensohn, Otto, 5, 6 storm god, 104, 106, 108, 144
S.ulmu, 106
Sachau, Eduard, 6, 7, 10 sun, as divine manifestation, 103, 105
sacrifices, 214n137 syncretism, 20, 54, 59
Samaria, 17, 69–73, 87–88 Syria, 45
Sanballat, 251n86 Syrians, 40–41, 45
Saqqara, 206n97, 208n9
Sargon II, 72 Tahpanes, 90
Sati, 54, 215n141 Tamet (Tapamet), 203n58, 205n89
satrap, 127, 130, 132, 137, 139 Tammuz, 112, 242n155
Sayce, Archibald Henry, 5 Tarsus, 212n82
Schama, Simon, 18, 142 Tartan, 226n125
scholar, tale of the slandered, 26 taxes, land, 93, 231n33
school, 27 Tayma, 106, 109
scribal education, 24–25, 27 temple: community, 95–100; greetings,
scribes, 57, 99; Jewish, 91, 204n62, 98, 120; personnel, 68
247n50 Thebes, 90, 134–135, 214n130; province
sea monster, 83 of, 132, 135
secretary, of Jewish community, 129 theophoric names, 28, 46–53
Sennacherib, 24, 71, 84 throne, deified, 226n113
serenade, 111 Tobit, 17, 25–26, 146
Shabbat, 28, 201n31 Torah, 101, 146, 253n1
Shaggar, 109, 240n139 tower houses, 118
Shalma(t), 79 Tshetres, province of, 132
Shamash, 53, 83, 211n60 Two Brothers, Tale of, 65, 71, 74, 82–83,
Shamashshumukin, 82, 84 84–85
Shapira, Moses Wilhelm, 11 Tyre, 72
Shegal, 106
Shelomam son of Hodawyah, 247n46, Ubil daughter of Shatibara, 38
249n68 Udjahorresnet, 245n33
Shillem son of Meshullam, 204n59 Uriyah, 214n137
Sin, 51–52 Uriyah son of Mahseyah, 57
Siyan, 49, 65, 67 Uruk, 81
slaves, Egyptian, 57
Smith, George, 11–12 venom, 108
Smith, William Cantwell, 17 Venus star, 106, 113
soldiers, 144; frontier, 89 Vidranga, 130, 132, 136–142
Solomon, 78 Vleeming, Sven P., 72
Spiegelberg, Wilhelm, 218n12 Volterra, Edoardo, 35
stars, 103; assembly of, 103
Steiner, Richard, 2, 63–64, 65, 72, 76, 85 wall inside fortress of Elephantine, 139
steward of Yaho temple, 56, 97, 203n58 warrior god, 104, 108, 144
stone, story of the stolen, 128–136 Wellhausen, Julius, 12
Y7557-Toorn.indb 259 5/7/19 11:50 AM

260 General Index
well inside fortress of Elephantine, Yahweh: of Samaria, 70; S.ebaoth, 97, 103
95, 139 Yamm, 84, 104
Wesselius, Jan Willem, 72 Yardeni, Ada, 9
widow, 238n113 Yarhi-Bol, 79, 80
Wilbour, Charles Edwin, 7 Yaron, Reuven, 39
wine, 107; new, 69 Yaʾu-bidi, 60
witnesses: Arameans as, 57; to con- Yedanyah (Didi), 56
tracts, 30; Iranians as, 38; to oaths, Yedanyah son of Gemaryah, 54,
100 125–127, 129, 135, 202n46, 246n37
Yeho-yishma, 33, 204n63, 205n89
Yaho, 102–107; in Amherst papyrus, Yezanyah son of Uriyah, 214n137
69, 85; of Hosts, 103; identified Yislah son of Natan, 134–135, 250n69
with Bethel, 104; kingship of, 69,
85; at Palmyra, 80; orthography Zadak son of Qon, 206n98
of, 27, 102, 200–201n26; Throne Zakkur: of Hamath, 68; inscription,
of, 80 67; son of Hosea, 247n46; son of
Yaho temple, 56, 95–98, 208n10, Meshullam, 204n59, 215n149
214n137; demolition of, 125–128; Zion, 97, 114
136–142; at Edfu, 96; at Leon- Zoroastrianism, 232n52
topolis, 96
Y7557-Toorn.indb 260 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Index of Ancient Sources
Hebrew Bible 2 Kings

9:10, 36 252n100
Genesis 10:29–31 237n96
28:10–22 236n88 Chapter 17 87
Exodus 17:16 237n96
13:20 226n110 17:24–41 60
Chapter 32 221n48, 236n88, 17:30 49, 60, 87
237n96 25:25–26 243n8
25:26 217n5
Numbers
33:6, 7, 8 226n110 Isaiah
8:18 233n61
Deuteronomy
9:13–21 237n96 Jeremiah
26:5 44 16:5 234n68
32:33 239n132 42:1–43:7 229n5
Chapters 43–44 217n5, 243n8
Judges Chapter 44 59, 66, 87
5:20 237n102 44:1 90, 243n8, 249n64
44:15–28 112
1 Samuel 44:15 243n8, 249n64
1:9–10, 20 221n46 44:29–30 229n5
1 Kings 48:13 30, 60, 70, 243n16
9:18 224n92 Ezekiel
Chapters 11–12 237n96 8:14 242n155
12:25–33 221n48, 236n88 29:10 243n12
12:28, 32 70
13:33–34 237n96 Hosea
14:1 252n100 8:5–6 237n96
14:7–11 237n96 8:5 221n48
16:4 252n100 8:6 221n48, 237n99
18:20–46 238n112 10:5–6 237n96
21:19, 23, 24 252n100 10:5 221n48
22:38 222n61, 252n100 13:2 237n96
261
Y7557-Toorn.indb 261 5/7/19 11:50 AM

262 Index of Ancient Sources
Joel 1:2 197n60

4:17, 21 233n61 1:6, 10 197n61
1:17–18 198n62
Amos 1:21–22 200n18
4:1 72 2:3 198n62
6:4–6 72 2:10 200n18
6:7 234n68 11:18–19 200n18
Zechariah 14:8–9 197n61
7:2 202n44 14:10 200n18
12:11 242n155 14:16–17 197n61
Psalms Judith
Psalm 20 69, 84, 104, 146 6:17 198n63
50:7–23 239n133 7:17 198n63
60:8–10 239n133 8:1 197n59
68:6 238n113 8:3–4 197n60
81:7–14 239n133 8:21 197n61
95:8–11 239n133 12:1–4 197n61
106:19 237n96 13:14 198n63
132:11–18 239n133 15:8 198n63
137:5 114 15:9 17, 197n61
16:21, 23 197n60
Job
6:4 108, 239n132 2 Maccabees
38:7 237n102 2:21 197n49
8:1 197n49
Ecclesiastes 14:38 197n49
9:7–9 246n41
Ezra
West Semitic Inscriptions
2:16, 42 203n59
7:12–26 122 KAI
222A:5 222n72
Nehemiah
227 202n36
7:21, 45 203n59
268 212n84
10:18 203n59
11:1 246n34 TAD
2 Chronicles A2.1–7 208n10
8:33 78 A2.1:1 208n10, 212n90,
11:15 237n96 219n26, 234n69
13:8 237n96 A2.1:2 210n58, 214n130
A2.1:3 208n15, 209n33
Apocrypha A2.1:8 212n88
A2.1:15 210n58, 212n90
Tobit A2.2:1 208n10, 212n88,
1:1–2 197n59 219n26, 234n69
Y7557-Toorn.indb 262 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Index of Ancient Sources 263
A2.2:2 210n58, 212n81, A4.1:2 245n30, 250n80

214n130 A4.2 214n130, 247n45,
A2.2:4 212n90 248n60
A2.2:5–6 212n80 A4.2:1 214n133
A2.2:5 212n86 A4.2:8 250n76
A2.2:6 210n58 A4.2:11 213n127, 215n147
A2.2:18 212n88 A4.3 247n45, 248n51
A2.3 229n12 A4.3:1, 12 204n68, 214n133,
A2.3:1 208n10, 212n88, 234n65, 243n7
219n26, 234n69 A4.3:7 244n24, 248n55
A2.3:2 212n87, 214n130 A4.4 247n45, 249n69
A2.3:5 213n123 A4.4:5 214n139
A2.3:14 210n55, 212nn79, 88 A4.4:7 214n133
A2.4:1 208n10, 212n88, A4.5 194n14, 232n45,
219n26, 234n69 251nn86, 88
A2.4:2 214n130 A4.5:1 199n8, 206n95,
A2.4:14 212n88 216n161, 248n58
A2.5:1 212n88 A4.5:2–4 250n75, 251n85
A2.5:2 214n130 A4.5:2–3 248n61
A2.5:6 209n28 A4.5:3, 8 235n71, 240n136
A2.6:1 214n130 A4.5:4 249n63
A2.6:8 212n86 A4.5:8–10 251n84
A2.7:1, 5 212n102 A4.5:10 250n81
A3.1:3 210n55 A4.5:18 251n85
A3.1 rev. 1 211n64 A4.5:19, 21, 22 250n81
A3.1 rev. 4, 6 210n55 A4.7:1 214n133, 234n65
A3.2:1 208n14 A4.7:4–17 246n38
A3.3 243n11 A4.7:4–6 250n73, 251n85
A3.3–4 195n25 A4.7:4–5 248n61
A3.3:1 201n30, 233n58, A4.7:5 235n71, 240n136,
234n69 249n63
A3.3:3–5 229n11 A4.7:7–8 251n89
A3.4:3 210n50 A4.7:7 249n63, 252n98
A3.6 247n45 A4.7:9–13 233n60, 236n89
A3.7 214n130, 234n65, A4.7:12–13 251n85
247nn45, 46 A4.7:13–14 217n3, 243n1
A3.7:2 250n72 A4.7:13 198n6
A3.7:4 247n49 A4.7:15 246n41
A3.8 214n130, 247n45, A4.7:17–19 251n87
49n66 A4.7:19–22 246n40
A3.8:9 209n19, 215n147 A4.7:19–21 246n41
A3.8:12 243n7 A4.7:22 204n70, 205n77
A3.9 214n130 A4.7:23 251n89
A4.1 202n46, 244n20 A4.7:25–28 234n67
A4.1:1 214n133, 244n25 A4.7:25 202n39
Y7557-Toorn.indb 263 5/7/19 11:50 AM

TAD (continued) A6.3–16 195n27

A4.7:26–27 204n70 A6.4 249n62
A4.7:29 246n42, 251n86 A6.7:6 251n92
A4.8:1 214n133, 234n70, A6.7:7 251n93, 252n98
235n74 A6.9 249n62
A4.8:3–16 246n38 A6.9:2, 4, 5, 6 230n18
A4.8:3–5 250n74, 251n85 A6.10:1 251n92
A4.8:4 235n71, 248n61 A6.11:1–2, 4 252n94
A4.8:5, 6 249n63 A6.12:1 230n18
A4.8:6–7 251n89 A6.13:4 231n33
A4.8:6 252n98
A4.8:8–12 233n60, 236n89 B1.1 231n27
A4.8:11–12 251n85 B1.1:16 212n89, 213n116
A4.8:12–13 217n3, 243n1 B2.1 198n3
A4.8:12 198n6 B2.1:2–3 203n48
A4.8:14 246n41 B2.1:2 203n54, 206n101,
A4.8:16–18 251n87 216n163
A4.8:18–21 246n40 B2.1:9 203n47
A4.8:19–20 246n41 B2.1:13 215n142
A4.8:21–22 204n70, 205n77 B2.1:16 205n89
A4.8:22–23 251n89 B2.1:17 205n89
A4.8:25–27 234n67 B2.1:18–19 215n155
A4.8:25–26 204n70 B2.1:18 205n89, 210n53
A4.8:27–28 246n42 B2.1:19 212n85
A4.8:28–29 250n79 B2.2 198n3, 206n99,
A4.8:28 251n86 207n102, 243n5,
A4.9 247n43, 251n86 248n59
A4.9:2–3 250n77 B2.2:2–3 205nn82, 91, 206n92
A4.9:3 234n66 B2.2:2 206n98
A4.9:6 252n98 B2.2:3–4 202n45, 203n49
A4.9:9–11 234n67 B2.2:3 205n77, 206nn97,
A4.10:1 214n133 101
A4.10:4–5 250n71 B2.2:4 216n168, 235n78,
A4.10:6 204n69, 205n79, 236n80, 237n91
216n160, 231n35, B2.2:8–9 203n55, 206n98
244n28 B2.2:9–10 214n137
A4.10:10–11 234n67 B2.2:9 206n101, 216n163
A5.2 230n23 B2.2:10–11 215n142
A5.2:4 231n27 B2.2:10 206n101
A5.2:7 244n28 B2.2:17 214n139
A5.4:2 235n71 B2.2:19 210n57, 212n96,
A6.1 230n33, 250n80 213nn114, 115,
A6.1:7 213n112 214n135, 215n155,
A6.2:23, 28 211n67, 248n53 226n123
Y7557-Toorn.indb 264 5/7/19 11:50 AM

B2.2:21 206n99 B2.10:2 206n101

B2.3:1–2 203n50 B2.10:18 202n46, 236n85
B2.3:2 205n77, 216n163 B2.11 215n148
B2.3:3 206n97 B2.11:2 203n57, 206n101,
B2.3:5 205n89 216n163
B2.3:27–28 212b93, 213n105 B2.11:14 211nn61, 62
B2.3:28 211n62 B3.1 203n58, 215n150
B2.3:30 204n59 B3.1:3 204n60, 206n101
B2.3:35–36 203n47 B3.2 234n65
B2.4:1–4 214n137 B3.2:10 213n127
B2.4:1–2 203n51 B3.2:11–14 215n155
B2.4:2 205n77, 206n101, B3.2:11 210nn51, 52, 212n94,
216n163 213n109
B2.4:16 211n62, 212n93, B3.2:12 213n125
213n105 B3.2:13 212n103, 213n127
B2.6 202n41, 203n52, B3.3 202n41, 215n152
214n138 B3.3:2–3 204n61
B2.6:2 206n101 B3.3:2 201n26, 206n101,
B2.6:3 216n163 233n61
B2.6:39 205n89 B3.3:3 216n163
B2.7:1–2 203n53 B3.4 248n59
B2.7:2 206n101, 216n163 B3.4:2 205nn84, 85, 90,
B2.7:3 203n58, 215nn149, 150 206n97
B2.7:4–6 232n46 B3.4:4 205n88
B2.7:14 200n56 B3.4:23 204n62, 205n89,
B2.7:15 215n141, 235n71 216n158
B2.7:18 205n89 B3.4:24 205n89
B2.7:19 204n62, 205nn83, 89, B3.4:25 201n26
91, 206n92, 216n58 B3.5 247n46
B2.8:3 206n101, 216n163 B3.5:2 233n61
B2.8:4 235n78 B3.5:3–4 205nn86, 90
B2.8:5 214n31 B3.5:11 206n99
B2.8:11 210n55 B3.5:24 205nn81, 89, 232n52,
B2.8:12 210nn55, 56 250n71
B2.8:13 210n56, 213n127, B3.6:2 204n62, 206n101,
215n155 211n63, 216n163
B2.9 207n103 B3.6:15–16 204n62, 216n158
B2.9:2 206n101, 211n63, B3.6:16–17 205n89
216n163 B3.6:16 216n163
B2.9:3–4 203n56 B3.7 247n46
B2.9:3 206n101 B3.7:7 205n89
B2.9:4–5 249n63 B3.7:8 215n140
B2.9:7 230n24 B3.8 202n41, 204n63
B2.9:17 234n65, 247n46 B3.8:1–2 204n64, 205n80
Y7557-Toorn.indb 265 5/7/19 11:50 AM

TAD (continued) B4.2:5–6 230n16

B3.8:2 206n101, 211n63, B4.2:12 213n122, 215n155
2216n163 B4.2:14 202n46
B3.8:43 204n62, 216n158 B4.2:23 212n95, 213n111
B3.8:44 214n133, 234n65, B4.3 209n20, 230nn17, 22
247n46 B4.3:1–2 248n50
B3.9 215n153, 216n159 B4.3:9 217n166
B3.9:2, 3 206n101 B4.3:21 248n50
B3.9:9 213n120 B4.3:22–24 215n155
B3.9:10–12 215n155 B4.4 230nn17, 22
B3.9:10 212n103, 213n114 B4.4:1–2 248n50
B3.9:11 209nn17, 21, 41, 42, B4.4:6 209nn20, 27, 217n166
210n60, 212n99 B4.4:8 211n60
B3.9:12 209n34, 212n101 B4.4:10 209n20, 209n27,
B3.10:2 233n61 217n166
B3.10:10 215n140 B4.4:12 230n18
B3.10:23–24 250n71 B4.4:18 248n50
B3.10:23 204n62, 216n158 B4.4:19–21 215n155
B3.10:24 249n67 B4.4:19 212n95, 213n111
B3.11:2 233n61 B4.5:1 206n101
B3.11:6 215n140 B5.1:9 248n50
B3.11:8 204n63 B4.5:2 206n101, 210n53,
B3.11:17 204n62, 216n158 216n163
B3.11:20 214n133 B4.6 204n62, 216n158,
B3.12 203n58 236n85
B3.12:2–3 204n65, 205n80 B4.6:2 206n101, 210n53,
B3.12:2 206n101, 233n61 216n163
B3.12:3 210n53, 216n163 B4.7:1 212nn91, 99
B3.12:4–5 205n88, 206n94 B5.1 230n25
B3.12:4 205n88 B5.1:3 230n25
B3.12:18–19 201n33 B5.1:9 214n136
B3.12:19 205n89 B5.2:2 204n67, 205n78,
B3.12:20 215m145 206n101
B3.12:32 204n62, 216n158 B5.2:4 230n25
B3.13 204n66, 207n104 B5.3:9 214n139
B3.13:1–2 217n165 B5.5:2 206n101, 216n163
B3.13:2 206n101, 210n53, B5.5:8 230nn18, 19
216n163 B5.5:10 230n19
B3.13:4 204n63, 230n18 B5.5:12 213n127
B3.13:5 230n18 B6.1–4 202n41
B3.13:11 249n64 B6.1:2 206n101, 211n63,
B3.13:12 212n99 216n163
B3.13:13 236n85 B6.3 247n46, 249n68
B4.2 194n14 B6.3:13 249n68
Y7557-Toorn.indb 266 5/7/19 11:50 AM

B6.4 202n41 C3.13:10–19 234n65, 247n46

B6.4:9 208n15, 209nn31, 34 C3.13:45 247n46
B6.4:10 208n15 C3.13:46–47 236n85
B7.1:2 206n101, 211n63, C3.13:48 247n46
216n163 C3.13:54 210n48, 217n166
B7.1:4 235n78, 236n80, C3.13:57 213n110
237n91 C3.14 230nn17, 22
B7.1:5 235n77 C3.14:1 212n99
B7.2 206n99, 248n59 C3.14:2 210n60, 216n159
B7.2:2 206n101 C3.14:4, 11 216n159
B7.2:3–4 206n97 C3.14:13 211n60, 213n121
B7.2:3 210n53, 216n163 C3.14:14 n213n118
B7.2:6 235m78 C4.14:32 215n156, 244n28
B7.2:7–8 202n40, 235n78, C3.14:35, 38 249n64
236n84, 241n146 C3.15 202n46, 236n82
B7.2:8–10 235n79 C3.15:1 244n26
B7.3 242n156 C3.15:2–3 247n46
B7.3:1–3 235n78 C3.15:3 249n68
B7.3:3 202n40, 236n85, C3.15:4 214n139
239n128, 241n146 C3.15:7 249n67
B8.4:1 211nn72, 73 C3.15:6 214n136
B8.4:3 209nn25, 26, C3.15:19 213n113, 217n166
213nn106, 108 C3.15:20 210n48, 217n166
B8.4:7 211n65 C3.15:23 213n115, 214n134
B8.4:13 211n73, 213n106 C3.15:50 250n71
B8.6:8 209n25 C3.15:82, 84 214n139
B8.7:2, 3, 6, 9, 10 213n127 C3.15:93 249n68
B8.9:5 235n78 C3.15:111 209n33, 214n136
B8.10:7 213n127 C3.15:114–115 247n46
C3.15:124 214n133
C1.1 199n13 C3.15:126–128 202n34
C1.1 i 1 199n16 C3.17:10 214n139
C1.1 ix 6 232n47 C3.19:14 249n64
C2.1 199n11 C3.28:85, 113, 114 233n55
C3.5:7 231n30 C4.2:5 213n104
C3.5:11 232n50, 235n71 C4.2:8 213n117
C3.6:10 211n74 C4.2a:2 211n68
C3.6:11 209n27 C4.3:12, 16 209n23
C3.6:12 209n29 C4.3:20 209n24
C3.8 IIIA:12 21n66 C4.4:1 250n71
C3.8 IIIB:28 211n71 C4.4:2 214n139
C3.13 199n12, 234n67, C4.4:3 250n71
236n89 C4.4:6 214n139
C3.13:1–9 214n133 C4.4:9 208n12
Y7557-Toorn.indb 267 5/7/19 11:50 AM

TAD (continued) D5.10:2 235n71

C4.4:11 210n48, 217n166 D5.37:8 208n12
C4.6:5 214n139 D6.1 249n68
C4.6:14 215nn151, 153 D7.1:13 231n36
C4.8:6 212n98, 241n141 D7.2:2 231n36
C4.8:8 210n54, 212nn92, 99 D7.2:4 215n146
C4.8:9 213n1w7 D7.5:6 232n41
C4.9 ii 2 211n69 D7.6 244n23, 248n50
D7.6:9–10 201n31
D1.1 208n10 D7.7:2 231n36
D1.1:2 214n130 D7.7:6 232n40
D1.1:8 210nn53, 55 D7.7:7 231n37
D1.6b 201n30, 233n58 D7.8:13 231n36
D1.13 236n85 D7.9 214n137
D1.17:3 232n54 D7.9:3–5 215n154
D1.33d:2 213n119 D7.9:10–12 230n15
D2.2:5 213n111 D7.10:3 231n36
D2.3 206n98 D7.10:5 201n31
D2.3:2 206n101 D7.10:7 231n37
D2.4:2 206n101 D7.12:4 231n36
D2.5:2 206n101 D7.12:9 201n31
D2.6:2 211n63, 216n163 D7.14:2, 6 231n38
D2.7a:2 206n101 D7.16 201n32, 236n81
D2.10:2 206n101 D7.16:1 232n42
D2.10:9 205n89 D7.16:2 201n31
D2.12 207n105 D7.16:5 231n36
D2.12:2–3 205n87, 206n92, D7.18 214n137
206n96 D7.18:2–3 201n30, 208n10,
D2.12:3 206n97 233n58
D2.12:4 206n101 D7.19:5 231n36
D2.25:8 213n107 D7.21:3 214n131
D2.25:9 208n11 D7.24 244n23, 248n50
D3.12 230n18 D7.24:5 201n31
D3.13:3 208n15 D7.25:9 208n12
D3.13:4 208n13, 209n17 D7.27 231n33
D3.17 230n18 D7.28:2 231n36
D3.17:1–2 236n85 D7.28:4 201n31
D3.17:9 236n85 D7.29 234n68
D3.17:10 214n139 D7.35:1–2 201n32, 238n104
D3.19:7 249n64 D7.35:5 231n36
D3.39b 206n97 D7.35:7 201n31
D3.39b:4 211n64 D7.35:8 232n41
D4.9:1 201n30, 233n58 D7.36:4 232n41
D4.29:2 213n111 D7.37:3 232n41
Y7557-Toorn.indb 268 5/7/19 11:50 AM

D7.40:8 211n63 14 201n32, 236n81

D7.41:2 208n15 14:3 231n36
D7.44, 45 231n36 15:2 231n36
D7.48:3 231n36 17 214n137
D7.48:5 201n31 20 201n32, 236n81
D7.50:2 231n36 22:7, 10 231n36
D9.9:14 208n16 25:2 231n36
D9.10 214n139 33:2 231n36
D9.10:2 208n15 41 201n32, 236n81
D9.10:4 210n55 41:17 232n41
D9.10:5 210n50, 213n124 44:5 201n31
D9.10:7 209n18 50:3 231n36
D9.11 206n96 55:7 232n42
D9.13:3 208n12 56 201n32, 236n81
D11.12:1 210n49 62 rev. 4 244n41
D11.12:2 210n59 96 214n139
D15.1–4 229n8 108 231n38
D17.1 249n64, 25n101 109:1 232n40
D18.1 207n9, 232n48, 112:1 231n36
233n61, 235n71 112:6 231n38
D18.2 209n37, 235n71 115:3 232n42
D18:6 209n36 115:6, 9 232n40
D18.7 209nn30, 32, 40 115:13 231n38
D18.10 209n36 120:2–3 231n36
D18.16, 17, 18 208n9 126:5 232n41
D19.2 209nn30, 32, 40 126:6 232n42
D19.3 209n30 128:2, 4 232n42
D20.1:1, 3 212n84 128:9 231n36
D21.2 234n65 133:2–3 231n36
D21.17 232n51 135 206n99
D22.5, 6 209n38 135:6, 7 243n4
D22.13 213n117 143 214n139
D22.18 209n40 152 201n32, 236n81
D22.18:1–2 212n97 15:2 201n31
D22.36 209n35 154:1 231n36
D22.53 209n39 154:2 232n41
D23.1 ii 9 235n71 159:2 231n38
167 238n104
Cl.-G. 167:1 201n32
2:2 203n47 170:4–5 230n15
2:3 231n36 174 201n32, 236n81
3:2 232n40 175 238n104
11:4 231n36 177 214n139
13:2 231n36 181 212n83
Y7557-Toorn.indb 269 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Cl.-G. (continued) X2 217n166

182:3 243n3 X7:3 231n36
185 201n32, 236n81 X11 230n14
186:1–2 201n32 X11:1–2 243n2
186:7 201n31 X11:5 248n50
203 215n144 X16 201n32, 236n81
205:4 201n31
220 215n144 J2:8, 11 231n36
233:3 232nn41, 42 J3:2 232n41
235:11–14 230n15 J7:20–21 231n36
237:3 231n38 J8 201n32, 236n81
241:2 231n38 J8:9 201n32
241:3 232n39 J9 215n149
246:2 232n42 J9:1 204n59
269:1 213n117 J9:9 204n59
280:8 232n41
280:10–11 231n36
Y7557-Toorn.indb 270 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Becoming Diaspora Jews - Behind - Karel Van Der Toorn

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Becoming Diaspora Jews - Behind - Karel Van Der Toorn

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Y7557-Toorn.indb i 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The series is committed to producing volumes in the tradition

Y7557-Toorn.indb ii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

karel van der toorn

Y7557-Toorn.indb iii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Copyright © 2019 by Yale University.

Yale University Press books may be purchased in quantity for educational,

Set in Adobe Caslon type by Newgen North America.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2019930737

This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence

Y7557-Toorn.indb iv 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb v 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Appendix: Translation of Papyrus Amherst 63,

Y7557-Toorn.indb vii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb ix 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb x 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb xi 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb xiii 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb a 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb 1 5/7/19 11:50 AM

start of a stream of follow-up publications. Elephantine studies continue to

New Light on the Elephantine Jews

Y7557-Toorn.indb 2 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The Discovery of Elephantine

Y7557-Toorn.indb 3 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Amherst of Hackney. Her father was a longtime collector of things of

Today, Howard Carter is a name in Egyptology. He discovered the

Y7557-Toorn.indb 4 5/7/19 11:50 AM

to Lord Amherst, Carter called it “the original Biblical language,” but in

Y7557-Toorn.indb 5 5/7/19 11:50 AM

and obtained permission to lead a French expedition to Elephantine start-

Y7557-Toorn.indb 6 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb 7 5/7/19 11:50 AM

The longest delay to date between discovery and publication concerns

Y7557-Toorn.indb 8 5/7/19 11:50 AM

From a Chapter of the Bible to a Jewish Story

Y7557-Toorn.indb 9 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Elephantine was special because it had been home to a Jewish com-

Y7557-Toorn.indb 10 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Clermont-Ganneau’s enthusiasm—“we are burning,” as he writes in the

Y7557-Toorn.indb 11 5/7/19 11:50 AM

basis of cuneiform tablets from Babylonia, Smith seemed to oﬀer evidence

Y7557-Toorn.indb 12 5/7/19 11:50 AM

In the second wave of Elephantine studies, beginning in the 1960s,

Y7557-Toorn.indb 13 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb 14 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Y7557-Toorn.indb 15 5/7/19 11:50 AM

alone in his views. If he is right, the translation of yĕhûdāy as “Jew” would

Y7557-Toorn.indb 16 5/7/19 11:50 AM

of human culture—as it has become in modern times. The ancients had no

Y7557-Toorn.indb 17 5/7/19 11:50 AM

ethnicity. The most appropriate translation of the term yĕhûdāyēʾ in this

Y7557-Toorn.indb 18 5/7/19 11:50 AM

As a technical term, “diaspora” entered academic discourse in the 1970s

Y7557-Toorn.indb 19 5/7/19 11:50 AM

pictures them as the ﬁrst documented case of a Jewish community abroad.

Y7557-Toorn.indb 20 5/7/19 11:50 AM

Aramaic and the “Original Biblical Language”

Y7557-Toorn.indb 21 5/7/19 11:50 AM